Should They Of Printed The Letter?

[mccfluff]

bit of a debate going on here, should the paper of printed this (ex) reader's letter?

I think it should of been binned as that's were this sort of garbage thinking should reside, others think it should of been printed if only to show what sort of idiots walk our streets

http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2013/news/reader-cancels-paper-over-perverted-daley-coverage/

[jim360]

"should have".

How sad that people should still hold these views. Perhaps it should be printed only to show how far there still is to go before we reach a truly tolerant society.

[charlieuniform3]

I think the paper is right to print it - freedom of speach etc and to let this sad little man's neighbours know what a biggot he is!

[woofgang]

what jim said...let these fools condemn themselves out of their own mouths

[ummmm]

Yep...I would have printed it.

[davetuc]

Of course they should have printed it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. You may call it 'garbage thinking' but that's your opinion. Free speech is free speech, even if the views seem abhorrent.

[mccfluff]

"seem abhorrent." they are abhorrent

[youngmafbog]

Of course it is correct to print it.

Typical right-on lefty liberal attitude to try and ban what they dont like of course. Why do you think you are right and represent the majority view, you are a minority group that has a big gob, that is all.

Free speech is free speech, until you lefties turn this into a commie state that is the way it should stay.

The topic has nothing to do with this before you start.

[Mamyalynne]

Good on the paper for printing it - all readers letters express a view. I doubt whether Mr Jones will be buying any more newspapers at all or watching much TV News coverage if he is so easily outraged.

[jim360]

And yet, ymb, not a single person in this thread so far has said that it shouldn't be printed. One of these days you might actually realise that the "right-on lefties" aren't about censoring abhorrent views, but about combatting and changing them.

[Old_Geezer]

I can't be bothered to read the details but seems to me holding an opinion does not automatically make one a bigot. Although, for the life of me, I can't understand why he's all het up about the paper covering the story. Whilst it ought to be a private matter for Tom, papers generally think this is newsworthy, for some reason, these days. As for printing it ? Why not. It's a valid option for the Ed.

[youngmafbog]

Jim//And yet, ymb, not a single person in this thread so far has said that it shouldn't be printed. //

From the post above // I think it should of been binned as that's were this sort of garbage thinking should reside//

That certainly reads to me dont print it bin it. Stand to be corrected of course.

[mccfluff]

why did Chill's answer get removed?

[jim360]

I suppose I was only paying attention to the replies rather than the OP.

[mccfluff]

i think its me on my own, but yes i see the point with regard to free speech

[mccfluff]

JIm -- how dare you, you must pay attention to me at all times :-)

[naomi24]

A reader is appalled at the appalling way in which they presented this appalling news. Of course they should have printed it - if only to demonstate his appalling use of the English language - which is really all it's fit for. ;o)

[ummmm]

Chill corrected you rather than answer the OP.

Jim corrected you but also answered the OP.

[Svejk]

Free Chilli.........

[jno]

I think newspapers should make a point of printing opinions that they don't share, including objections to their own coverage of events. (The Daily Mail would disagree.) This man's a bit out of touch (I hope) but if he's prepared to put his name to his opinions, the paper should be prepared to print them.