The Lowell Sun Is A Terrible Newspaper

A Lowell Sun editorial writer squeezes out another quality Op-Ed.

Because she knows I loathe the conservative Lowell Sun, a friend of mine just sent me an email exchange she had with the editor of the Sun, Jim Campanini, a squinty-eyed man who looks as if he’s trying to—but can’t quite—figure out the world around him. Apparently, it started when my friend wrote a letter to the editor stating that it’s too bad the city’s only newspaper publishes significantly more conservative Op-Eds than liberal ones in a predominantly liberal city and region—a reality I can attest to, being all too familiar with the Sun’s house-of-horrors editorial page. Campanini declined to publish the letter and responded to her personally, stating, without a hint of irony, that the Sun publishes all points of view.

Here’s the exchange, starting with my friend’s letter to the editor, which was not addressed to Campanini personally, but intended for general publication. I have decided to withhold my friend’s name from the letters, and have placed in bold those remarks by the Sun’s editor which are completely unprofessional or outrageous.

(Begin correspondence)

To Whom Is The Sun Speaking?

Why does the Lowell Sun insist on speaking only to the conservative minority on its Op-Ed page? Its editorials have endorsed George W. Bush and John McCain, even though (Greater) Lowell didn’t by wide margins. Its lily-white columnists and their vanilla verbiage rarely if ever write anything that could be described as progressive. And the letters the Sun selects for publication are overwhelmingly from conservatives or outright reactionaries. On top of this, many letters contain blatant falsehoods, complete non sequiturs, and just plain terrible writing. The Sun seems all too happy to print these because they support its editorial agenda.

The city of Lowell is in the middle of a significant transition to a city of artisans, professionals, and college students who—whether you want to admit it or not—generally hold progressive views. And surely many older (Greater) Lowellians hold views that are at odds with the Sun’s. I’m not saying that the Sun should advocate liberal positions, but I don’t think I’m alone when I say that I’d like to see some ideological diversity on these pages. I know of plenty of liberals who have written eloquent, well-reasoned letters to the Sun, only to have them not published in favor of poorly-written letters that simply reaffirm what the Sun’s editorials have already stated. A liberal columnist wouldn’t hurt either.

In an age when newspapers are going out of business, the Sun is alienating a bloc of readers who want to stay abreast of city issues and read insightful commentary, but are turned off by the paper’s ideological uniformity. Sadly, the Sun seems to have no interest in printing progressive views. While the city of Lowell is undergoing major changes around it, the Sun continues to push an agenda that Lowell has repeatedly rejected at the ballot box.

Campanini's response:

[Name withheld],

I found your letter most amusing. Evidently, you don't read the newspaper very closely, for you will see that we don't censor viewpoints and have as many liberal columnists - E.J. Dionne, Eugene Robinson, Steve and Coakie Roberts, Donna Brazile - as conservative - Cal Thomas, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter. I put Kathleen Parker in the more moderate arena. Our local columnists are liberal zealots Bob Forrant and John Edwards from Umass Lowell.

As for our editorial voice, we are independent but lean toward family values and a conservative mindset on social issues.

If it weren't for The Sun's strong editorial positions through the years, Lowell would not have a downturn [sic , presumably he meant “downtown”] with artists lofts, an arena, LaLacheur Park, new restaurants, two new garages and the Hamilton Canal District project.

Also, I would hope you can give me concrete information or the names of "liberal" letter writers who have not been published in the Sun. We publish all viewpoints, I think you are making it up, which is a sure sign that you are a liberal. Still I don't hold it against you. Most of my friends do the same thing all the time and I tolerate them with love and dignity.

Lastly, we open up our pages to discussion to our readers - all readers - and we never discourage their viewpoints or the way in which they state their case. You sound very undemocratic in that you would take that freedom away just because someone can't articulate like President Obama.

My best,

Jim Campanini

My friend's response:

Mr Campanini:

I found your letter most insulting, and indicative of the bias that generally plagues your rag paper. I consider it a vindication of the point I was making.

Evidently, you didn’t read my letter carefully, because I never said or implied that the Sun “censors” viewpoints. Rather, your editorials and letters are in fact, overwhelmingly conservative. As for Bob Forrant and John Edwards, they don’t seem to write as regularly as your others columnists, and when they do it’s usually about local issues and in a nonpartisan manner. Also, I find your description of them as “liberal zealots,” very telling. And while I haven’t been keeping count, conservative syndicated columns definitely seem to outnumber liberal ones. As for your leaning towards “family values,” this term is complete baloney. Do you know of anybody in the mainstream who advocates against “family values?” It’s a term some conservatives like to use to assert a nonexistent moral superiority, as if liberals cannot claim to be for "family values."

You also say, “If it weren't for The Sun's strong editorial positions through the years, Lowell would not have a downturn [sic] with artists lofts, an arena, [etc.]” Are you saying there’s some kind of downturn in Lowell for which the Sun is claiming responsibility? Ok, so you meant “downtown.” But I’d be interested to hear what city councilors, administrators, citizen groups, and business associations have to say about your contention that without the Sun, Lowell’s present downtown would not have been possible.

As for my liberal pals I mentioned, I decline to name in this contentious context, especially without their permission. You are accusing me of being a liar, adding, “which is a sure sign that you are a liberal.” Someone might say this is a sure sign that you are a jerk, but rest easy, I’m not that someone. However, thanks for “tolerating” me, because if there’s anything I require, it’s the toleration of William Randolph Campanini.

Lastly, I’m not undemocratic. I’m anti-ignorance and pro-facts. The Sun has recently published letters that contained clearly made up information. You say you don’t discourage viewpoints regardless of how the case is made? Well that’s just foolish, and explains many of your letters, such as the one about cap-and-trade which baselessly claimed that residents’ energy costs would increase by 300% if it passed, or the totally unintelligible letter about Martha Coakley and gambling statutes, or the one that just plain lied and said ACORN generated 15 million votes for Obama and that it will conduct the census. Personally, I wouldn’t have published these letters, not because they’re conservative, but because they’re horribly written and even worse, contain patently obvious falsehoods. But again, you’re happy to print them because they support your agenda.

If you’re as democratic as you imply, then you’d print every letter you get. But that would be ridiculous because newspapers should print only well-reasoned ones, or at least, ones that don’t make stuff up. I don’t expect people to write like Maureen Dowd or David Brooks, but I’d like to think that facts and logic are minimum requirements for letter publication in the Sun. Of course, I’d like to think that, but when I read your Op-Ed page, how could I? How could anyone?

My best,

[Name withheld]

Campanini's response:

[Name withheld],

Of course you are a liberal. You resort to name-calling in order to try to get your point across.

Good luck,

Jim Campanini

My friend's response:

Mr Campanini:

No, I'd say the rest of my letter gets the point across. I don't think you'd take kindly to being called a liar (as you did to me) either. Telling me that you think I'm lying and am therefore liberal is not becoming of a news editor, not to mention a total non sequitur.

(End correspondence)

Now, I’m probably one of those name-calling liberals Campanini’s referring to above, so I might be biased, but I have to say, the guy got his lunch handed to him. That BS about having an ideologically balanced Op-Ed is absurd, as anyone who’s read the Sun will tell you, conservatives included. He totally got called on it. As for her rejoinder, the best the Campster could do is seize upon the word “jerk” while ignoring a completely cogent letter as if to take the high road. But what do you expect from a guy who automatically associates liberalism with lying?

- Max