The minefield of letters to the editor: No quotas on ideas

There is perhaps no other more controversial, more democratic and more misunderstood feature of newspapers than the "Letters to the editor."

Ever since 16-year old Ben Franklin created the fictional Silence Dogood letters to his brother James at the New England Courant in 1722, letters to the editor have intrigued newspaper readers.

Of course, young Ben posed as the middle aged widow in "Silence Dogood" and penned a total of 14 letters on everything from love and marriage to the gossip of the day.

Of course, newspapers no longer publish fictional letters, and we have a system of verification where we must call the letter writer and verify the letter's authenticity.

Still, letters to the editor are one of the most read sections of the newspaper and online.

Maybe it's the notion that anyone can basically have their say in front of a substantial audience. In the case of The Free Press, that would be approximately 60,000 readers of the daily print edition and about 15,000 daily viewers of the www.mankatofreepress.com

The letters to the editor section is one of the few remaining vehicles where average folks can be heard, can criticize their own newspaper and have it published without fear or favor.

But, of course, what complicates this pure seeming exchange for the better of democracy is the "editor" part of "letters to the editor." That would be me.

You see, democracy and freedom of speech is one thing, but it doesn't give one a right as the Supreme Court has said to "yell fire in a crowded theater" (if of course, there indeed is no fire.).

So, the editor part of this equation must decide if the letters meet the standards in general, of accuracy, decency, fairness and civility.

Most people have the biggest problem with accuracy and civility. If we know a letter writer is stating as facts things that are provably untrue, the gong and buzzer go off, and the red X flashes.

But many people confuse a "fact" and an "opinion." One can state a matter of opinion like "Mark Dayton is a bad governor." It's not provably true or false really, and "bad" is a very subjective word. So, that passes as an opinion letter.

One cannot have an opinion however that "Mark Dayton embezzled from the taxpayers." This is not provably true. Embezzling is crime. It may be one's "unsubstantiated opinion" but it won't fly. If we were to print that as a letter to the editor, we could be sued for libel.

Yes, even if it's something we did not author, but nonetheless published. We are liable.

We also require that if people are stating facts that are not "common knowledge" we ask them to cite the source of these facts so readers can evaluate the credibility of the source.

Certainly, it's a judgment call about what's common knowledge. But if it's that common, why not cite the source?

And third, people wonder why the newspaper has "bias" in selecting letters to the editor. As far as I can tell, they come to this conclusions because there are more letters from one side of a political spectrum than the other.

They're always surprised to learn that we have no quotas. If 100 people write in favoring candidate A, and 50 write favoring candidate B, and their letters meet the standards, that's how many of each we print.

I've had people say: "Well, if you go more letters favoring one candidate, why don't you just not print those and make it even." Seriously, I say to myself. They would have me be a "quota editor" making sure there is an equal numbers of letters, and thereby denying rights to those for no other reason than they were in the majority.

This, by the way, would also have me violating my own stated policy. If you meet the requirements of accuracy, fairness, civility and the 275 word limit, you're in.

I believe in the free marketplace of ideas espoused by conservatives like Milton Freidman and progressives like Oliver Wendell Holmes.

If we get a lot of letters on one side, it's not up to us to be the "nanny state" and cut people off. The other side needs to buck up and write more letters.