.....Advertisement.....
.....Advertisement.....

Editorial cartoons

A letter in today's paper (click here, then scroll to the bottom) takes us to task for running an editorial cartoon one day criticizing Hillary for flip-flopping on Iraq after running a cartoon the week before criticizing President Bush for not being responsive to public sentiment on the war.

"I was always taught that 'what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,' meaning that we must be consistent in our beliefs. Apparently, The Times does not hold to this tenet," wrote Pete Hamilton.

I've got two responses to that: First, cartoons are signed work, and like all signed work on our pages represent the individual opinion of the person signing them, not the institutional viewpoint of The Roanoke Times. We probably need to do a better job educating readers about that distinction, but there should be no expectation that cartoons by different authors will express consistent viewpoints.

Second, there is a difference between flip-flopping based on polls - which is what Clinton was accused of in the Jim Morin cartoon - and recognizing that there has been a fundamental shift in national opinion and that the vast majority of the nation no longer supports a failed course of action, which is what the Daryl Cagle cartoon dinged the president for his failure to do.

The publisher's role

We printed this letter today, which raises some interesting questions about the role of the publisher. Those questions deserve to be answered. Here's the letter. The answers will follow the jump:

A publisher's view can influence coverage

Debbie Meade, the incoming publisher of The Roanoke Times, is also chair-elect of Planned Parenthood of the Blue Ridge. Thank you for telling us (Oct. 19 news article, "Newspaper will get new hand at the helm").

In covering the critical and divisive issue of abortion, The Times now has no credibility. Your assurance that the publisher's political opinions have no effect on your news coverage defies common sense.

The conflict of interest is obvious.

Will Meade recuse herself when the editorial board discusses or writes on abortion or "recommends" candidates, as she has a personal interest in abortion laws?

What kind of direction will she give to news editors when they are covering anti-abortion news?

Does anyone at The Times even understand what kind of statement this makes about the newspaper?

PAUL ROBERTSON
BLACKSBURG

Read more »

Search

You are currently browsing the archives for the Newspapers category.

Comments

    • Glen Franklin Koontz: @75–What’s wrong with earning what you have? Why should one who is successful have...
    • Art Hill: just how do you think old daddy will do that huh? You haven’t heard? http://www.wnd.com/index.ph...
    • Glen Franklin Koontz: Hail to the new President in 2013–Sarah Palin.
    • pammala: @40…”seeing just how far it can go before Daddy puts his foot down. Comment by Art Hill —...
    • pammala: 2 really, 4th grade science as I remember