The Publisher’s Advantage - The Problem With Letters to the Editor                                                                                      11/3/2026

 After nearly 50 years of writing LTEs to various publications, I have learned that each publication has a commentary line that one must not cross if he wishes his opinion to be printed. The line differs by publication and individual editor and can vary based on the topic and the writer.

Capitalism says, and I fully agree, that if you own the paper, it is entirely your prerogative what to print or exclude. But in opinion dialogues, that gives the publisher a significant advantage over the submitters and readers because only the publisher knows the whole story and is not obliged to tell it. Some examples:

If ten letters are printed, nine in favor and one opposed to an issue, what can the reader conclude? Only that the publisher chose nine in favor and one opposed. He does not know how many were submitted or in what ratio.

If a letter is submitted and rejected, the writer has no idea why it was rejected, and the publisher has no obligation to tell him. Does the publisher just disagree, or was there just not enough space available. It’s like taking a spelling test, getting a “F” on it but not being told which words were spelled wrong.

Publishers have editing rules, but they are unknown to the writers, so relevant commentary can be rejected for benign rule violations. Further, not knowing the rules precludes determining if they are being applied equally to all writers, and the publisher has no obligation to do so.

All this creates a publisher’s advantage over its subscribers.

This site is  intended facilitate free and open discussion from serious readers of all persuasions.