To say that The Oakland Press is flooded with letters to the editor around election time is an understatement.

People during these electoral periods want to express their views on a pending millage or bond issue and on who they think is the best candidate for a public office. The goal, generally, is to try to convince others that their view or endorsement is accurate and should be followed.

Many times, letter writers are testing the waters. They may not be completely sure of their position and so they are trying to see how many people agree or disagree with them.

As with all letters to the editor, we try to run them on a first come, first serve basis. That’s why you may see an influx of letters for or against a topic and then another influx expressing the opposite view.

One thing that we like to make “perfectly clear” is that if we run more letters for a particular issue than against it — or vice versa — that doesn’t mean The Oakland Press necessarily endorses the issue. It only means that at a particular time, we got more letters for the proposal than against it.

Although we usually run the letters as we get them and if there is a backlog, some letters may not get in for a week or two. However, sometimes when issues are particularly “hot” or time sensitive, we bend the rule a little.

For example, around election time, if we get 10 letters about the primary but because of other letters we receive, we weren’t be able to get all of them in by the letter deadline, then we may run a couple letters out of order.

And “deadline” is a critical point here. We usually set a deadline for receiving letters to the editor for a specific election one to two weeks before the balloting. Then, we try to get those letters into the paper no later than a week before the election.

For example, for the Aug. 3 primary, all letters dealing with candidates or ballot issues must be in to us by no later than 5 p.m., Friday, July 23. No election related letters or guest opinions will run after Tuesday, July 27. The maximum length for these letters is 250 words, unless they merely endorse a particular candidate, then the limit is 150 words.

Obviously, the deadline for receiving letters must be advanced enough to allow us to get all of them received on time into the newspaper by about a week before the election.

There are reasons for not running letters within a week of an election. They are called fairness and practicality.

The Oakland Press used to run letters even on the day of the election. But we found that people were waiting to submit their letters until just before election day hoping for publication on election day. The general theory was that the last letter read by people before voting would influence their selections.

This created a flood letters that logically were impossible to deal with because we just didn’t have the space to run them all.

So, by establishing deadlines, we allow our readers to express their opinions and get them published. It seems to be the fairest way to handle election-related letters. At least we haven’t found a better way yet, although we’re always open to suggestions.

Remember, the operative question is what is the most reasonable and fair policy?

I have received several phone calls from people who are questioning GM’s creating 29,000 jobs in South America, as reported in a recent news story.

The readers, basically, argue that American tax dollars helped GM survive and now the company is thanking the general public by creating jobs in other countries when jobs are needed here.

It’s a valid argument and I’m not going to defend GM, I don’t have enough information. Presumably, however, GM made the decision based on business considerations and what’s best for the company.
But such action does lead many people to question the wisdom of last year’s auto bailout loans.

And it’s understandable that GM’s actions in dealing with foreign firms for any company service would not sit well with Americans. The argument that we’re living in a global economy may be true but it doesn’t help ease the concerns and pains of problems here in the United States.

One thing is fairly certain, if GM had gone under, Michigan would have been devastated. Would we have survived? Possibly but not without great economic pain and suffering.

However, GM, in a much more stripped down form, is still producing cars and providing jobs in Michigan.

I guess we just have to hope that when business is sent elsewhere, it’s in the best interest of the company and helps keep it operating here in Michigan.

Election endorsements are a staple in most newspapers, even yet today with the constantly changing face of the print media.

But selecting the races to endorse takes quite bit of strategy and planning because scheduling the interviews of candidates is often a challenge and sometimes can be a logistical nightmare.

There are just not enough hours in the day to accommodate all of the candidates and representatives of various groups seeking approval or opposing millage issues.

So, for the primary, we don’t plan to endorse in every election race. It would be impossible. Because of the volume of candidates, we have to be very selective.

Generally, our policy for the primary is a wait and see one. We will examine the results of the primary election and then decide which races appear to be the most competitive or prominent on the November ballot. Most likely we will be endorsing in the governor’s race and Congressional races. But outside of those contests, we’ll have to see what happens on Aug. 3.

There is one primary race that looks pretty interesting, even though it’s for a position that usually isn’t high profile. The race for an Oakland County probate judge seat has five contenders. Based on the high level of competition and some requests from readers, we will be interviewing all five candidates in July and write an endorsement editorial for the end of the month.

Although you don’t see a lot of advertising and campaign adds by probate court prospects, the duties of the judge are critical and affect most of us, in one way or another at one time or another.

Among many other things, probate court may over see your estate or the estate of a loved one who is recently deceased. It also becomes involved when in determining guardianships for children as well as care for adults who don’t have the capacity to fend for themselves.

The five candidates are J. Martin Brennan, Rochester Hills; Dana Margaret Hathaway and Barbara B. Murphy, both of Birmingham; Kathleen Ryan of Bloomfield Township; and Jamie Marie Verdi of Rochester.

There are a number of millage votes that probably will get our scrutiny and a thumbs up or thumbs down after we’ve studied the issues.

They include SMART, the suburban bus system, which is seeking a 0.59-mill property tax renewal to fund suburban bus service in the participating communities called “opt-ins.” Only communities that opt in to local bus service pay the property tax in Oakland County. Wayne County also has an opt-in system for its communities while Macomb County’s is county-wide.

