"If antiwar protesters succeed | csmonitor.com" [Daypop Top 40]
Below is the email I sent to the CSMonitor in response to this anonymous OpEd piece. (I should state that standard policy for this pub is to show the source.)
The author has good points. Then again, he makes A LOT of points. Some readers may want to reply to them. He is however, a mystery guest. The publication must field any inquiries or rebuttals.
I understand that the author's security may be of great concern. However, strictly as a matter of principle, I do feel that printing "anonymous OpEd" pieces can undermine journalistic integrity.
Re: If antiwar protesters succeed
Dear Christian Science Monitor:
I believe it might be wiser to stick with your traditional policy of not printing anonymous pieces.
The author challenges the reader to prove him wrong. Where is he? Who is he? Readers can only send their rebuttals to your publication. What if his argument is flawed? It is possible.
If he were to be proven wrong, the publication takes responsibility for the position, not the author. (The critical reader has to ask if the author even exists.) The publication, by default, takes responsibility for supporting and defending the stated position.
Is that quality OpEd?
- Gary Santoro
8:42:36 PM 
|
