Censorship vs Editorial Prerogative

Chris Davis, Editor,  Pincher Creek Voice

In a recent letter to the Editor, reader Cornell Van Ryk expressed discontent that I refused to publish an earlier letter of his.  You can read his published letter in full by clicking here.

In his published letter Van Ryk states:

The PC Voice has published a few of my comments. Last week, I expressed my opinion around the Chief Spence hunger strike, Canada's involvement in Mali, and Alison Redford's state of the province address. The Voice refused to publish.

and goes on to say

Now there are two reasons one gets blocked from these forums. The first is that those in control disagree with the opinions expressed (censorship), the second is that the writer uses inappropriate language.

At this point I want to make something clear.  This is NOT an unmoderated forum.  It's an online newspaper.  We reserve the right to decide what we publish.  Is this censorship?  I contend that it is editorialship.

We've tried incorporating a forum, open to less (but not no) mediation.  Almost nobody used it.  Van Ryk himself, when given the opportunity to, essentially declined.

I believe that regular readers of this site will realize that we publish many opposing points of view.  I believe we've shown little or no editorial bias regarding most of the issues we report on.  We've published, for example, plenty of pro-Castle logging and anti-Castle logging points of view.  We've published points of view from the Wildrose party, the New Democrats, and the Progressive Conservatives.  We've published points of view that were against those points of view. We've published points of view that are pro and anti the Idle No More movement.  We've cheered for an away team when warranted.

We've done so within ethical guidelines that we established early with this publication, and intend to adhere to.

Van Ryk's original letter contained material that, in my opinion as Editor, was pointlessly inflammatory without adding any substance to topics that were more national than local in nature.  In my opinion they did not meet the editorial or ethical standards of this publication.  The buck stops  here.

This isn't Facebook. It's not a personal platform for any one individual, myself included.

It has standards.  I interpret and enforce them.  The buck stops here.  There is no guarantee that a submission will end up on our front page, just like there's no guarantee a submission will end up in the Calgary Sun, the Calgary Herald, the Pincher Creek Echo, on CTV's nightly newscast, or anywhere else that is curated and moderated.

Without standards this publication would die quite quickly.

Having said that, we do appreciate the feedback and contributions of our readership.  I believe the wide variety of those contributions visible on these pages gives credence to that statement.

Thank you for reading, and a special thanks to those who contribute.