Home 
Opinion Election season spawns policy review
Election season spawns policy review
|
Round one of the two-round Election 2008 is behind us. The primary that
just concluded brought out some of the best in candidates, but it also
brought out some of the worst. Sadly, negative-style campaigning has become the norm in our country. Some national, state and even local elections suffer from the same problem: it’s not about what candidates can do if they are elected, it’s about casting elements of doubt on their opponents. We see it in advertising, and more and more we are seeing it in letters that supporters send to newspapers. Locally in this primary season we saw it in some advertising, most of which was placed independently of campaigns. Except for a few ads, most of our local candidates focused on stressing what they had to offer. Most of the attacks that were launched came via letters to the editor. The Observer received almost as many attack letters as it did endorsement letters. And anyone reading The Observer’s letters column saw a few corrections that ran following some of the letters — and even one that corrected a correction. The Observer is utlimately responsible for all of its content, whether it be a news story, an advertisement or even a letter to the editor. A false accusation can result in a libel lawsuit. Sometimes, though, a fine line exists between what constitutes an opinion and a false accusation. Some letters that arrived the week prior to the election couldn’t be published because they were either in bad taste, launched attacks with no time to give the subjects of the attacks time to respond, or there simply wasn’t time to document the allegations. Some ads were rejected for the same reason. Launching an attack just a few days before an election, when there is no time to respond, is wrong. The Observer won’t partake in “October surprises.’’ Not for — or against — any candidate. The experience of this past election necessitates that The Observer will take another look at its letters policy in regard to election season. We’ll review the need for attack letters that don’t endorse anyone. We’ll look at unsubstantiated allegations. We’ll review whether to set limits on the number of endorsement letters. And we’ll consider deadlines for submission of election letters. When the fall campaign arrives, The Observer hopes that candidates will focus on the issues that are important to readers and avoid the mudslinging that has become too commonplace in today’s elections. And we hope that their supporters will do the same. |
