Anything I should add? Fix?
As someone who has had nearly every one of my letters to the editor of The West Australian published (only too happy to provide copies of, but they are not on topic in this thread) my first suggestion would be to reduce the length.
The Ed will anyway ... expect whatever you do submit to end up with a different heading than you expected/provided (or maybe even wanted) and the odd paragraph hacked out here and there. Also, don't expect them to correct any of your spelling or grammar.
Should by some miracle your letter as it currently stands actually be given newsprint, most readers eyes would have glazed over and moved on to the next letter long before the name "Senator Conroy" comes up.
The next load of readers will quit as soon as they DO read "Senator Conroy" ... mostly because they would never have heard of him anyway.
The next load will quit as soon as the read what the filter will do because they (like me) in fact agree with it and don't care about trying to understand it or what it might cost them ... it's "technical stuff, and I'm no good with technical". :)
The rest (doing their morning business in the small room) will read it to the end and roll their eyes while muttering "pro pron fanatical religious zealot, will this country ever run out of them ?", especially when they get to the mentions of Hitler et al.
In short, if I was The Ed, I'd at most print the first four paragraphs under the heading of "suspicions over motivation for internet filtering" or something like that.
Tis probably too soon for many editors to be considering such stuff at the moment ... and remember, their main care is about what sells newspapers, not saving your world.
regarDS
Posts
