I think you should let the newspaper have it, too. Media Matters for America is dedicated to correcting the inaccuracies and outright lies of people such as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and writers for the New York Times. It doesn't get much bigger than that. The Poynter Institute routinely covers college papers. They're important. Call them out on their bias and spreading of inaccurate information.

Publishing inaccurate information as fact is not only journalistically unethical its outright irresponsible. Their own reporters are hopefully fact checked constantly, and unless they presented the letter as not supported by the paper, they've made a glaring error here.

It's difficult to tell without reading the letter, but because the letter was clearly published as a reader-generated content, I don't think the paper was in the wrong. What was the "misinformation"? Did the writer inaccurately cite scientific studies? As much as I may disagree with this letter writer's opinion, the newspaper is serving as a forum for public opinion. This person has an opinion. The paper published the opinion in a section set aside for public opinion. The best way for you to combat this is to write why you think the statements are incorrect, not to chastise the paper for performing an important service to the community.

A.E.R. - I disagree. If there is factually incorrect information, you can't hide that as an "opinion." This is exactly the way that intelligent design has wormed its way into the curriculae of our schools - "tell both sides," except fact hasn't got two sides. True and False, that's the way it works. A newspaper should not knowingly publish false as "telling the other side."

I'm siding with A.E.R. here.

The letters section of a newspaper is, as said, specifically for public feedback and opinion. It's perfectly analagous to the 'comments' section of a blog post; there are no special 'conventions' just because it's a newspaper. Do the comments on Feministing get edited for factual content?

Think about it for a moment. Can you imagine the labor required to fact-check every opinion/letter that a newspaper publishes? Especially when newspapers are already in dire financial straits.

That said, a newspaper is best served when, instead of printing just that voice on a contentious issue, it reaches out to people to ask for alternative voices. That's the highest and best road for a newspaper to follow, rather than censor people's views.

Sutro, comparing the static and newspaper approved letter to the editor to a dynamic and simply moderated comment section is like comparing apples to oranges.

Additionally, opinions stated as opinions on the newspaper's views and stories are different from misinformation cited as fact.

If a newspaper continues to publish misinformation as fact, particularly in this case, I no longer trust it and it no longer recieves my readership. I think that as a business move and as an obligation to the readership it has created, the newspaper should have pointed out the innacuracies in the letter to the editor.

Additionally, if this is the school paper, it is representing poorly on the school and student body if it publishes this information without critical comments. Educational bodies tend to not take well to finding that they publicly support falsehoods.

I'm taking a class on editorials right now and we've been having a discussion on letters to the editor. I don't know this paper's policy, but a lot of small papers publish pretty much all the letters they get to ensure that the section is an accurate representation of who writes in. Many newspapers even give priority to letters that disagree with their views to balance the scale. Most papers that I know of don't fact check letters to the editor b/c it is obvious that these people are unaffiliated. They check to make sure it's a real person and sometimes edit for length. Anyway, don't roast the paper for giving everyone (even the crazy asshats) a forum for debate.

I think the editor should have posted a little note at the end of the letter saying that scientific information was inaccurate and then cited sources, just a website or two. People should always take letters to the editors with a grain of salt, anyway. Rarely do real journalists write in.

As a graduate with a journalism and women's studies degree, and 2 1/2 years on my college newspaper, (not that this makes me an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but just an informed opinion), if the letter was printed in the opinion/editorial page, it is not the responsibility or place of the newspaper to fact check the material beyond what has already been mentioned.

In my opinion, they should have printed an opinion piece to balance out the page, but even that is not required in an opinion section. There are of course guidelines for what kinds of letters the paper will print, but as some have said, papers often do print opinions that differ from their own in order to show that the newspaper shows differeing views on topics.

This letter was not an article or a story that is held to a professional journalists/newspapers standards for facts. Freedom of speech/opinion is allowed in this country with obvious exceptions of hate speech, etc. However misinformed this person is, I don't think his opinion and words would qualify as such.

Anything in the opinion section is just that, nothing someone says in the section is fact, and should not be read as such by the readers. At my paper, we did have a disclaimer on every opinion page reminding readers that the opinions in the letter were opinions of the letter writer, did not necessarily represent the views of the newspaper/editor, etc. etc.

Hmmm opinions seem pretty mixed here, so I think I'll play it safe and leave the paper out of it. Thank you!

Oh and just for clarification, the letter did cite inaccurate and misleading statistics.

As an editor of my college paper for several years, anything in the op/ed section technically doesn't have to hold a lick of truth as long as it is not libelous. IMHO, I would have printed it with a counter piece IF we decided to print it at all. While the school paper is there for the students, the editors do have an ethical obligation to act as gatekeepers and disallow the printing of items that would not be beneficiary to the students and/or does not promote a forum for the academic discourse and exchange of ideas. I've been to enough conferences to know that a general consensus among editors would be that we really hate to print things like that, but we can get equally as much flak for not printing.

I would have likely printed it... with a counter piece right next to it (full of citations and written by myself, lol, I never shyed from confrontation at the paper). But I know many of the junior editors on staff if left to make the choice on there own would not have printed it. My university is 68% female, and all the editors were female and our poor (male) advisor walked into (and bashfully out of) way too many office conversations on sex and birth control.

There ought to be a disclaimer, prominently displayed, that the newspaper takes no responsibility for the accuracy of the content except to prohibit the publication of potentially libelous comments. That should take care of things.