The opt-in communities are Auburn Hills, Berkley, Beverly Hills, Bingham Farms, Birmingham, Bloomfield Township, Clawson, Farmington, Farmington Hills, Ferndale, Franklin, Hazel Park, Huntington Woods, Madison Heights, Oak Park, Pleasant Ridge, Pontiac, Royal Oak, Royal Oak Township, Southfield, Troy, Walled Lake and West Bloomfield.

Oakland County Parks is seeking a 0.2415-mill property tax renewal for 10 years to pay for operating its network of parks and golf courses around the county.

Also, Oakland Community College is seeking a 0.8-mill property tax renewal for 10 years, beginning in 2012.

The endorsement process can be complicated but it’s also important because many people rely on us to offer some guidance or at least make suggestions that they can agree with or reject.

There’s a mass e-mail that has been floating around in cyberspace for several years promoting a rumor that should have died long ago.

But, it’s in cyberspace and continues to work its way around the web. If you’ve received it once, you’ll probably receive it again — if not this year then the next, or the next or the next...

The Internet has given “urban legends” seemingly ever-lasting life and it’s a shame but it’s also an example of why people have to be cautious when they go online or even when they just open their own e-mails.

I don’t want to re-ignite, any more than it has been, the false information, so I’m going to keep this as generic as possible. Basically, a company was accused of repackaging its product in a patriotic fashion and included the pledge of allegiance on it. However, to be “politically correct” the company allegedly omitted the words “Under God.”

In checking with the company, which most mass e-mail senders don’t do, I was informed that the e-mail was an out right lie. I was told that there not only won’t be a pledge of allegiance on the product’s packaging but there is no patriotic redesign at all.

We’ll discuss this in more depth in my Friday blog and I’ll explain why most people should probably develop at least a little bit of journalistic skepticism when surfing the web.

I've requested that readers submit letters to me in conjunction with the Journal Register Corporation’s Ben Franklin Project. The Oakland Press is owned by the corporation.

The project is an innovative effort to utilize the online high-tech resources available and put out a newspaper. The Oakland Press and its sister publications will produce such an edition for July 4.

While the goal is to provide readers with a newspaper that will hopefully look pretty-much the way it usually does, the behind the scenes activities, particularly from a production standpoint, are harried and new.

The project has a number of aspects but basically there are two features. One is to produce a newspaper using available online technology. The second is an attempt to get the reader more involved in the newspaper. We not only want reactions to stories but we’re also trying to get direction from the readers as to the types of stories they would like covered. In some cases, readers might even be able to suggest some questions during the interview process in writing a story.

Getting the readers more involved has been generally called “crowd-sourcing,” a new catch word that can include any number of activities and efforts where an audience or group of people are asked for input.

That’s why I’m asking, for the Opinion Page, for readers to write a letter on one of two topics:
A. In your opinion, who is the most patriotic citizen you know or have heard about? The person can be a living or deceased local, state or national figure or an historical one; OR
B. Is the Fourth of July Holiday celebrated in true, patriotic fashion? What do you like about it and what would you do to improve or enhance it?
Please keep your letters to about 250 words or less. However, participation in this special project will not preclude you from writing another letter for the month of July.

Please send your letters by e-mail to me at “allan.adler@oakpress.com.” Any questions, please call me at (248) 745-4626.

Help me and The Oakland Press make this experiment a success. But time is getting short. Because of the different production processes, I need the letters by Thursday, June 17.

Should both sides be heard in editorials?

Certainly, when reporters write impartial stories, they are obligated to obtain comments and information from both sides of an issue. That’s the only way to present a balanced report to the readers.

But for editorials, do you need to present both sides? It’s a debatable answer. Certainly, it would be a reasonable action. But is it necessary?

When you write an opinion piece, whether an editorial or guest opinion, you certainly need to back up your views with facts. There’s no debate about that. A well-written piece will use facts to support whatever is the writer’s argument. For example, if you believe interest rates on credit cards are too high, then it is only expected that you list examples of those rates. People — credit card company officials in particular — may not agree but at least you’ve presented some facts.

But how far do you go to express the other’s point of view. You could say that the interest provided badly needed revenue to support the bank or financial institution offering the card.

Generally, if you present the other side’s point of view, it’s usually in an attempt to refute it. For example, you could concede that the interest earned on credit cards supports the financial institution but say that the profit margin is too high — that it only should be 10 percent instead of 20. That’s your opinion.

The bottom line question is how much do you argue for the side you are opposing, if at all? Remember, in an opinion piece, you are trying to convince people that your point of view the best.

What do you think?

We want to hear from you
The Oakland Press would like you to participate in the corporate-wide Benjamin Franklin Project, which explores innovative ways to develop local news stories and present them to our readers.
We will be publishing a special project edition on July 4. Readers are encouraged to express their views on one of the following topics:
A. In your opinion, who is the most patriotic citizen you know or have heard about? The person can be a living or deceased local, state or national figure or an historical one; OR
B. Is the Fourth of July Holiday celebrated in true, patriotic fashion? What do you like about it and what would you do to improve or enhance it?;
Please keep your letters to about 250 words or less. However, participation in this special project will not preclude you from writing another letter for the month of July.
Please send your letters by e-mail to me at “allan.adler@oakpress.com." Any questions, please call me at (248) 745-4626.