I’m writing in response to the September 24 Letter to the Editor written by [Providence Republican City Committee co-chairs] Angel Connell and David Talan. Opinion pieces have always been an interesting pathway of expressing one’s feelings on a particular hot-button issue. And it’s often easy for those who don’t share said opinion to react emotionally without attempting to find reason and understanding in the opposing point of view. In my opinion, this lack of willingness to seek understanding is the largest contributing factor to the growing divide in this country today.
Opinion pieces are held to the same journalistic integrity standard as other forms of journalism by their rootedness in fact. The Eye’s very Writer’s Guidelines list “Seek the truth and report it” as their first pillar. So that’s all to say that, when reading Angel’s and David’s piece this morning, there was a glaring violation in upholding the truth as so described under the guidelines. Let’s break it down:
Calling for an end to political violence is an opinion.
Condemning those that would revel in Charlie Kirk’s death is an opinion.
Emphasizing the need to protect free speech is an opinion.
But when the editor allows Angel and David to say that Charlie Kirk died “as he defended the American tradition of free speech,” we’ve suddenly lost both the integrity of the piece and our ability to have rational, fact-based discourse on the opinions raised.
Charlie Kirk certainly invoked his Constitutional right to free speech. There is no argument there. Several of his bigoted, xenophobic, and hateful statements are protected under our very right to free speech – a topic that can be reasonably debated. But saying that he was a defender and champion of free speech is just flat out untruthful and doesn’t cultivate reasonable, rational discourse. It’d be no different than me claiming that Pol Pot was an advocate for human rights. And it allows the writer to abdicate any responsibility from their opinions being reinforced by a false statement.
I won’t bother you with sending several sources of Kirk’s attempts at stifling, silencing and doxxing those who held opposing views as I don’t desire this note to be published. But I’m hoping that my message inspires The Eye’s opinion pieces to be grounded in fact first, regardless of how agreeable the supporting opinions may be. I appreciate the consideration.
Jack Hartman, Fox Point
Want to comment? Click!