Are we allowed to have an opinion?

[IB01]

For the 10th time this week, we are lectured by the editors or columnists of the Journal Star not to form opinions. Let domestic dispute play out says the headline of the PJS editorial.
"The community should back off", as only the educated journalists are trained to properly form an opinion.
We should yield (I guess to them) any and all rights to an opinion.

http://pjstar.com/stories/022908/EDI_BFTSR32B.058.php

But then I flip to the next section, and it is a "You page" ("Where you are the news")
and the leading "Talking Point" requests readers to submit and have their opinions printed on this exact subject that we had been told to shut up about.
We are told by various readers that we need to "wake up" and we need to get our facts straight. And then there are the numerous you page submissions that use the same words (appalled, astounded, outraged) to hammer their points.
Isn't this the very definition of schizophrenia? They ask for people's opinions and print them, but then they slam them elsewhere in the paper and scold them, telling everyone how ignorant they are to form opinions.
Someone explain this to me.

[Murph]

Yes you can have an opinion but it must be formed by them.....lol

[tornado]

And the ever pervasive slam against people who post on message boards, with this comment
"Still others have taken sides based upon prejudices of race and gender that should shame them but sadly does not as they shout in cowardly anonymity."

So they slam anyone who responds using an alias on their You Page as well.
Why does this bother them so much?
I have no idea whose opinion it is reading that editorial, as nobody signed it either.

As I have said for many years, the talk on message boards is no different than the chatting in a bar, on a street corner, and at the water cooler.
Do they propose that they want to police all that's said in those settings. Are they the self appointed thought-police and free-speech-monitors?
This is a private message board, not publicly owned. It really isn't all too different that my writing what I want in my own diary....except that if you choose, you can peek in here and see what I write...but you are not required nor forced to. Heck, if you tried hard enough, you could probably even get into my diary as well, and would you slam me for writing in there as well?

Here is the single biggest difference between the speech found in their newspaper and the speech found on a message board.
Recall...both have protections from the Constitution,
but ........the speech found here allows opposing viewpoints without labelling them cowardly, ignorant, and telling them to back off.
Fact #1...people do and WILL have opinions....get used to it, even if the opinions aren't the ones you share. I think you guys spend way too much ink trying to squelch those opinions you don't like to hear.

[lefty]

I think opinion is one thing...but so many were demanding certain actions to be taken by BU....I believe that's where the "cool off" comment came from

[BU_EMT128]

I don't know about the whole opinion thing, I just received quite the reply from Phil Luciano for a email i sent him yesterday pretty much saying all my opinions are wrong.

[J Money]

I think the editorial is pretty insulting to those who have talked about the situation on message boards. It also references "hiding behind anonymity" while the author of the editorial has not signed their work--a pretty blatant double standard.

I do, however, think that the case presented isn't too bad after what we've read in the star earlier this week. Whoever wrote that story at least notes that if the charges are unfounded, Daniel has been unfairly punished, and vice versa.

[Scouter]

I think the editorial is pretty insulting to those who have talked about the situation on message boards. It also references "hiding behind anonymity" while the author of the editorial has not signed their work--a pretty blatant double standard.

I do, however, think that the case presented isn't too bad after what we've read in the star earlier this week. Whoever wrote that story at least notes that if the charges are unfounded, Daniel has been unfairly punished, and vice versa.

It seems like we have to go over this every time someone posts an editorial ... Read this:

http://pjstar.com/opinion/ssections/primer/ourview.shtml

[BUBraves2006]

It seems like we have to go over this every time someone posts an editorial ... Read this:

http://pjstar.com/opinion/ssections/.../ourview.shtml

Might want to tell the web editor that the apostrophes appear as question marks.

[Scouter]

Might want to tell the web editor that the apostrophes appear as question marks.

And that the JS is no longer a Copley paper!

add: 666 posts for you now, BUB2006! You better make another one ASAP!!!

[tornado]

Then I ask, just how reliable is any explanation they give when they don't even know who they are working for?

But, scouter, I really have no idea what that link was supposed to be for...
What is there we "have to go over"?

The point is made that journalists & editors claim the right to opinions, and they claim the right to scold and lecture readers who form opinions
and some even go so far as to shame and criticize those who do form certain opinions.
Hmmm....maybe you see this differently, but I see a whole lot of arrogance and hypocrisy.

Of course they have a right to their opinions, but why is it their job to coach us in our opinions?

You don't think comments like
"Let domestic dispute play out"
"in a Peoria where everyone seems to have an opinion on the matter."
"...that's just wrong"
"Still others have taken sides based upon prejudices"
"should back off and let this play out"

and from previous articles...

"So cool off. ..."
"please stop"
"it's (readers' opinions) silly. It's insulting. It's irrelevant."
"many BU faithful are throwing away their thinking caps, pulling their red sweaters over their heads and trying to hide from reality"
"We could use a lot more calm and facts in this matter and a lot fewer half-baked opinions and excuses."
and many many more...

are unbridled efforts to sit atop their pedestal and speak down to us to get us in line with our opinions?

Does it not seem like the writers of what's in the PJ Star are overly obsessed with what people think and overly motivated to try to stop it and control it?

Again....they are fully entitled to their opinions....and, unless I miss my guess, very, very few people would stop buying the paper if the opinions disappeared....
But please, give the same right to the very people you expect to read and heed your opinions.
Give people the right to their own opinions without the high and mightly attitude that we all need you to coach us in what we think and scold us when we are out of bounds.

[Scouter]

Tornado, perhaps you failed to read the bolded part of JMoney's quote where he asked about newspapers not signing editorials and thinking it to be a double standard. I passed along that link so he (and maybe some other people here) could understand how and why newspapers come to do that.

[daPAWW1]

Exercise Your Rights!

Simply Stop Buying The Paper!

[BU_EMT128]

Simply Stop Buying The Paper!

Done

[tornado]

For your viewing pleasure.........

Here is a terse statement as published in the Pantagraph today:
"Peoria police say they arrested Ruffin at his apartment early Saturday after a 20-year-old former girlfriend accused him of cutting her lip as he tried to get her to leave. He??™s told police she hit her lip on a door."

http://pantagraph.com/articles/2008/02/29/usports/doc47c746c9654d8506288263.txt

Why do I seem to think this differs sO much from the repeated statements of
"battery with hands and feet, choking, and busted lip" that we hear repeatedly in another certain publication?

If the Bloomington police have this story....essentially the same story I have shown many news sources had as far back as Sunday, then show me where the PJS has ever said anything like this....UNTIL FINALLY ON THURSDAY, AFTER 5 DAYS OF MISINFORMATION AND MEA CULPAS ABOUT HOW HARD IT WAS TO GET THE FACTS.
In Wed. edition they quote Franklin about the door, but they never once cite the Ruffin version of events that say she hurt her lip on the door, never, until Thursday...long after a lot of negative opinion was molded by the "battery/choking/ligature marks/heinous crime" stuff that was everywhere for those 5 days.

[Beninator]

I don't know about the whole opinion thing, I just received quite the reply from Phil Luciano for a email i sent him yesterday pretty much saying all my opinions are wrong.

Why doesnt that surprise me about PL? PL's articles would be much more effective if he left out his attempts at humor. But I guess he will never learn.