It's only personal if you take it that way

Frontiersman editorial board

Sunday will be the last day campaign-related letters to the editor will appear in the Frontiersman for the Nov. 5 statewide election. The deadline has appeared in several of our recent issues, and that has helped to create a flurry of last-minute stumpers, supporters and detractors. We make every effort to print as many of the letters as possible. Last Sunday we cut all of the national opinion stories and cartoons, and this week we've added extra space to accommodate as many letters as possible. While it's likely we won't be able to print every letter we receive, we're confident that we will print as fair a cross-section as possible.

One thing we do notice is that not only does the volume of letters increase, but the intensity of many of those letters tends to intensify as well. Our policy has always been -- and will remain -- that we do not allow personal attacks in letters to the editor, or in any other format for that matter. In fact, we have rejected several letters this year because they contained personal attacks -- or potentially libelous statements.

Still, some candidates have expressed concerns because they feel they've been victimized by personal attacks as the letters deadline approaches. The important thing to bear in mind here is that there is a difference between calling one's public character into question and attacking one's personal character.

If a letter writer expresses a personal experience he or she has had with a candidate that was disappointing, as long as that experience relates to the candidate's performance in office, or ability to perform in office, we will print that. There is clearly a difference between questioning a candidate's professional competence and issuing a personal attack. Of course, when someone says you haven't done a good job, or aren't qualified to do a good job, it's hard not to take that personally. That's part of the pressure of choosing a public life. A fair amount of people aren't going to agree with you, and some of them will be vocal about it.

If you're a candidate and a letter in our pages contends that you lack the intelligence to comprehend the issues, we've failed in our commitment to prevent personal attacks. If a letter states that you have bungled the opportunity to address those issues, we have not failed in that effort. It's a thin line, but it can be endured with thick skin and the courage of your convictions.