The Minnesota Majority posted some "well-written" and "original" sample letters that got submitted through their website attacking Nick Coleman's column about the Archbishop Nienstedt.
We now appear to have evidence of what most people have suspected for years. As of December 3, the Star Tribune newspaper had published just six letters in response to Nick Coleman’s attack piece on Archbishop Nienstedt (besides the Archbishop's formal response). And four of the six letters were in support of Coleman. But here's the most revealing fact exposing the newspaper's apparent bias -- NOT ONE of the over 60 letters critical of Coleman's column submitted through our website were published by the newspaper.
Editor Scott Gillespie wrote a column about these LTE campaigns.
We also received many letters on the Coleman column -- including one from the archbishop himself -- that appeared original and not part of an e-mail campaign. We published several of those, pro and con. And that's the point of this column.
If you'd like your letter published in the Star Tribune or on our website, you should know that we value original material. We receive hundreds of well-written, thoughtful letters each week, and for that we're extremely grateful. Those writers who actually read the paper or our website and take the time to compose a letter deserve more consideration than a guy in Oregon who doesn't know the difference between the Star Tribune and the Daily Planet.
Go read the Minnesota Majority letters for yourself - and put yourself in the editor's shoes. Would you publish these? Are they worth the ink?