The Monitor fairly represents the region’s diverse range of perspective.
That language is in our mission statement, which appears on the front page of this paper every week. We’re working hard to make it a reality, not just in our news section but for the opinion and analysis featured in “Surveying the Views.” We thought it would be helpful to explain how we think about the Views page, and how you can contribute.
Three sorts of pieces appear on this page:
Publisher’s Notes reflect my personal perspective, though I typically discuss these with our editor, Joshua Murdock, to make sure they’re not in tension with the (modest) whole of The Monitor. We publish these irregularly, only in instances where we think my voice can provide distinctive value.
Columns are written by non-staff contributors. They reflect the opinions of their respective authors, not of The Monitor. We have asked Jane Hamman, a Clancy resident and a member of the state Board of Education; and James Nelson of Helena, a retired State Supreme Court justice, to write regularly—and we are seeking other consistent contributors. But we also welcome one-off columns.
Our strong bias is for columns written by local people about local issues. But we also feature pieces from other sources when they highlight issues and responses that are relevant to this community. Those sources include the Solutions Journalism Exchange, High Country News, Writers on the Range, and The New York Times’ “Fixes” column.
Finally, letters to the editor are shorter pieces that come exclusively from the community and our readers. They can respond to issues in the news; to editorials and columns; or to other letters. We hope that the letters section will become a true public forum, highlighting ideas and constructive discussion from all corners of Jefferson County.
Here are guidelines that apply to all three sorts of Views pieces:
We check facts. Statements that are not fact-based cannot appear in The Monitor. By “fact-based,” we mean that they can be confirmed by credible research, legitimate data from governments or other sources, or reporting by authoritative news organizations.
I cannot emphasize this enough: Opinions published in this newspaper must be anchored in fact. Expressing your view should not be seen an opportunity to distort the underlying reality, or to borrow others’ distortions. Quoting the opinion of someone else, however prominent, is not the same as citing facts.
We reserve the right to edit contributed pieces. This is standard practice in journalism. We edit for clarity, length (columns should not be longer than 1000 words; letters must be 250 words or less), and grammar—ensuring that this content is accessible and easily understood by all. In doing so, however, we aim to preserve the writer’s argument, opinion and voice.
We reserve the right not to publish contributions. The Monitor believes fiercely in freedom of speech, and just as fiercely in the importance of reflecting a broad range of opinion and experience. Both of these are essential to democratic function.
But we will not publish pieces that promote racism or that reflect bigotry based on religion, gender, sexual orientation or national origin. We won’t publish personal attacks on individuals or other forms of hate speech.
We do not publish pieces authored by candidates for public office. In the case of incumbent officials, we will not print their views within six months of a primary or election in which they are candidates.
We prefer local perspective on local issues. It’s not that we’re uninterested in national and global politics and government. But there are many, many media sources our audience can go to for authoritative opinion about what’s happening in Washington. We’ll provide perspective on those issues when there’s something to say about their connection to Montana and Jefferson County. And we’ll provide insight on the many important questions that inform local life and are shaping our county’s future.
We have a strong bias for solutions. It’s fine to criticize state regulations or local political decisions, or to censure emerging national or global trends: Exposing and explaining what’s wrong is the first step toward making it right.
But the more useful opinion pieces transcend mere protest. They propose new or different ideas, alternative approaches, ways to fix the problem. What can be done? What can we do? This is how society moves from divisive finger-pointing to constructive change: We consider both challenges and possible ways to fix them. So The Monitor favors opinion that errs on the side of solutions.
I hope these guidelines will encourage more readers—you—to make your voices heard on this page. Please, write a letter or send us a column. A forum for vibrant and diverse public discourse is part of the value that a local newspaper provides—and it’s the hallmark of a strong community.
