Readers Write: Agreeing to disagree no longer polite journalism


From the moment President Trump raised his hand to take the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2017, the “art of journalism” went down the tubes. I long for the days when the news was reported and the people would decide. But no, we don’t have the luxury of honest journalism anymore. Criticism, name-calling and rushes to judgment came clamoring down the pike from the losing side of the political divide. (We all remember the very early accusation by the anxious, down-trodden vitriolic media that President Trump had removed the Martin Luther King statue from the Oval Office when he had not. He actually added back the statue of Winston Churchill to the room, which his predecessor had indeed removed).

Back in the day when journalism was an art, agreeing to disagree was polite, albeit controversial. I’m writing with regard to Eric Cashdan’s view (Aug. 16, 2019 NHP Courier entitled “Don’t Mistake Who Trump Is”) which was a criticism of Mark Leytin’s view stated in the Aug. 6 edition. Really, Mr. Cashdan? Our response to factual information as typical “neo-fascist” talking points and “nonsense?” I was hoping you could at least challenge the facts, but no – you could not. How tired and typical a method to shut down dissenters by name-calling them – a sorry tactic which should have been nipped in the bud back in nursery school.

Rosanne Spinner

New Hyde Park


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here