It's an age-old question. No newspaper can keep all of its readers happy all the time. One person's idea of news worth printing is another's idea of junk.
Complaints about politics are probably more common than most. This item ran on the editorial page of the Arizona Daily Star, June 15, 1916:
NEWS
“When these blamed conventions are over,” writes a weary reader who isn’t much interested in politics, “will there be some news in the papers again?”
Well, maybe. War stuff, for example. Things seem to be warming up in Europe again. And then some other weary reader who ins’t interested in the war will write in and want to know if there’ll be some news in the paper when peace comes. And it all goes back to the question that nobody has ever answered satisfactorily: “What is news?”
As a matter of fact, there seem to be about as many kinds of news as there are kinds of people. And since it would be a bit difficult to print a newspaper to order for every reader, an editor has to figure mostly on the average man, and give him what he wants. And we rather guess the average man is really interested in the political campaigns in this country and the military campaigns in Europe.
That being the case, why not criticize the average reader, rather then the editor? Or why not roast the politicians and war boards that made the news?
People are also reading…
We don't really recommend criticizing out readers. If everyone had the same opinions as everyone else, it would be a boring world. We do like to hear readers' opinions.
However, in light of recent events in Florida, this writer would like to see differing opinions aired without violence.
