This is in response to Carrie Tett’s April 12 column, “News can,t please everyone all the time.” You are correct – you can’t please everyone all the time.

However, the pictures depicted in the article about Peep Land seemed only to be included for one reason: to please the writer of the story.

In Miss Tett’s column, she writes that “Sometimes news is hard to swallow.” Sure, and there is nothing wrong with printing a story about Peep Land.

In fact, I agree with your decision to run that story.

The item being debated here, though, is the choice to place in the story several photos that are pornographic.

Why? How did this help the article?

Yes, it is possible that a few of your readers may not know what pornography is, but if that’s the case, then why don’t they visit Peep Land and find out?

Or better yet, just put a definition of the word if you’re concerned about people knowing what pornography is.

Printing a picture, however, is abusing your right to free speech.

I think that quite a few people in your audience were disgusted by the printing of the pictures.

Just because you are writing to a college student body doesn’t mean that we want to see pornography.

I know of at least five people on my floor alone that were in disbelief that the pictures were printed.

We don’t have the time to write in every time you make a judgmental error.

On the other side of your comment, how many letters did you get praising you for printing that picture and for exercising your rights? I’m willing to bet the number is no greater.

The right to free speech is one that should not be taken away.

However, it should be one that is used, not abused.

Dan Burke

Freshman

Computer engineering