Letter To The Editor: How Geography Determines Stories

The trial and execution of Troy Davis captivated the attention of people all across the country, and has led to articles and editorials in national and local newspapers from coast to coast. Yet the local newspaper of Savannah, Georgia, the place in which Troy Davis’ alleged crime took place, has paid little to no attention to the recent developments of this story.  It is a newspaper’s responsibility to provide the public with important stories, whether or not a given story makes your city or state particularly proud.  Any editorial at all would be better than nothing, no matter what you have to say about the topic.  The important thing is that people are aware of what is going on in their country, and in this case their state.  

I attend a university in a small town in Massachusetts, and even here students and the community were putting together protests and recognizing Troy Davis.  If you search the recent archives of the Los Angeles Times, they have numerous articles analyzing this case.  A similar search of the Savannah Daily News database yields just two links: both of which redirect you to another news site.  This raises a question that goes far beyond the matter of Troy Davis and his execution.  Newspapers need to be discerning and be able to objectively inform the public to enable democracy, not to perpetuate the biases that different parts of the country may possess. 

I became interested in the Troy Davis case when I had to look for a story in my Newswriting class.  I quickly became aware of the attention that people were paying to the Georgia execution case in all different parts of the country.  I found an editorial in The Los Angeles Times about the execution, and was about to respond to it, when I realized I should look at a local newspaper from Georgia and see what their coverage on the case looked like.  

I knew their perspective on the situation may look a bit different than what I have seen in Northampton and Los Angeles, but I was so surprised and annoyed when I found basically no coverage of the story in the local newspaper of Savannah, Georgia. (Savannah is the city in which Davis’ alleged crime took place.) A search led me to only two links, both of which were just hyperlinks to other news sites.  A similar search in The Los Angeles Times provided 72 articles about the case.  I am aware that the LA Times is much bigger than The Savannah Daily News, but it is also on the other side of the country opposed to being in the very town in which the case was concerned.  

This ended up going beyond the Troy Davis case, becoming a discovery of how newspapers throughout the country do in fact have different biases, and this is reflected in the content of their stories.  We always talk about how newspapers must be objective and just present the news, but it is possible to write parts of the truth from various perspectives.  This is what I realized after comparing the two newspapers, and I am more skeptical than ever of the objectivity of the news.

Letter To The Editor: My Hometown's Take on Standardized Testing

In response to the criticism of the STAR testing incentives, as a former Agoura High School student, I will attempt to reveal a student’s perspective on the issue.  First of all, it is important to understand that standardized test results do have an effect on students to an extent.  Most students plan to go to college after they graduate, and if they want to get into a competitive program, the reputation of their high school has an effect on their admission.  Better standardized test scores means a higher API score for their school, meaning that higher reputation.  

As a former student, I am well aware that a big reason why schools do not perform well on these tests is a result of students just not trying.  How else would these incentive programs have caused such dramatic results in such a short time? 

In regards to students with learning disabilities, students are in fact given different levels of the STAR test based on their course levels.  It may not be an accomodation that satisfies all parents, but standardized testing is necessary to evaluate the education that students are receiving in relation to other schools.  Whether we like it or not, we live in a competitive world, and trying to delay that effect on young adults until after they graduate from high school will not likely do them much good. 

I admit the administration may be getting a bit carried away with their incentive efforts, but their motives should not be misunderstood or misrepresented.  Higher standardized testing scores have positive effects on faculty and students alike. 

I chose to write a letter to my local newspaper partly because I thought it would have a better chance of being published.  Not only do I offer a new perspective on the issue, but I am a former student of the high school in question.  The previous people that were featured in The Acorn, which included a parent and the editor of the newspaper, complained about how unfair standardized testing is and how the school is punishing kids who do not do well.  Since I took the California standardized test for many years and witnessed the type of tendencies that go on with other students taking the test, I thought I could offer some information from an insider’s perspective.  I conceded toward the end that my high school may be getting a bit carried away with their incentive programs, but I still think it is important that parents and writers consider the entire scope of a situation and that they do not get so fueled up on a single part of the issue, ignoring the other perspectives and the inevitable decisions that schools must make.

When Should Editors Stop Editing?

Wahl-Jorgensen: Editors see a policy of limited editorial intervention as the only way to ensure an open and honest debate about the varied issues that face citizens of a multicultural society. They are also eager to show that ethical aims of fairness, accuracy and balance underpin the letters pages. (Page 87)

I definitely think it is important that editors do their best to include comments from their readers that are uncensored and in their original form. Yet there is already a subconscious censoring of letters in the process alone of selecting which letters to publish. Editors must search for letters that prove good points, yet which present opposing stances. They must give everyone the opportunity to share their opinion, no matter how mainstream or unorthodox. 

I think there may be some cases in which letters can lead to misleading interpretations of issues if the editor does not format or present them in a careful way.  I am optimistic enough that people can read editorial sections discerningly, but I still do not rule out all together that there may be a time and a place for an editor to intervene. It may not be the ideal situation for an open and organic conversation, but I think that the editor also has a responsibility to keep a constructive conversation going. 

