I take issue with the editor signing such a staunch biased editorial "the Bradford Era", using his position to speak for so many employees, and seemingly push his own agenda.
According to Marty Wilder, in her farewell editorial or last article, she described the staff at the Era as "one big happy family". She described them was working as one cohesive unit. So the managing editor DOES speak for the whole "family".
What agenda, do you think he might be pushing? Don't you think if the "old man" hired him, that he supports what the new editor is doing?
A newspaper should be unbiased, stating the facts and not opinions.
What? Where did you ever get that from? Dude, we live in a free country! People can buy, start and/or own a newspaper and say and print what they want! We have the first amendment in this country! We have a free press! THAT is more important than the second amendment! A newspaper can print what ever they feel like printing! Welcome to America! THAT is what people who fight to protect our country fight for! Newspapers and any news media can be as biased as they want to be! Witness FOX news!
It would be nice to have "unbiased" news, but that don't always happen. SOME newspapers strive to be unbiased and report the news from an unbiased view, but even when they do, extremes from both sides argue that they are biased.
I stopped buying that paper because it seemed to only glorify the actions and business ventures of the good ol boys, but now we're at the other extreme. Maybe this new guy will shed light on more "liberal" stories, but he's not getting off to a good start in my eyes.
Well, the Bradford Era really is a right-wing republican rag, and in my humble opinion, can use a little liberal reporting to balance them out a bit. Our country is getting much more progressive each and every year. The Era needs to respond to that to keep an audience. I got excited when it seemed the new editor is going to try to pull the Era's head out of Marty Causers rear end! That would be a good thing in my opinion!
As far as the author of "Other Voices", I don't know the guy but I agree with him. The issue isn't the gun, it's the human behind the gun.
That seems like more oversimplification from FOX news. Yes, it was a human that pulled the trigger, but without a gun and ammo, he might have killed far less children.
The shooter at the Church in Coudersport was stopped by an unarmed citizen. The shooter there only had a handgun, but may have killed the whole congregation had he had an assault rifle.
There is no simple answer to gun violence in this country, but doing nothing is not the answer.