Editor’s Note questioned

What is going on when the Golden Star doesn’t wait for the Town to read a letter and reply but rather replies on the Town’s behalf

To the editor

So I am confused and wonder if you can help me. I thought the way things worked is someone wrote a letter to the paper and if someone else read the letter in the paper would write a reply for the next edition of the paper. I also thought that newspapers carefully kept themselves separate from governments so they would be free to ask tough questions and print news that governments might not like.

At least that is how I thought newspapers worked.

So what is going on when  the Golden Star doesn’t wait for the Town of Golden to read a letter and reply but rather replies on the Town’s behalf in the same paper the letter is printed in. Was the Town given an advance look at Bruce Fairley’s letter before publication? If so, is this advance look given to anyone else or just the Town? if the town is given special privileges by the paper, so much for the independence of the Golden Star.

With respect to information in the “Editor’s Note” was it provided by a Town official? If so, who? When someone says someone else’s facts are wrong then it should be clear who is say this.

If the Town wanted to reply to Bruce Fairley’s letter then why didn’t they write a letter to the next edition of the paper like everyone else?

Will the Golden Star be replying to future letters on behalf of other parties or only the Town?

John Manuel

Golden