Dear Mr. McCulley,

Let me start by clearing up a few misconceptions your letter brings up. I assure you we are not monkeys, and only two staff members smoke, of which only one smokes regularly. Furthermore, we do not use typewriters, but rather, outdated computers. Also, we have had some copy editing problems, but those are being corrected. I know it must have been a terrible inconvenience to you. As far as the factual content, I am not aware of any false information reported in The Northerner. That being said, I would like to address what you mention as a “sour attitude” of our paper. I am assuming you are referring to the negative review of your film company written by a staff writer that appeared in the Feb. 13 issue. The review questioned your film company’s lack of maturity, which after reading your letter is obviously unfounded. Whether you agree or disagree with the writer’s assessment of your intellectual growth, the review accomplishes what a review is supposed to do – convey an opinion on some piece or work. The review doesn’t speak for the rest of the paper, and no one else on the staff has even seen your movie. We are not going to simply abstain from running a review because it is negative. The review was tactfully done and offered constructive criticism, unlike your reply. How quickly you forget that two weeks prior to the review, we ran an objective story regarding your film company. The Northerner has given you plenty of positive coverage. If you can’t take a little constructive criticism, then you have a long life ahead of you. Oh yeah, and remember this: “We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking up at the stars.” -Oscar Wilde

Sincerely, Scott Wartman Editor In Chief