We get a lot of complaints at The Torch, and this week is no exception. We received so many letters to the Editor that several have to be held over for next week.
We love this kind of feedback. It shows that not only are people reading the paper, they care what is printed in it.
Granted, most of the writers would rather that the paper printed something different, but journalists do not have the ability to distinguish between positive and negative attention.
We stand behind the articles that appear in The Torch, and when it comes to the Editorials section, we support everyone’s right to freedom of expression.
Of course, that doesn’t mean we always agree with each other. There are no few letters exchanged between editors and staff containing lines like “As usual, I disagree on every point” or “I see what you mean. It’s wrong, but I see what you mean.”
Nevertheless, the Editorials section of The Torch is not a soapbox for any one person or group, nor does it have a coherent political ideology. We have yet to kill an editorial because we disagree with the author. Rather than advancing a specific agenda, the purpose of the Editorials section is to provide an open, public forum for debate. One issue may have two articles advocating war, and the next could easily see three taking the opposite position.
Some people feel that we are too negative, or that we complain too much. We encourage those people to send us letters so that we can print their complaints, too.
The more varied the opinions the more varied the debate. Hopefully, people will read something in The Torch that stirs them. Maybe they will be thrilled to find someone who agrees with them. Maybe they will be incensed over a controversial stance. Whatever the case, we hope that they will not stop sending us letters. We have too much white space without them.