Changing Hawaii

By Diane Yukihiro Chang

Friday, July 17, 1998

---

Restraining comment
on letters to editor

THE most enjoyable part of my job is reading the letters that assistant editor Mary Poole selects for publication. We publish hundreds of them each year on what we call the opposite-editorial (op-ed) page. Most of these commentaries are impressive. They make me think, "Couldn't have said it better myself..."

Then there are those that furrow the brow. In these cases, I wish Mary would let me tack on an editor's note pointing out some obvious flaw in the argument or just making a wisecrack in retort.

But she's much too polite.

Since the op-ed page is a popular vehicle for community give and take, we print letters without editorial comment. It takes great restraint.

In my dreams, though, I can include an addendum whenever I want. Take, for example, the following cases of actual letters to the editor:

"Every Sunday, I see Lt. Gov. Mazie Hirono jogging near Diamond Head. Why does the lieutenant governor need to have her limousine following behind her at 2-5 miles per hour? Why do the taxpayers need to fund a limo with a driver/security man trailing? Most would not even know her by sight so it could not be a security issue. And at 6:30 in the morning, there aren't a lot of people in the area to bother her."

Editor's Note: If anyone deserves to be accompanied by an armed body guard in a large car equipped with a cell phone, it's a woman jogging by herself at 6:30 in the morning in a secluded area.

"Your July 1 editorial page shows what is, at best, editorial schizophrenia and, at worst, malicious journalism. Columnist Richard Borreca called into question Governor Cayetano's ability to help business. Right next to that was an editorial calling on the governor to veto legislation that would do just that. In another case, Mr. Borreca criticized the governor for letting the public employee union wield too much power, yet your newspaper ran a news story criticizing the state for making employees unhappy by moving them out to Kapolei, even though a past editorial endorsed the government center in the Second City. A little consistency on your part is warranted."

Editor's Note: There are distinct differences between a news story (a factual account), an editorial (the opinion of the Star-Bulletin editorial board) and a column or commentary (an individual's personal opinion). We feel there is room for all three in the paper. So, we purposely encourage different points of view and any "inconsistencies" that may develop.

"The lead sentence of a June 30 article read, 'Either the open market at Restaurant Row had to go, or attorney William McCorriston would.' That is untrue. I spent at least half an hour explaining to your reporter the situation: Several tenants (including our firm) did complain to Restaurant Row management that the open market and video arcade appeared to be violations of the lease requirement that the Waterfront complex be maintained as a 'Class A Building.' Never did I tell your reporter that I gave an ultimatum that the law firm would leave Restaurant Row if the open market stayed."

Editor's Note: Mr. McCorriston, puh-lease. While you might not have told our reporter that you gave an ultimatum to Restaurant Row, three sources confirmed to her that you did, and that's exactly what the lead says.

Editor's Note to Mary: Thanks for restraining me from doing editor's notes on the op-ed page. I could get in way too much trouble.

---

Diane Yukihiro Chang's column runs Monday and Friday.
She can be reached by phone at 525-8607, via e-mail at
DianeChang@aol.com, or by fax at 523-7863.