Editing letters to the editor: a moral dilemma

[Robb]

So my editor and I were kicking around this moral dilemma:

We get a letter to the little paper extolling the virtues of Bush. It's so full of bad grammar and poor spelling we realized it would take a massive rewrite to even begin to make sense. But, of course, we don't want to overdo it, since he's not on staff or anything.

The question is, by letting it stand and letting the author look like an idiot, are we being partisan? :shrug:

In the end, we edited the hell out of the thing and ran it, but the question remains. What do you all think?

[Longhorn]

1. I used to type up the LTTE's for a large daily newspaper.

Our policy was not to correct the letters but to insert after errors. But whatever the policy, if it's the same for any letter, no matter what the content, then you're not being partisan.

[TryingToWarnYou]

2. There's "editing" and then there is "editing"....

Having written many, many letters to editors and had many published, the one thing that I have an issue with is when they change the meaning of the letter by removing whole paragraphs or sentences.

Cleaning up mis-spellings, if minor, shouldnt be an issue as long as you are not changing the meaning of the letter. However, in your case, if the letter is that much of a mess, I wouldnt even consider publishing it as it will require a lot of work on your part to get it ready for publication.

[Robb]

5. Oh, I agree

...and I'm sure we didn't change the meaning of the letter.

But is part of the message in the poor grammar? Are we representing the author to be more educated than he is by fixing stuff?

Not a big deal on our scale, of course, but still. We're weekly, and like to run a letter from either side of a debate if we can; the trouble was for this paper, everything we had in the basket from the GOP side sounded absurd. We picked the "best" and cleaned it up, with the hope of balancing the page.

[TryingToWarnYou]

13. LOL..funny, but sad.

I wonder what would happen if these guys focused on getting an education vs. being assholes.

Just print it as is and insert "(sic)" where appropriate..

[indie]

3. I would be pissed off

if you edited my letter. I don't think it's your place to do so. This is not a column for the paper, and you should keep your hands off of it.

[TryingToWarnYou]

14. I think you are missing the point....

So you write a letter saying:

"Kery is the werst posible choize for presidunt..."

Should they fix that so you dont look like a moron or leave it so that you do?

If they leave it, are you going to cry that they did so to make you look bad or are you going to be happy that they didnt "edit" your letter?

[Chef]

4. Letters

I would have run it the way it was sent. Its been said that the first sign if senility is when you start writing letters to the editor.

[kiahzero]

10. I think I went senile at age 15, then (n/t)

[soupkitchen]

6. Maybe it's more about aiding and abetting the enemy than being partisan

If the guy is an inarticulate moron, why make him an articulate moron? Thereby giving him credibility.
At some point form is essence.
Either don't print the letter or print it as written.

[truthspeaker]

7. Reporting the straight facts is never partisan.

Just run them as-is.

[eyesroll]

8. Our LTTE policy is we edit for spelling and grammar but nothing else.

If it doesn't make any damn sense, we don't edit sense into it. (We don't necessarily run those that don't make sense, but we've had to sometimes.)

[M155Y_A1CH]

9. Set it in stone

You need to work up a policy
that can be followed to the letter.

There will be no moral dilemmas
if all of you can refer to the same policy.

Then you are diligently following the policy
when something like this pops up.

[RUSTY SHACKLEFORD]

11. If the illiterate neocon weener send you the letter, publish it as is.

Just put "(sic)" after every spelling mistake. You don't get paid to be public type-editors.

[dweller]

12. if you correct the spelling and grammar

will the original ltte writer even recognize or understand the edited piece?
:shrug:

dp

[asthmaticeog]

15. I've edited LTTEs

Our policy is that we reserve the right to edit anything that appears in our paper. It's our paper, it's our liability. We wouldn't change meaning, as that would go so far past ethical boundaries as to disappear over the horizon. Usually when we get a letter with just ridiculously poor spelling and syntax, we write it off as kook-mail and don't publish it at all. If something needs THAT much surgery, it's rarely worth bothering. Much respect to you for taking the time so your reader could have his say. I sure wouldn't have.