The Daily Grego is an elitist forum for lampooning obtuse, idiocy-ridden media. Comments are closed, but we will read (and sometimes post) your e-mails. About us | E-mail | RSS | Facebook

Saturday, May 19, 2007

Ah, letters

Letters to the editor: not really our cup of tea. We prefer to make fun of stuff written by professionals. But... this one hurt. Really. Got us right in the coconuts. Enter Tri-County Journal reader Nathan B.:

It's amazing how brave people are when they can hide. This is evidenced by the raucous participation of readers in the Sound Off! section of this publication.


I wouldn't say it's amazing, but yeah. People are more likely to speak up if they don't fear consequences. Is this necessarily a bad thing?

I know the LAST thing today's newspapers need is raucous participation. More tepidness, please!

It's easy to complain when you can do it without people wondering who you are. Now, get some guts and sign your name to your opinions.

OK, it sounds macho to say you're not afraid to print your gulldurn name with your galldang opinion, but come on. What's so cowardly about an anonymous comment? And if that's so bad, what about an entire anonymous BLOG?

If you have a point to make, write a letter and sign your name - it adds credibility as well as allows for the public to know that it's not the same people calling (or writing) every week.

If there's anything I hate about newspapers, it's reading the same -- SAME! -- writers every damn day.

Doesn't anonymity help combat some of the preconceived notions other readers might have? In a small newspaper, isn't that at least somewhat valuable? If we can evaluate ideas based on their merits rather than their sources, aren't we better off?

*Sniff*

*Sniffle*

*Single teardrop, shed out of pure love for journalism*

As for the Journal, you should require your readers to give their name or at least provide some outlet for readers to know that they're not seeing the same people's thoughts every week.

Quantity and quality of comments decrease when readers aren't allowed to respond anonymously. Maybe some limits are in order. But why condescend?

If anything, requiring identification would increase the probability of seeing the same readers' thoughts every week.

I'm sure the section is a big draw for you, but how about some journalistic integrity?

Truthfully, Nate, we're asking people the same question.

We're just not signing our names.

No comments: