On September 29, I sent a nicely formatted and carefully edited letter to the editor of local northern Virginia paper Loudoun Now. My letter included correct spaces and punctuation. It included a bullet list of five points. There were no typos or errors.
In thirteen different locations, spaces had been removed, with the effect that words were run together. New sentences followed the prior without a space after the period. And so forth.
My letter was critical of the Loudoun County school board for its apparent decision to limit opportunities for media to access the most recent public comment session on September 28 at the LCPS administration building in Ashburn, VA.
The piece soon appeared on the Loudoun Now web page, and—to be clear—I am grateful that they ran it. However, oddly, it had been re-formatted. In thirteen different locations, spaces had been removed, with the effect that words were run together. New sentences followed the prior without a space after the period. And so forth. Furthermore, my bullet formatting was removed, and the items were merely presented as a list with commas (in two places, again, even omitting spaces after the comma).
The net effect was that, while the piece itself was correct and my points were made, it looks less intelligent. Furthermore, readers (consciously or unconsciously) are likely to assume that the author was careless and inattentive to detail.
Since the flaws I note above in my own piece as published did not exist in the version that I sent to Loudoun Now, I wonder: How did they get there?
By contrast, a letter from Virginia Commonwealth Attorney Buta Biberaj, a Democrat and supporter of the members of the school board whom I have criticized, appeared two days later (though not on the same topic). In addition to nearly tripling the maximum word-count for letters to the editor, Biberaj’ letter is perfectly formatted … and it includes two nicely-presented bullet lists. Finally, her letter (about Domestic Violence Awareness Month) appears with a photo of Biberaj herself, looking concerned.
A good paper ought to correctly format all of its content.
Since the flaws I note above in my own piece as published did not exist in the version that I sent to Loudoun Now, I wonder: How did they get there?
For clarity, I am not faulting the paper for correctly formatting the contribution from the Commonwealth Attorney. A good paper ought to correctly format all of its content. I simply find the situation described above to be interesting and somewhat concerning, especially considering the current discourse and the specific topic related to the apparent partnership between some selected media outlets and the people under sharp criticism inside our local Loudoun County government bodies.