The 2017 election may have just wrapped up, but already Fountain Hills is looking ahead to the 2018 campaign trail.
In last week’s Times we learned that not only is Mayor Linda Kavanagh not seeking re-election next year, but we’ve already got two hopefuls planning to run for the position. This week, we announced that two newcomers expect to run for town council, too.
Since the political ball is already rolling, I figure now might be a good time to remind folks of a few of our guidelines when it comes to letters to the editor. This was spurred on by the fact that I’ve already received a couple of letters that break with the policy listed at the bottom of this very page every single week.
You must be a member to read this story.
Join our family of readers starting at $5 for your first month and support local, unbiased journalism.
Click here to see your options for becoming a subscriber.
Register to comment
Click here create a free account for posting comments.
Note that free accounts do not include access to premium content on this site.
I am anchor
Election letters
Posted
Ryan Winslett, Editor
The 2017 election may have just wrapped up, but already Fountain Hills is looking ahead to the 2018 campaign trail.
In last week’s Times we learned that not only is Mayor Linda Kavanagh not seeking re-election next year, but we’ve already got two hopefuls planning to run for the position. This week, we announced that two newcomers expect to run for town council, too.
Since the political ball is already rolling, I figure now might be a good time to remind folks of a few of our guidelines when it comes to letters to the editor. This was spurred on by the fact that I’ve already received a couple of letters that break with the policy listed at the bottom of this very page every single week.
It’s really not that difficult: Feel free to comment on the politics, not the people.
This is an election, so we absolutely expect people to disagree with the candidates from time to time. That’s a standard part of this whole process and, when done with a bit of care and respect, a healthy part to boot.
The problem we have is with folks simply taking shots at the candidates on a personal level. It’s okay to disagree with someone, but we have zero interest in running letters that feature little more than glorified name-calling.
Saying you dislike a candidate’s position on a given topic, or the way they’ve voted in the past, or something they supported in a previous article is A-OK. Stating a position and supporting it is exactly what the letters page is all about.
However, if your letter boils down to little more than, “I just don’t like this person,” you’re not really adding anything to the conversation.
I think we can all agree that the 2016 election cycle got pretty heated. During that time, I can’t tell you how many folks reached out to the office to express concerns about how ugly some of the letters were getting. The focus shifted away from anything of substance and frequently became little more than cruel statements or blind accusations.
That’s exactly the type of letters I hope to avoid in the coming year. I’m sure that will upset some folks just trying to get a jab in, but that’s the way it’s going to be.
We’re quite a ways off from candidates becoming official in April but, since we’ve already got hats being thrown into the ring from every direction, I figured it would be a good idea to put a few things in black and white nice and early.
Again, to be clear, I’m not discouraging disagreements, support/disapproval of candidates or open debate. We encourage input from all parties and will gladly run letters that add to what will likely evolve into a long and involved conversation. Just be sure to keep it clean and be respectful.
There’s a long road leading to the 2018 election. We expect folks to disagree on which route we should take, where we should stop to top off the tank or which roadside attractions we should check out. Those conversations make for a memorable journey. The guy in the backseat who just keeps yelling at the driver? Not so much.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here