Letter editing at the 'Post'

While realizing that the editor has the prerogative to correct grammar, Americanize spelling, omit certain phrases and generally prepare a letter for publication, I did not realize that it entitled him to add certain words and phrases, and exchange words which totally change the whole meaning of a sentence or letter. I choose my words very carefully, the subtlety of which perhaps you do not realize. For example, in my original letter printed on July 17, I wrote "libel and slander". The word slander may have been superfluous to the phrase, but then it was incorrectly inserted into a completely different sentence.

The definition of slander is "defamation by means of spoken words and gestures". (Osbournes Concise Law Dictionary). Therefore, Mr. Baskoro's letter was incapable of slandering me, being possible defamation by the written word, i.e. libel, not the spoken word. However, I did not even contend that Mr. Baskoro's letter was defaming my character, so to hold out that I had stated that it was by inserting an incorrect word is embarrassing for me.

And then to exchange a perfectly reasonable English/American word, "unobservant," with a word I would personally never use "dull-witted," irked me even more. But what really took the biscuit was your insertion of the phrase (freedom) "or their life" and the omission of the carefully chosen words "a different kind of" (freedom of speech). This implied that I was holding out that only the West has freedom of speech, which is not what I intended at all, only that their perception of freedom of speech is different.

At the end of the day I do find The Jakarta Post to be an informative and well-balanced paper. I enjoy reading it and am grateful for being given the opportunity to contribute to it.

P.S. Since when did acrimonious mean confrontational?

ANNE-MARIE TAPP

Cilegon, West Java