Titling letters is big responsibility for editors

As the managing editor of The Gazette, I have quite a few responsibilities. Many are probably obvious to most people: write and edit news, assign stories to reporters, and determine where and how this news should be placed in the paper.


But many aren’t nearly as obvious: sift through hundreds of e-mails each day, communicate with people who want to know how to submit news items such as anniversaries and obituaries, and attending local events to take photographs.

One responsibility I didn’t think much about before, writing headlines for letters to the editor, was brought to my attention earlier this week when a Stevens Point resident sent a letter about this subject. This is the bulk of what this peson had to say:

“When is it justifiable for a person, groups of people, and the media, to take a person’s comment/viewpoint and twist it into something other than the person’s original intent? This seems to happen a lot as of late, especially in the media. For instance, I recently wrote a letter to the editor and sent it to two of the local papers in the area. Both papers put a different title to the letter received. Now we all know that the title of anything written has an impact on the message or story which is being conveyed.

“One newspaper’s editor read the letter, acknowledged several points written, including a woman’s right to choose. The other put their own personal spin on what was written and in fact titled it with something never actually stated in the letter; thereby, controlling my actual message and bending my viewpoint (freedom of speech) to fit in with their take on things.

“I don’t care for someone else titling my writings and question the local papers as to why they need to ‘control’ what a person is communicating by putting their own title to the letters received. Do teachers/professors title a student’s report, review, thesis, article, etc.? Does a publisher title an author’s book? Of course not! That is wrong and is also wrong when it comes to Freedom of Speech. Real Freedom of Speech, not the made up, kind, Freedom of Speech which we are led to believe we have.”

The writer then challenged the editors to respond, which I did. This is what I said:

“To be perfectly honest, if people send a title and it works, I use it. I’d rather not have to title them myself, out of fear my title may not jive with the original intent of the letter. Especially with some of the letters we receive in which the person’s message makes no sense at all. I’m sure the editors at the other newspaper probably feel the same way.

I then explained why I titled the original letter the way I had, and then offered a suggestion:

“In the future, send YOUR title with the letter and a simple note asking us to contact you should that title not work. I receive those requests all the time and happily oblige.

“For the record, book publishers do change the titles of books all the time, and teachers/professors often do, too. I’ve had it happen to me in school. Freedom of speech entitles you to say the stuff you wrote. It does not entitle publication, though. As the editor, I have the right to edit, delete or reject letters or portions of letters, as stated in our letter policy. So please do not confuse freedom of speech with the paper’s rights.”

The writer responded and said my points were taken and that she does not confuse freedom of speech with my right as an editor. She also said she hoped I would run her letter and my response. Since I don’t typically respond to letters on the letters pages, I decided I would use this column to show our discussion.

In further e-mail conversations with the writer, I answered a question she had about the guidelines we use to title letters and why we may change a title if one is sent with it. This is what I said:

“Titles are often changed by us when they don’t conform to our guidelines as to what a title should be. You suggested titling your current letter ‘What is Freedom of Speech?’ That wouldn’t work for us, because it’s a question first off, and it tells us little of what’s actually in the letter. A better title would be ‘Woman questions how newspapers title letters.’

“Be assured we’re not trying to insert our own political beliefs. I’ve gotten to the point with letters it’s best to be simple with the titles and to make changes to content only when absolutely necessary. Let people say what they want to say, no matter what you think, is my philosophy.”

The writer questioned my use of the world “woman” with my suggested title, saying it was arrogant to use instead of “writer.” I’ll disagree, because had she been a man, I probably would have suggested “man” instead. I also use “writer” on occasion because it’s good to mix things up.

In the end, I’m not sure I got through to her, as she returned to her original point questioning the amount of freedom of speech she actually has because editors have some control over how her message is printed.

Again, I’ll argue editors have that right, whether or not anybody thinks we should. I’ve never used it to purposefully change the intent of a person’s letter. I’m glad she brought the issue to my attention, though, as I will think twice when titling letters, just to be sure.