It’s not too often Nicki Minaj influences my thinking. I’ll explain.

Recently I’ve received several emails addressing issues with letters to the editor. I’d like to address them.

As long-time readers may have realized I have several standards for letters from readers. One is they cannot contain libelous statements. The other is they can not exceed 500 words. If the letter is addressing an issue brought up in a story that appeared in another publication or news outlet, I’m not interested in it. 

Of course I will not print anonymous letters.

I’ve printed many letters over the years that disagree with columns I’ve written. I have never had any problem with that. Some writers have delighted in calling me names or criticizing me personally. My years as a radio talk show host taught me just how much people can hate someone if they disagree with them. The vitriol I witnessed in that medium is much greater than what I’ve seen in the past 20 years here – thankfully.

I was the house liberal at the late and lamented WREB during the Reagan Administration. The hate mail I received was often very creative. 

I try to get every letter in the paper that I can. Sometimes something falls between the cracks and I apologize for that.

Recently though, a reader took me to task for not fact-checking a published letter. My lack of doing so apparently put the letter writer in a poor light.  I did read the letter for libel, but it has not been my habit to fact-check everything in a letter.

The issue here is whether or not the letter writer would have agreed with my “fact” over his or her “fact.” Yes, I still believe there are absolute truths and irrefutable statements, although in this age of “alternative” facts I realize my feeling would probably be considered quaint by some. 

To attempt to derail the publishing of a letter because of this reason may be opening up a spectacular can of worms.

However, it is now something I’m considering. There is a difference between the expression of an opinion protected by the First Amendment and the repetition of statements that are not substantiated. 

I don’t believe this happens too often in our pages, but in reaction to the complaints, I will be looking more closely.

This is a fine line to walk. I get that. I share concerns that one reader expressed, though, that today more than ever what is presented as fact is frequently not a truth.

Of course the issue with fact-checking is automatically some people believe that fact-checking is inherently biased against certain points of view.  

So, while I was on vacation this week the recent controversy stirred up by Nicki Minaj’s completely irresponsible statement about the COVID-19 vaccine hit the news. She tweeted, “My cousin in Trinidad won't get the vaccine cuz his friend got it & became impotent. His testicles became swollen. His friend was weeks away from getting married, now the girl called off the wedding. So just pray on it & make sure you're comfortable with ur decision, not bullied.”

I thought if someone had written  that message as a letter to the editor, would it be irresponsible for me to print it? I thought, “Yes.” 

So in reaction to the comments I received I will watch things much more carefully. I still welcome your letters. You can still tell me I’m all wet. You can still present your political and cultural opinions. I’m just going to ask you to actually fact-check yourself. Don’t repeat things simply because you’ve heard them and they fit your own personal ideology. 

Well I know I’m bound to get a few letters about this column. Don’t worry, I’ll print them.

I’m going back on vacation now.