Strange that local newspapers always enjoy printing the rhetoric which emerges from politicians, but what if a politician decides to utter unsubstantiated comments which are then printed in a newspaper? Do you have the right to challenge such misinformed comments? That would surely be freedom of speech and at that a reply which may well be more informative, offering confirmed facts to the public which may otherwise be withheld?
So where do you challenge such misleading comments? Well that certainly is the problem, especially when dealing with local press editors in Tameside because their objective is to persist with press photographs of local politicians, especially when they are in power, and they ensure as many column inches as are needed are made available to promote those press-privileged politicians, thereby creating a partnership which may well be advantageous to them both - but indicates contempt for the public.
So the question is do local editorial staff and reporters have the right to exclude important substantiated facts by denying the public the right to respond to misleading comments made by close political partners of the Press - no they do NOT. But do they actually? YES they do!
Over a two year period, the Advertiser Group & Reporter Group newspapers in Tameside have indicated a bias towards the Mottram Bypass political cartel promoting the road scheme, and constantly feed the same picture into their reports of traffic hold-ups. The latest example is their publication of rhetoric from a Politician - Derbyshire County Councillor David Wilkinson - who does not even attend the Public Inquiry to consider the emerging facts.
The latest example of editorial sabotage concerns my submitted online comments concerning said article and politician which was obviously binned in the Editorial Office.
My submission to the press contained conclusive and substantiated facts, not simply rhetoric, but the barricades went up because Editors prefer political rhetoric not facts, especially if it might disturb their political allegiances and contacts.
It is therefore unfortunate that the press are depriving essential details being made known to the 220,000 people in Tameside, and the only source of complaint they refer you to is the Press Complaints Commission.
So is it State Control? Stalinism? Fascism? Dictatorship? 1984? or just deceptive administrations which surround us now in Tameside - and are the press completely under the influence and have they become simply sycophantic puppets?
It's for you to decide if the message gets to you or maybe you could find out for yourselves like I tried when I contacted the Editor as to why my comments were not included ... NO RESPONSE WAS RETURNED.
John Hall, Denton