The Weymouth News newspaper is the only news I get in hard print anymore. All other forms of media I receive via web access, including Wicked Local Weymouth, which is the on-line version of the Weymouth News, or at least should be. As more and more newspapers become extinct, their web sites will be the only way to get the news, in its various forms, and eventually their respective outlets, in this case Gatehouse Media, will be forced to charge a fee for on-line access. The reason I continue to get the printed version of the Weymouth News is because they do not post all the articles found in print, on the web site. I have submitted some articles over the past couple of years that appeared in print but not on-line. The on-line version of news opinion allow for immediate comments, whereas the print versions require a “letter to the editor” that, if it appears at all, won’t be seen for at least a week after the initial opinion was read. I have also submitted this blog site, through an invitation to do so, that has yet to be linked to on the Wicked Local site. What I’m alluding to here is that I don’t understand the policy of the Weymouth News, when it comes to what gets posted on-line, what gets printed and what doesn’t.
Today I read a letter to the editor written by Kevin Borth. I have several issues with the letter, some that apply to Gatehouse Media, and some with Mr. Borth. First off, it has always been Gatehouse’s policy to limit outside opinion to a certain number of words. I know that this policy is probably flexible, but Mr. Borth’s opinion appeared alongside another letter to the editor that was also beyond the word count limit. Not a big deal I suppose, so long as all letters and opinions are published, which they are not. Of course that would be costly in the print form, although not so much in the on-line form. Mr. Borth’s opinion also was available in print and on-line. He must be related to someone in the front office. In fairness, the other letter was available in both forms of media as well, so perhaps the policy has changed. It’s just a tad frustrating that a simple link to my blog, which is Weymouth related, is ignored while off subject opinions that go against policy find their way into everyone’s home.
As far as the content of Mr. Borth’s opinion goes, it is sensationalism, which is probably why it was published; to get comments and feedback. Unfortunately, most of the comments were by the same two people, and a third that clearly needs therapy, but that is nothing new. It’s easy to write sensationalized popular opinions, ones that call for all illegal immigrants to be deported for example, or as in this case, being critical of one’s freedom of speech under the guise of patriotism. The point is, Mr. Borth’s opinion had nothing to do with the “editor”, the “Weymouth” news, or the original opinion by Jean York.
I went back several weeks to try and find an article by Ms. York that was critical of the military. I didn’t find it, although it may have been written months ago. Perhaps a reference or link to it in Mr. Borth’s letter would have helped. Truth be told, I never read Ms. York’s column. Not because I disagree, but because it never has anything to do with “Weymouth” news. The same can be said of other weekly columns in the Weymouth News.
Lastly, my personal opinion of Mr. Borth’s letter is that, for someone who spent 27 years in the military, he should be ashamed to write an opinion that so blatantly separates the United States military duty from the rights and freedom of its citizens. He uses words such as “we” and “us” when referring to the military, and “you” when speaking of following orders. When last I checked “we” were the United States Of America, and “we” just might be of the opinion that Iraq and Afghanistan are not where “our” military should be.