TO THE EDITOR:
Regarding Brian Frederick's column, I was very disappointed to read that he "studies" journalism. Frederick's belief that the concept of reparations for slavery was "not an issue" displays a startling amount of ignorance for one who "studies" journalism. Reparations were, in fact, debated long before Horowitz began running his ad.
I also found Frederick's belief that "the strongest voices are not necessarily the loudest" but rather are "the most enlightened ones," to be very disturbing. I would assume from his tone that Frederick believes himself capable of determining just which voices are "The most enlightened." If it were up to him, "the readers' advocate," no one who expressed opinions contrary to his "enlightened" ones would be printed. How fortunate for his readers that Frederick "studies" journalism.
Frederick also, predictably, finds it necessary to resort to ad homonym attacks upon Horowitz rather than responding to his arguments. Frederick uses terms such as "ignorant," "egotistical," "blow-hard," "bully," "hustler," and that favorite old mainstay of the left, "racist."
Curiously, he states that a white man should not "feel it necessary to determine what is best for blacks." I do not believe that white Americans can speak for only white Americans, while black,
Hispanic or Asian-Americans can speak for only their respective groups.
Overall, this was a very ill-conceived and meanspirited (not to mention unenlightened) column. And I won't go into the obvious disrespect that Frederick has for his readers which was displayed by his unnecessary and offensive profanity. Sadly, the debate about reparations was in no way enhanced by his shrill natterings.
Kelly Blackwood
