Separate opinion from news

I write to address troubling patterns I see emerging at The Spokesman-Review.

Lately, the S-R has allowed opinion pieces to creep onto the front page and other “hard news” sections. The latest example is Shawn Vestal’s July 28 front page article, “Furor over fluoride hard to swallow,” where he states that, “Unfortunately,” those opposing fluoridation have kept fighting, and that they “are using the same tools that flat-earthers drag out to deny global warming or argue for intelligent design: information that looks suspiciously like science.”

If this is so, then Shawn should be able to make his case without …

I write to address troubling patterns I see emerging at The Spokesman-Review.

Lately, the S-R has allowed opinion pieces to creep onto the front page and other “hard news” sections. The latest example is Shawn Vestal’s July 28 front page article, “Furor over fluoride hard to swallow,” where he states that, “Unfortunately,” those opposing fluoridation have kept fighting, and that they “are using the same tools that flat-earthers drag out to deny global warming or argue for intelligent design: information that looks suspiciously like science.”

If this is so, then Shawn should be able to make his case without resorting to the personal attacks that are rife through this piece.

Please, S-R, leave your opinions in the “Opinion” section, leave the ad-hominem attacks from your staff on your blogs, and stick to reporting “Just the facts, Ma’am” on the front page and other “hard news” sections, and let the readers form their own opinions from those facts without the snide comments and condescension.

Oh, and for the record, I am pro-fluoridation, but thanks for letting me know that being an “intelligent design” believer puts me on equal footing with “flat-earthers,” Spokesman-Review, and charging me for the privilege.

Cameron C. King

Spokane