Why we do it
Published Monday, May 5, 2008
Page 4 on Sunday and again today contained one of the most controversial things our newspaper editorial board does.
We endorsed candidates in the mayor and aldermen races.
After more than two weeks of hour-long interviews with nearly every candidate, our board (three folks) sat down to discuss who we thought would best serve the City of Natchez. And we made our picks.
I'm sure we upset a lot of readers, candidates, sources and advertisers.
That comes with the territory. But upsetting folks certainly isn't our goal.
The way I see it, you as the voter probably don't have the time to sit with each candidate for an hour to throughly question them on all the issues.
But, doing just that is part of my job.
Nowhere in our endorsement editorials does it say that you — the voter — HAVE to vote they way we say. But for those of you who don't feel that you've properly studied the candidates, our endorsements could be helpful.
The nods we gave are merely our opinion, and we could be very wrong. But right now, with the information we have, we think our slate is the best one.
It's the role of a community newspaper to inform the public. It's the role of that newspaper's editorial board to offer educated opinions on important issues. We hope we've done that.
Thanks Julie
Comments
That's fine and dandy! As long as you agree with me! You are close sometimes, but I am always right!
Julie, The Democrat's endorsements did not personally offend me at all. Newspapers like to endorse candidates, pure and simple. But your editorials claim that the Alderman's race is the most important. And it was with the aldermen candidates where your paper gave us the least amount of information - dreadfully little considering you spent an hour interviewing them. Your writing here seems to suggest that rather than letting us receive information and form our own opinion, we should simply let you do the research and then follow your suggestion on voting. Sorry, but I think the Democrat fell flat when it came to informing us on the candidates. The exception would be the candidates for mayor where you did relay more information to us. But again, you tell us that race is not the most important.
No one should be upset. We know what to expect of the Democrat. More like the National Enquirer than the New York Times.
I'm most surprised that there have been no lawsuits over the vitriolic and often misinformed postings. Personal attacks against citizens who are not public officals should never be allowed. Hateful and untrue accusations are not allowed by most papers. I feel that this regurgitation of old rumors, lies and innuendo are destructive to our community.
Morning Julie. No way to please everybody all the time.
God bless.
Julie, do you reinterview the aldermen candidates for the run offs, and do you re-interview the mayoral candidates for the general election? I, for one, would like a clarification on where these people stand on issues which are important to this city.
Post a comment