Inside Opinion

If you have questions about how the Daily News makes editorial decisions, this blog has the answers. Editorial page editor Matt Zencey and writers Frank Gerjevic and Rosemary Shinohara will discuss what they're working on, answer questions and ask your perspective on issues facing Alaska.

Matt Zencey

Matt Zencey joined the Daily News as an editorial writer in 1985 and was named editorial page editor in May 2007. He has won several. "Best editorial writing" awards from the Alaska Press Club and was a Nieman Fellow in Journalism at Harvard University. He lives on the west side of Anchorage, where he enjoys the best weather in town and easy access to the Coastal Trail. E-mail Matt at mzencey@adn.com

Frank Gerjevic

Frank Gerjevic has worked at the Daily News since 1978, where he's been sports editor, copy editor, reporter and columnist. He's been an editorial writer since 1998. He began his newspaper career with the Anchorage Times in 1975. E-mail Frank at fgerjevic@adn.com

Me and Nicholas Kristof - 10/12/2009 5:02 pm

Those pricey city union contracts...What ADN said at the time - 10/7/2009 6:03 pm

Home heating haiku - 10/6/2009 12:42 pm

"He got more than 175 words for his letter!" - 9/24/2009 6:23 pm

Dividend haiku - 9/23/2009 5:12 pm

Garage doors debate - 9/23/2009 4:12 pm

What Alaska members of Congress say about financial reform - 9/21/2009 4:49 pm

Why the federal court dismissed the challenge to Alaska's way of picking judges - 9/16/2009 10:58 am

"He got more than 175 words for his letter!"

Wednesday, we published a 300+ word comment from hunting advocate Rod Arno, responding to an Associated Press story that he believed was too sympathetic to critics of predator control. His response appeared amid that day’s letters to the editor.

It prompted a reader to complain that Arno got a “letter” that was much longer than our typical 175 word limit.

We get this complaint a lot from people who notice when a letter is longer than our word limit, so I'm sharing the explanation I gave to the reader who complained:

"Mr. Arno requested a compass-length response to an article we published about critics of predator control and we cut his submission down to the length you saw in the paper. We felt his defense of trophy hunting was something that would be of interest to readers, whether they agreed with his view or not, and we edited it to a length we thought was appropriate to make his point in a way that was a good use of readers' limited time."

"You disagree with that judgment, which is your prerogative. Editing is a subjective process involving judgment, not the rote application of formulas."

"Just as we do not guarantee a compass writer 675 words, we do not guarantee a letter writer the full 175 words. If a letter can make its point in less than 175 words, it is subject to being cut. If a compass can make its point in 350 words (+/-), as was the case with Mr. Arno's submission, we will edit it accordingly."

"At that length, it [Arno’s response] was pretty short to get the full compass treatment (Compass label, author photo, highlighted quotation from the text, full tag line), so we omitted those elements. If we had included those elements, it would have taken more space away from other letters published that day."

I might also have told the reader this: Sometimes a letter or compass is especially well-written or especially compelling, in which case we will let it run somewhat longer than the usual limit.

But be forewarned: Don't ask for that kind of waiver, unless you are prepared to hear the dread words: "Sorry, your piece is not written well enough to go on longer than our limit."

- Matt Zencey, editorial page editor

show comments

Comments

NEW STORY COMMENTS: Learn about our upgrade | Create an avatar in the new system »

By submitting your comment, you are agreeing to adn.com's user agreement.

hide comments