Letter: Balance not required

I find it interesting, though not surprising, that in Thursday’s DI Matt Strom expressed doubt that his letter would be published. He obviously holds, in addition to his other conservative beliefs, the irrational idea that the media in this country, and our DI in particular, is liberal. After witnessing that same media, including the DI, idly stand by as our country invaded a sovereign nation without provocation, it is difficult for me to come close to viewing the media as liberal. However, the DI does reflect the student body, and at an institution such as our great university, students tend to be liberal.

I personally think this is a byproduct of empiricism and the constant state of flux that all academia inhabits, but I am nowhere near being the philosopher I’d have to be to back up that claim.

In any case, it appears that Matt is not terribly familiar with Occam’s Razor. If he was, the thought may have occurred to him that the DI opinions department was quite possibly inundated with letters from people astounded that someone as advanced in her schooling as Danielle is could be that ignorant of the concepts of freedom, patriotism, and reality. I can easily imagine the opinions staff picking a select few from the likely dozens of responses to her letter – I know, my own response to her letter wasn’t run in the paper.

Again, we have been shown someone who doesn’t understand the First Amendment. It protects from government intervention all forms of the expression of thought. A newspaper is not required by the First Amendment to be balanced; that is instead a matter of journalistic ethics. Claiming otherwise only exhibits one’s ignorance.

Kyle T. Bergan

junior in LAS