Your policy not to publish rebuttals to your editorial endorsements was unfair. In her column of Oct. 27, Review Publisher Debra Godshall said you "decided not to run the few partisan political letters [you] received" because "it would have snowballed." Although your policy is perhaps understandable in order to avoid a partisan letter-writing campaign in the paper's opinion page, you should have made an exception for at least one rebuttal to your own editorial endorsements.
By not doing so, you presented a biased point of view that was unfair to some of the candidates and did a disservice to your readers. Specifically I think your policy was grossly biased against Jonathan Lundell in light of your editorial endorsement of the other two CUSD candidates.
|
|
They went out of their way to find the best conservative commentators to present the opposing point of view. "Op-ed," they noted, means "opposite the editorial." Even with the balanced presentation of rebuttals, they noted that a majority of their readers' feedback regarding the editorial series was negative because of the apparent political bias.
In comparison, the editorial policy of the Half Moon Bay Review lacked balance and demonstrated clear bias.
Stephen Miller
Moss Beach
Editor's note: You are not holding the Philadelphia Inquirer nor are you reading the paper in the City of Brotherly Love. The Inquirer's manner of endorsement has caused some waves in the newspaper world. Some find it groundbreaking, others wonder whether it is spineless pandering so as not to upset anyone. We feel it is important to interview the candidates and tell readers where we stand.
w