 |
Report Comment
"While I agree generally about the silly legal and social ramifications of what is entirely a private, personal matter, I continue to find Ted's commentary deeply offensive, which given the Editors Note this week, must be common.
The problem isn't that Rall is a vile, name-calling bigot who freely expresses hate speech in regard to those who dare to disagree with him. That's funny enough considering Rall represents neither a constituency nor a credible career in actual journalism.
No, the problems (2) is that Urban Tulsa, which I love, doesn't have the balls to:
1. Replace Rall with someone who is an actual Oklahoman or who at least knows where Oklahoma is. Even an Okie as hard-core Christian-hating and Marxist as Rall would be an improvement. Rall is a carpetbagger who goes into whatever little markets will print him because they can't afford a credible syndicated alternative.
2. Urban Tulsa does not demonstrate the need for balance of commentary, which is a hallmark of legitimate media. The paper has, in my experience, never sought out, employed or regularly published columnists who aren't Marxist bigots.
Seriously, a paper in Oklahoma only prints opinions of those (mostly out of state) columnists who despise Christianity, considers military members murderers, and openly espouse violent community revolution? Great marketing vision in Oklahoma. Well, if your only goal is to appeal to 22 year old hipsters in midtown Tulsa. Absurdly amateur marketing for a publisher interested in being professional or successful.
As witnessed by a shrinking staff, smaller product, less content and less advertising.
These things make me sad as a fan for many years. But I have to say, you have brought it on yourself."
|
|
