Editing your letters to the editor
I thought I had a reasonable rapport with a frequent letter writer. That is, until he sent me a recent letter by email and I did a little polishing and sent him the edited version.
He responded:
"I couldn't spot your tweaks. Fortunately, they appear not to have detracted from the core message. As far as I'm concerned, your job is to maintain word limits and correct typos. The core message of the writer must be kept intact if this is to be a true representation of community opinion (as represented by those who bother writing)."
I replied: "Thanks for reminding me what my 'job' is."
If that response sounds like I was a little put off, well, I was.
Our letters policy, printed on each day's Gazette Opinion page, explains that letters "may be edited for brevity, clarity, good taste and libel."
I try hard to keep each writer's message intact so it's a "true representation of community opinion." Just what that work entails, however, can vary widely from writer to writer.
Sometimes I'll get a letter of 300 or 400 words. When I inform the writer that our limit is 250, the person might urge me to trim it to 250. Sorry, I'm not going there. Sometimes I will trim a dozen words or more to help a writer who simply can't reduce a letter to 250. But if the letter is 300 words or longer, trimming it to 250 will take too much time and risks removing material the writer might want retained. At some point, it also ceases to be the person's letter.
I try to make sure no facts are in error, but sometimes they slip by us as workload mounts and minutes grow slim. I use spell-checker and try to clean up poor grammar. That, too, varies widely. Some letters are atrocious. I don't imagine the writers want to look illiterate but still desire to get their points across. So I clean these up as well as I can, treating all with care.
If you send your letters by email and I do a fair amount of work on them, I can quickly email them back and make sure you're comfortable with the changes.
Almost every week, I get a "thank you" from some writer who appreciates the time and attention I take to improving a letter. I can't recall ever offending a writer by changing something that altered the "core message." That's never my intent. In fact, it would be unethical.
Greg Peck can be reached at (608) 755-8278 or gpeck@gazettextra.com. Or follow him on Twitter or Facebook
Sep 23, 2012 at 1:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
gpeck...again today 3 anti Romney cartoons. How about a cartoon lampooning the Obama administration's handling of the Muslim terrorist attacks in the mideast? Lots to lampoon there!
Sep 21, 2012 at 5:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
donnaw: We post almost every cartoon we get from our syndicates online (The only time we don't is when we think one is too distasteful--not political. I can only think of a few through the past three years.). Sure, every cartoonist seems to hit the same topic, which is the 47% right now. Soon it will be on to some new development. I recall growing tired of cartoons related to "You didn't build that," when that was a hot topic. Only one or two of each topic ever hits our print product.
Greg Peck
Sep 21, 2012 at 12:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Donnaw--that's because it was taken completely out of context--just like the most recent (well, 14 years old) tape the R's are now using. That gets to my point, though. I understand the fact checking of letters--to a point. But how come no news organization has yet made it FRONT page news about ANY candidate who continues to push their lies?
Sep 21, 2012 at 9:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Greg..I see there are many many cartoons lampooning Romney's 45% statement. I don't remember you publishing any cartoons when Obama made his famous "You didn't build that!" statement. Maybe one but not as many as about Romney. I love a good political cartoon but like to see a balance.
Sep 21, 2012 at 7 a.m.
Suggest removal
I'm a little shocked that letters to the editor are edited at all. Instead of having letters that "may be edited for brevity, clarity, good taste and libel", why don't you instead just not print those letters, and return them to the sender with an explanation, or ask the sender for a revision?
Sep 21, 2012 at 6:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Thanks, egalindo. In this business, and revealing personal stuff each week as I do in my blog, leaves me open to criticism. If I took it all personally, well, I wouldn't have lasted nine years in this position already.
Greg Peck
Sep 21, 2012 at 6 a.m.
Suggest removal
I think that instead of worrying about that your staff should worry about editing articles that are posted here..For instance a few weeks ago there was a HS football score update and it was nothing but a Mess..Also there is a program called spell check they should use that also...
Sep 20, 2012 at 11:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Try not to take it personally~some people will be grumpy no matter what. I've always had good experiences sharing my opinions with you Greg. I know we have different opinions but I feel that I was always treated respectfully and fairly. Keep up the good work!
Sep 20, 2012 at 6:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Greg - thank you for the offer but I need to decline. I use an alias here as I do not want to involve my family. We have had some bad experiences with that in the past as we live in a world of "red" which does not look good on me :)
Sep 20, 2012 at 3:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
"Perhaps we added a few words for clarity, accuracy or even fairness."
what is the point of the letters then?
Sep 20, 2012 at 3:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
So who is the editor of the print that comes out of the gazette?? for example. This dog is ready for his trial appearance.
I never claim to be an English major but this makes you look pretty silly!
"
Martial artist accused of fighting police, dog found competent for trial
By ANN MARIE AMES ( Contact ) Wednesday, Aug. 22, 2012"
Sep 20, 2012 at 9:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Maybe I'm niave, because I was surprised that letters were edited for anything other than grammer issues.
Sep 20, 2012 at 7:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
fordfan: Sorry to read about your concern. Without knowing the specifics, I can't offer an explanation. You could contact me by email at the office, and perhaps I can backtrack and explain. Perhaps we added a few words for clarity, accuracy or even fairness. Absent those, we wouldn't change a letter in any attempt to alter a "core message."
Greg Peck
Sep 19, 2012 at 8:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
greg - a while ago the Gazette edited a letter that I sent in and added multiple words that I intentionally left out. The letter was under the Gazette's word limit. I never did understand the reasoning for doing so and I never got an explanation for why you did it. Hopefully this will help you better understand why people do not always have good things to say about the editorial staff. I am very hesitant to send in letters now as I never know what they will turn in to. Once you have the letters, you can do with them as you want and we have no control.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.