Yes, we do edit letters to the editor, and no, we don’t run every letter we receive. That’s never been a secret. Here’s why we do it:

This newspaper is not a public utility, nor is it just a community bulletin board. Our mission is to provide news and advertising to help people make informed decisions. We have several thousand readers with divergent opinions about what our priorities should be, so we try to publish something for everyone. That limits the space we can devote to letters. While we believe it’s important to provide a forum in which our readers can express their views, certain guidelines must apply.

Our size limit for letters to the editor is 300 words. That is considerably more generous than the industry standard, and it gives letter writers adequate space to make a point and provide supporting information. The limit is publicized on our opinion page at least once a week, in the policy that clearly states that letters will be edited for length and content. When we receive letters that exceed the limit, we have two options: edit the letter down to 300 words, which we do if we believe we can shorten it without substantially changing the writer’s phrasing, or send the letter back to the writer and request that it be rewritten to comply with the limit. There are benefits to both options. Editing a letter here allows it to appear in print much sooner; sending it back for revisions guarantees that it will reflect the writer’s intent.

Letters are edited in other ways as well. Obscenities are deleted. Libelous material is deleted. Extraneous comments that don’t relate to the writer’s central point may be deleted. Spelling and grammar are corrected, because we want ideas to be judged on their own merits, and not all letter-writers who have insightful ideas have had the benefit of a comprehensive education.

In short, we do all we can to help a letter get into print. Editors like letters because they generate readership, and an ironic fact of journalistic life is that letters critical of a publication generate the most readership. Writers frame those letters, because they are solid evidence that readers are paying attention to our work. Those would be the very last letters we’d want to suppress.

The rumor that numerous letters have been submitted but not printed seems to have grown by leaps and bounds. Our goal is to print all letters that are appropriate for civilized discourse in a community publication. Those that don’t meet that criteria may be rejected, but the majority of letters not published are withheld for one reason: we are unable to verify the identity of the signer. Our letters policy clearly states that all submissions must include a phone number at which the writer can be contacted. Many, if not most, of the letters we receive do not meet that requirement. In that case, we try to locate the writer, by all the means available to skilled reporters. Sometimes we succeed; sometimes we don’t. Often our phone messages, notes and e-mail queries elicit no response.

We assume there are various reasons for that lack of response. We know that some letters are signed with fictitious names and some are signed with the names of other real people, which is the reason we verify all signatures. Sometimes letters are written in the heat of the moment, and by the time a few days have passed, the writer has had a change of heart. We frequently receive phone calls from people requesting we not print their letters.

Some letters are clearly labeled "Not for Publication." We don’t print those. Nor do we devote precious space to the mass-mailing postcards sent by some organizations to their members with the goal of bombarding journalists and legislators. When we receive multiple letters from the same writer, we hold some back in order to give other readers a chance to voice their opinions.