Opinion pages offer ‘virtual town square’ of free speech; here’s to hoping it stays that way
In his March 18 letter to the editor in Southern Maryland News, Tom Hanrahan complains that he does not see in the letters to the editor “constructive dialogue resulting in modified opinions” as evidenced by letter writers expressing to others “how grateful they were for a past opinion, that it was so insightful [and] convincing while being gracious, resulting in a change of mind on a subject.” In searching his past letters, I cannot find that Hanrahan has ever written a letter expressing either gratitude or a change of mind.
To lessen the “same people writing the same ideas repeatedly,” Hanrahan suggests that the per-person limit of one letter per month be reduced to one letter every two months. I would argue that more freedom of speech is needed, not less. He always has the option to not read what certain people write. It is the prerogative of the editor to limit the repetitiousness of the subject matter of letters, while not unduly inhibiting a public debate.
Hanrahan’s concept of letters that modify opinions assumes the presence of some readers with open minds. Unfortunately, the existing social and political atmosphere promotes conformity of thought and speech through the intolerance of political correctness, censorship, groupthink, vague and subjective “hate” speech, and the coercive nature of social media.
As suggested by Hanrahan, it may be true that the words printed here are “merely words tossed into the air to no effect.” However, silence is acquiescence, and it is a delusion that no harm can come from the indifference of saying and doing nothing. The opinion pages of a newspaper are a virtual town square with norms of decorum unlike social media. It is the last refuge of free speech versus cancel culture.
Thankfully, the liberality of the editor of Southern Maryland News allows people to express their opinions once a month despite the climate of repression. Despite Hanrahan’s constructive and insightful dialogue, he has failed to change my mind on the periodicity of letters to the editor.
Mark Broadhurst, California