DISQUS

I can appreciate your desire to have a policy that can be consistently, fairly and efficiently applied.

Here's an idea:


1) Discard letters whose authors are from outside the Telegraph's circulation area.


2) Print those letters that you, in your editorial judgment, contribute to the discussion.


3) Publish on the web site all letters of local concern, when their authorship can be verified.


4) Print, once a week or so, the week's roster of letter writers and candidates they supported (one author and one candidate for each letter.


In this way you would distill the news value of a support letter down to the essential point: an endorsement from someone you might know. People could feel that their opinion counts. If a reader wants to see more, they can go to the web -- where there's never a problem trying to fit all the news that's fit to print.

The reply by Ray Guarino was on point. Cheers.

One has to wonder about how sincere the Telegraph is -- arguing that foul language is acceptable when it's "newsworthy" -- when it goes on to use "fart jokes" in a break page headline.

Kudos to the Telegraph for these news alerts. I am impressed with the Telegraph's forward thinking.

It even inspired an old fogy like myself to figure out how to use SMS messaging!

What an odd question from a Telegraph reader. I’d expect it from a reader of The Onion!

A local newspaper is supposed to be a lot of things all at the same time. Some things are definitely not entertaining (think high-tide times, school board policies, degree days and stock market results) but they ought always to be relevant.

A paper that puts entertainment first would be as useful to me a source for local news as WMUR-TV.

But that’s just my opinion. Ultimately the Telegraph’s editors, advertisers and readers will decide.

Wow. I didn't even know you had a mobile-optimized web site. It looks good.

By all means, keep working on the fancy-schmancy Twitter stuff -- if one of the end results is that we get a straightforward, simple and functional site like nashuatelegraph.com/mobile!

I didn't have a problem with the story at the time. I figured it was a juvenile approach that fell flat, but that it slipped through because it seemed funny at the time.

But now, my opinion's changed. I'm appalled by the Telegraph's defending the intentional jazzing up of news to make it "entertaining."


Please. There are enough entertainment outlets out there already. I buy the Telegraph for local news. Whether it's on the front page, or breaking-news blogs, cell phone news alerts or video newscasts, I want actual news.


The last thing I'm looking for from the Telegraph is for it to be yet one more media outlet trying (poorly) to be entertaining when it could be informing.

Compliments on your print coverage of the storm. After a slow start the first day, you came through with some nice local photos and facts.

But can I share a bit of constructive criticism? While it was interesting to see the "Now and Then" photo package on the Region front today (Wednesday, May 17), I think you ought to have waited a bit before devoting half a page to 70-year-old photos showing how much worse it once was.


I'd have preferred to have seen the space devoted to local photos with information of what went on yesterday.


Why? I guess some of us are still dealing with storm damage and flooded basements, and aren't so receptive right now to accounts of how good we have it by comparison.


It's cool you had a historical photo archive so readily available (you'd run some of the previously), but you went with it just a tad too early, don't you think? It would have made a nice Sunday feature, perhaps.