Stumped by response to Tenn-Tom letter
In regard to Bob Raymond’s letter to the editor in Friday’s paper, I’m also stumped. I’m stumped by your reply to him. He stated his surprise that your article about the Tenn-Tom Waterway was negative and that you left out the benefits gained from the project. Your flippant reply to him was that the un-cut version of the story could be found online. What percentage of your readers actually subscribe to the online edition? Does this mean that if I want the whole story, I should read the online version of The Dispatch and disregard the print version? Why have a subscription to the print version of The Dispatch at all? If you are going to be selective in how much of a story you print, why focus on the negative aspects and leave out the positive? They say newspapers are dying. I can see why.
Lee Ann Moore
Peter Imes replies: Apologies to Mr. Raymond and anyone else offended by my brief reply to his letter. Print editions are constrained by the space on the pages while internet space is virtually unlimited. We often print abbreviated versions of stories and even letters to the editor in our print edition, saving the full version for the web edition. That said, we should have recognized the need to print the entirety of that particular story due to the local tie-ins. We will re-print that story in full in Monday’s paper.
The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.