Editor:
I?m curious to know what kind of research goes into the opinion articles written in The Daily Utah Chronicle. It seems that they are written from such a blind point of view, one that on first glance sounds intelligent, but upon any kind of inspection is just blind observations that make perfect sense while the writer sits in front of his or her computer.
And for what purpose does Dave Hancock write? Is it to be able to use lines like “And then thought kicks in?” Or is it to simply let people know he is an agnostic humanist?
And why is the Opinion section so predictable? I have always thought that the Opinion section was supposed to be a little sexy? not tabloid, but somewhat shocking.
Instead, tell me the news of the day, and I will tell you what The Chronicle’s view will be. Sure, sometimes views like Jared Anderson’s bigotry get published?but it?s the same rhetoric as Dave Hancock?s.
It?s either one or the other. Either way it?s predictable.
In the end, I guess I?m just bitching. I don?t really care what The Chronicle does. I just wish the feeling of well researched opinion articles was more apparent, instead of the pseudo intellectual garbage currently printed on who knows what kind of deadlines.
The truth is, I don?t read The Chronicle religiously. For that reason my opinions are based upon only my brief glances at your online edition. But, in the end, the reason I don?t read is because, just to be blunt, you guys suck.
Parker Richards
Junior, Design