News and Opinion from Sisters, Oregon
Last Thursday, I got a message from a man who had submitted a letter to the editor a couple of weeks ago. He was disappointed that we ran a letter in response to his that — in a negatively personal way — dismissed his substantive argument essentially as “drinking the Koolaide,” referring to the 1979 mass suicide of the Jonestown cult in Guyana. That kind of hyperbole has become so common that we get desensitized to it. It’s over the top — and not much of a contribution to an actual debate.
The writer said that the experience makes him disinclined to participate in the discourse. He has a legitimate grievance.
Let’s all try to do better. The Nugget is going to be more attentive to the guardrails when letters tread into the territory of personal swipes, and we ask that letter writers work a little harder to avoid taking them. We want as full and as vigorous a discourse in Letters to the Editor as the community is interested in having. Disagreement — vehement disagreement — is great. But let’s argue for persuasion, not just to vent or to grandstand. If you disagree with a letter-writer’s stance, go after them on the substance. Argue with others the way you would want them to argue with you.
We’ve got a long few months of roiled up politics ahead of us. This is a diverse community with diverse views and we can and must air them. But let’s do it in a way that casts light instead of just stoking heat — and all of us work a little harder to do better.
Jim Cornelius
Editor in Chief
Reader Comments(0)