GMO article belonged on opinion page
To the editor:
I was disturbed by the front page article from the Nov. 6 Ledger entitled “Fairfield activists watch California food labeling vote.”
Although the subject was interesting, it was not clear to me why the article was considered news and why it was on the front page. I’m sure there were plenty of election issues across the country in which Fairfield residents actively participated and/or made financial contributions. Why was this particular issue highlighted rather than others?
There were serious accusations made about the biotech industry. I know there is a lot of research that is well accepted by the scientific community that points to positive benefits of the use of GMO’s. I also know there are a lot of Fairfield and county residents who support the use of GMO’s and who feel the biotech industry is making a significant contribution to agricultural production. I was surprised that kind of information or responses by local residents on the other side of the issue was not included in the article.
My sense was that the article had a hidden agenda (some might say not so hidden) and a bias. I have no problem with agendas or biases. However, I believe that such articles more appropriately belong on the opinion page and not on the front page presented as news.
The Ledger has consistently done a great job of presenting a balanced perspective on controversial issues, whether they involve the school board, county roads, water meters, reservoir swimming — you name it. I hope the Ledger will continue to use fair and balanced journalistic standards as it has done so successfully in the past.
— Willy Koppel, Fairfield