For the most part, I think that editors do a good job of selecting letters that show various perspectives of each issue. Even though readers may immediately agree or disagree with a letter, it is still important that we are constantly faced with information that is varied and representative of everyone out there. Even if someone's opinion isn't going to change our mind, it is important that we recognize the different perspectives out there so we can create a better understanding of the world around us.

Letters To Learn From

I selected one letter from the New York Times, and one from the Los Angeles Times.  They are similar in the respect that they are both clear and rational, while avoiding an overwhelmingly serious tone. 


Letter from the New York Times addressing climate change:
Re “Is It Weird Enough Yet?,” by Thomas L. Friedman (column, Sept. 14):

I agree strongly that “we need to take steps to mitigate climate change — just in case Governor Perry is wrong.”

The French philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal, in what has become known as Pascal’s wager, suggested that even people who did not believe in God should act as if they did, since being wrong could be catastrophic.

I would say to the climate skeptics: If you do not believe in climate change but act as if you did, even if you are right, the result would be a society with clean, sustainable jobs, less dependence on Mideast oil and healthier lives. But if you are wrong and we do not act immediately, the results would be catastrophic.

PHILLIP GOTTSCHALK
Montville, N.J., Sept. 14, 2011

I liked this letter because the writer is very rational in the sense that he addresses the idea: What is the worst thing that can happen if we believe in climate change? The letter addresses the two possible outcomes of how we react to the issue of climate change. He makes it clear what is at stake, and his reference to Pascal makes it easy to understand that there is no huge downfall to believing that climate change does in fact exist.  In my opinion, it is hard to argue with any of the points that he makes.

Letter from the Los Angeles Times addressing prescription drugs:
Re "Drugs now deadlier than autos," Sept. 18

It wouldn't be at all surprising to find that the increased abuse of prescription drugs somewhat coincides with pharmaceutical companies increasingly marketing their products directly to consumers.

Though I do not wish to demean the seriousness of the maladies that many of these drugs are intended to treat, the advertisements cause semi-hysterical laughter because the possible risks associated with imbibing these drugs often sound far worse than the conditions they treat. Side effects I've heard include blindness, a sudden drop in blood pressure, suicidal thoughts and death.
Do drug companies want to actually help those in need, or do they simply try to make ever more money?
Lewis Redding

Arcadia

This letter caught my attention because it addresses the harm of prescription drugs rationally while also utilizing some irony and a tinge of dark humor. The writer lets his personality shine through a little bit without being overly radical with his ideas or language. It also caught my attention because the same thought always crosses my mind as I watch commercial after commercial about prescription medicine that cram a long list of side-effects at the very end that seem far worse than what the medicine is treating. It makes you question whether you should just take your chances with what you already have. The writer shows some level of being a critical consumer, as he does not just buy into what the drug companies are trying to market. 

The Relationship Between Journalists and the Public

Journalists stand in a paternalistic relationship to readers: They guide them rather than engage them in conversation. They decide on the legitimate and valuable topics for the agenda based on the estimation of the public’s need to know, but don’t see the necessity for listening to the public. (Page 18) Wahl-Jorgensen

It is really important that there is a two-way relationship between journalists and their readers.  By being able to respond to journalists, readers are empowered to have an active role in their education process.  If people are merely force-fed information, they may become unable to recognize good and relevant stories for themselves.  It is also important for readers to be able to voice their opinions toward journalistic work because it will motivate writers to uphold a high level of effort with their research and stories.  With a higher level of integrity and substance, journalistic pieces can better benefit everyone involved.  The western world prides itself on being progressive and democratic, and allowing the average public to participate and share a voice in journalism is a way of valuing this democratic ideal.

Making news became commercially viable through the selling of audiences to advertisers, instead of newspapers to partisan audiences…The new centrality of advertising income also meant that owners and editors were compelled to abandon controversial, partisan material from their reports, and instead aimed to please as many advertisers and consumers as they possibly could by printing ostensibly “neutral” content and proclaiming their political independence.(Page 38) Wahl-Jorgensen

When viewing the relationship between news and advertising, it is hard to strike a fair balance between the two.  Ideally, journalists would be able to write about ideas that they truly believe in, never compromising their beliefs for the sake of making money.  It is tricky, however, seeing how revenue is the only way that newspapers can get by and continue to have the resources to produce more news. Not to mention we live in a world where making a profit is one of the biggest motivators behind any work we do. 

On the other hand, I think it may be good in a way that newspapers are objective in presenting the news.  Readers should not be forced to think a certain way about a matter, and by reading just about the facts of an event, people can hopefully draw their own conclusions and form their own meaning.  There are enough private magazines and other sources of information out there, that if people want to read a particular viewpoint, they can find it.  Likewise, if a journalist is very opinionated and wants to write about a certain topic or from a certain political perspective, I have no doubt that they can find a place to write, along with people willing to read what they have to say.