Editorials Quotes

The thorn in the cushion of the editorial chair.

I had the most incredible English and literature teachers in school, and it really influenced my love of storytelling. It's what made me excited to study journalism in college. I love editorials and documentaries. All of that came from being given the opportunity to lose myself in good writing when I was a kid.

Most people don't read editorial pages. I think I must have been 40 before I even looked at an editorial page.

I found it unworthy of publication because it is not supported by any scientific or historic facts. Moreover, as a matter of principle, it's not right to exchange silly and false information about the use of human blood in the food of other humans whoever they may be because such a thing doesn't exist in the world at all.

For the reader who has put away comic books, but isn't yet ready for editorials in the Daily News.

Editorials are editorials. They a supposed to have an opinion, even a very strong one.

Newspapers write ringing editorials declaring that this is and always was a democracy.

Mr. Gingrich's injunction represents the worst of American political discourse, which reached a low during the dispiriting presidential campaign of 1988. Then, more than ever before, negative argument displaced reasoned discussion about how a nation might best be governed. The sound bite reigned. Attack commercials flourished. The signs this year aren't any better. Evidence that negative campaigning can come back to sink the sender has had little impact. The races for governor in California and Texas have already seen the same slash and burn. No doubt the proceedings will grow more rabid still as November nears. Negative discourse serves democracy poorly. The temptation to avoid serious debate is already great. It increases as the stakes soar and slander becomes a rewarding, easy option. The issues of the day go untended. The whole affair takes on the character of the gladiator's art. The GOPAC glossary may herald a descent into even lower levels of discourse. It comes blessed by a politician of some influence—the Republican whip in the House—and it is intended for candidates on the state level, many of them presumably running for the first time. Even though Mr. Gingrich himself may not have seen the list before it was mailed, this is a disturbing document. The nakedness of the GOPAC offering also makes it useful. There must be limits to the negative politics that voters will bear; the bald appeal to invective will certainly probe those limits. For now, it should be said that some adjectives in the glossary aptly describe the glossary itself: shallow, sensationalist, and, yes, shame(ful).

Most good newspapers don't set out to offend readers. But newspapers shouldn’t avoid controversy, and if they don’t occasionally a offend readers, they’re probably not doing their job.

I decide who's right and who's wrong, and go from there. But I can't just comment on an issue. I've got to take an editorial position. Too many cartoonists simply illustrate the news. Well, the readers know the news, and a cartoon that illustrates doesn't tell them a thing they don't already know. So, I formulate an opinion and draw it.

The Times is speechless and takes three columns to express its speechlessness.

I think the editorial page of the Washington Post is the best in the country. I think the editorials - considering it's a liberal town, liberal constituency and from the liberal tradition - I think it's the best editorial page around. It's quite balanced.

What you have to deal with … is a determined attempt by Press agitation and abuse to exercise an unlawful influence on the decisions of the government authorities.

Editorials are, obviously, pieces of opinion journalism. They are not intended to be dispassionate, balanced accountings of a news situation or issue. They present a strong and strongly argued position and do not necessarily present or even take into account the opposing position.

My feelings towards the newspapers are very affectionate.