Understanding the Conditions for Public Discourse: four rules for selecting letters to the editor

Abstract

Using the work of deliberative democratic theorists, this paper investigates and critiques the criteria letters editors at newspapers use to construct their column. Deliberative democratic theory values egalitarian public discussion on matters of common concern, and worries about providing the conditions for this discussion. The paper identifies four rules for selection; referred to as the rules of relevance, brevity, entertainment and authority. First, the rule of relevance refers to the demand for the content of the letter to be "relevant", or respond to issues and events already on the agenda. The rule of brevity, in turn, encapsulates the requirement to write short, punchy letters that state the reader's view in less than 300 words. Thirdly, the rule of entertainment highlights how editors prefer spectacular, punchy letters. Finally, the rule of authority captures the rejection of ungrammatical writing, and letters written in unconventional styles. The paper demonstrates that the rules of selection are not entirely in line with the visions of deliberative democrats, because they privilege particular forms of expression. Nevertheless, these rules make it practically possible to open up a site for public discussion in the newspaper.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 120 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.