You would think that a publication that has received substantial criticism over one of its articles would be extra-careful about how it treats letters to the editor. But if the publication was Salon, well... read on.
Thanks, but editorial proprieties in quotation lacking.
Ms. Walsh, I am deeply flattered that Salon featured Mercury Rising in its review of the blogs.
However, whoever prepared the excerpt of my article was mischievous--and deceptive-- in welding by ellipses one paragraph early in the post to a sentence many, many paragraphs distant and referring to a different, narrowly-defined topic.
My post was titled, "Why the Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. article alleging the election was stolen is substantially right and the critics substantially wrong." Salon's title was "There's wrong, and then there's less wrong." So, Salon falsified my attempt to be fair to Farhad Manjoo into a snide attack on Robert Kennedy.
I would much rather that you had closed the quote of my piece by appropriate methods, using the line that follows directly:
"Justice has not been done."
Monday, June 05, 2006 11:29:54 PM
PS: This letter belongs to Salon.
They are welcome to come get it.