Letter: Critical of style, not substance
I'm impressed that at least three people read my public "spanking" of reporter Nicholas Wilbur on the 20. Actually, it may not be his fault. Perhaps his editor simply told him on Thursday to "write 2,000 words by Friday," and then didn't edit the results.
I certainly didn't intend to continue discussing on Mr. Wilbur, but comments have been made which require clarification. I have high respect for Mr. Wilbur's in-depth reporting and was only critical of his editorial style, not its substance.
I wonder if they teach reading comprehension out at the college. I think some readers need such a course to gain more accuracy. I also think that Suzanne Adams is a good reporter and at least her opinion articles are coherent if a bit domestic. Rich Thurlow, the paper's news editor, is also a reasonably good writer, although I strongly disagree with virtually every opinion he presents. There are others, and in general, KDM is a well-written paper.
While I'm at it, let me observe that the photography of JC Amberlyn really gives the paper unique stature, and does it without a word being said.
I usually skip sports and I strictly avoid the animal-slaughter-for-fun section because it makes me nauseous - but such is our Kingman culture.