As a 20-year subscriber to the Herald, I’ve seen a number of changes in the paper as far as writers, visual style and content go. One thing that has not changed in that time is the fact that the Herald continues to champion a progressive agenda through the opinion pages as well as using material from USA Today and The Associated Press.
I came to the realization years ago that that is not going to change in my lifetime! What concerns me more is the fact that the dialogue between the powers that be at the paper and the readers is at risk.
Letters to the editor more and more appear to be an afterthought as the editorial page is filled with columns by local politicians as well as left-leaning national columnists. Letters to the editor on a specific issue usually appear weeks after that particular issue appeared in print. How does that stimulate debate in the community?
Using Facebook as a filter for comments on the Herald website has certainly reduced the number of participants and toned down the commentary. Strange as it may seem, there are still a lot of us out there who find Facebook to be a waste of time. Is this a form of censorship the press usually decries?
In addition to taking a serious look at how reader commentary is treated in print and on the Web, how about an in-depth look at why journalists in general – and the Herald in particular – tend to look at local as well as national events from a progressive perspective.
Dennis Pierce
Durango
