This week's piece for the Gazette is here. I haven't read the final edit yet, but I know the editor cut the final paragraph because it didn't have a source. Actually, the source was me, and the Gazette has a no-editorializing policy, which I understand. I didn't think the paragraph was editorializing though, so you decide. Read the piece and then add this last paragraph to it. I'm pretty sure it's a way better piece with the last paragraph, and I'm pretty sure reporting doesn't always mean quoted sources. Occasionally, I think, the reporter should actually report.
The culture war lends itself to serious misunderstandings in communication, and the primary breakdown is in failing to understand Schaeffer’s comprehensive vision to integrate all of life, including political and economic, under the umbrella of Christian spirituality. More than 2200 people attended the conference on July 9 and 10, so it appears Schaeffer’s legacy continues to influence Oklahoma 26 years after his death.
The number was eventually changed to 2500, and that's probably close to true, and it was relocated in the story. I'm not really irritated about it. Editors have wide discretion, as they should, and far more often than not, mine has been right. The editor has to decide what the angle or slant will be and how it can best be localized—this is not a national publication, after all. Cutting the final graf hurts me a little, only because I think it's a better piece with it in, but maybe because I got to editorialize?
