I’m not a fan of editorials, whether they originate from the editorial staff, or are styled as “Letters to the Editor”. Sometimes it’s the heading: no “full-eye” appeal, and that’s as far as I get. If curiosity trumps and I choose to read on, I try to spot the “beef” by the end of the first paragraph and turn the page.
Your editorial, “Corruption, party before country, and naiveté” (Amandala 3/7/2020), was different. The caption notwithstanding, I did go to the text. And read it through to the end.
I wish to congratulate the writer for a well-written essay. The piece was tightly done, with only minimal editorializing. Even then the writing stayed on point. And there was no slackening in the pace as the narrative moved on in conjunctive clarity. The voluminous information in the article was presented with marshalled precision.
In a week when COVID-19 glowed limpid and the criminal dealers in pain were just rousing themselves to the renewed prospects of a curfew-free landscape, the BTL/UHS/PoB stories cried out for sensationalism. And not many would have faulted the paper: the narrative was full of intrigue, and the actors on stage were larger than life.
Your writer/s modelled journalistic restraint by resisting the allure of wordy glitter and are to be commended for it.