Readers respond to the April 27 column “Changes on Editorial, Op-Ed pages reflect reader survey responses.”
Star’s new lineup captures a fan
Thanks for your explanation of the new editorial balance. I was wondering what was happening during the past couple of weeks.
I appreciate the new, more diverse opinion page. I’m sure you are getting plenty of complaints. Count me as a fan of your new policy.
Real estate, Tucson
Balance still seems to be lacking
Please tell me why it should take all of Lisa Benson, Glenn McCoy, Kathleen Parker, Charles Krauthammer, Jonah Goldberg, Michael Gerson and George Will just to balance out Ruth Marcus, Eugene Robinson, Leonard Pitts and Fitz?
Could it be that the latter four just have so much more intelligence and heart than the former seven? I left out Esther Cepeda, because I don’t see her as that much on one side or the other.
Artist, Sierra Vista
‘Frat-prank’ mentality still persists
Seriously? After reading editor Maria Parham’s self-congratulatory column on the new, more politically balanced editorial philosophy of the Star, I read the Star 200 special section and noticed that the only unflattering photo in the whole section was of Jan Brewer.
You don’t have to be a Brewer fan or supporter to see the irony in this. It seems that the “frat-prank” political mentality of the Star still lies just beneath this newly attested “balanced approach.”
Balanced reporting is slipping away
I’ve been reading the Star every morning since 1968. Coming from Canada, much of what I learned about what it means to be an informed, involved America was in the Star.
Probably it was the strong university presence that gave us informed, intelligent ideas and information. Then the affluent discovered Tucson and the ideas of the very wealthy and the newly arrived Midwesterners changed the tide and we got political pap.
We have now enjoyed about a dozen years of more balanced, intelligent reporting, and now I see that this is slipping away. Your decision to feature such vitriolic and ill-informed contributors such as George Will and Lisa Benson is disheartening.
We need local people who understand our community and history. I need the news from the Star, but I feel I’m being beaten over the head by these changes.
Retired, Green Valley
Star becomes even more conservative
It is with much dismay that I read in Sunday’s paper that you are planning on being even more conservative than you have already become. Whoever thinks you are liberal must be ultra-conservative.
Tucson’s attraction has been that, as opposed to Phoenix, there is liberal thinking, although I suspect that is changing with the influx of people we have had. I do hear from friends that they have switched to the Phoenix paper, which has become more liberal than it used to be.
I won’t even look at right-wing pieces
Hiding behind a wholly unscientific “survey” is gutless and patronizing. So you all took a look and decided that con(men-self)servatives are an underserved population in the news biz?
I will look at no political cartoons not by David Fitzsimmons. I will not even read the headlines for your present/future right-wing columnists — meaning it will take me even less time now to read your paper.
Like the fascists of yore, you believe they must be appeased. You’re channeling Neville Chamberlain, just to (try to) make a buck. But how is it that all these many and numerous neanderthals you are now courting couldn’t save the Tucson Citizen?
Look, if you want “balance,” hire the Flying Wallendas, or would you rather just get in goose step with the rest of them?
Star takes a giant leap to the far-right
It was with great interest that I read editor Maria Parham’s column. I had noticed the giant leap to the far-right on the editorial pages of my hometown newspaper — all of it justified as bringing “more balance” to the readers.
I find nothing balanced about the negativity of those I’ve come to call the four horsemen of dissension — Parker, Will,
Krauthammer and Goldberg. They make their living by criticizing the American president and appealing to the worst in human thought.
Perhaps a more constructive editorial policy for the Star would be one that encourages working together toward consensus. Is it your purpose to feed the dissension that has made our country nearly ungovernable?
I want to read moderate Republican and Democratic views. What about someone like David Brooks?
A responsible editorial policy is one that helps to bring us together as a nation, not one that feeds our divisions.