Editor’s note was presumptuous

Writer not pleased with paper's response

This letter is regarding the letter, Go Back to New Zealand (The News, April 26) from Fox McKinley.

Editor Steven Heywood adds his note to this letter in which he states, “I find it amazing that in Canada, some of us still think it’s OK to suggest that a person with a dissenting argument should leave the country.”  

And more, adding that “this is the last refuge of those without a valid point to make and woefully, reflects the state of debate in this country.”

 I find it amazing that in Canada, some editors think it’s perfectly OK to voice their personal opinion on the content of a reader’s letter.

 I thought it was the letter editor’s job to decide whether a letter should be printed, and if so, to check that the text is clear, correct, concise, comprehensible and consistent. 

I thought his mandate was to correct any errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation, not to give us his opinion of the letter, or the author.

 Whether or not I agree with Mr. McKinley’s viewpoint is beside the point. 

I think Steven Heywood’s personal comments were presumptuous and rude.

 L.P. Winter

Qualicum Beach

 

 

 

Editor’s Note: The News strives to print all viewpoints — even the ones with which we might disagree. 

That, however, does not mean a letter or its author should not go unchallenged when warranted. 

The letter referred to was deemed acceptable for printing (including a similar one on the same page), yet the specific point addressed in the note, we felt, demanded comment.