Columbus Dispatch again demonstrates their bias against honest science

Home | Audio | Buy | Contact | Downloads | FAQ | Links | | TOC | Videos

Dr. Patrick Young's Home page

Here is my final response from the Dispatch. There were two previous emails I sent to Glenn Sheller that met with no response. I finally sent this one and copied several of the higher level administrators in the Dispatch.

Notice his response to me. All they are doing is rejecting my column because they disagree with it.
(Click here to read the column the Dispatch rejected)

Feel free to print this on the website.



From Glenn Sheller

To Patrick Young

Subject Re: Blatant Bias for evolution at the Dispatch

Date Mon, 19 Apr 2004 111311 -0400

Mr. Young

You are right to be upset with our delays in getting back to you about your column. I apologize for the delay. We have decided not to use the column.

All the best,

-- glenn sheller

At 1009 PM 4/16/04 -0400, you wrote

Dear Mr. Sheller ­

It has been approximately one month since our last interaction on the publication of my guest column in the Dispatch. You have not even had the courtesy to respond to my last two emails.

I have discussed this issue with you in good faith in hopes that the Dispatch would come to its senses and provide some semblance of balance to the “critical analysis of evolution” lesson in the science standards. You have stated that the Dispatch has no problem with publishing columns that are in disagreement with their stated positions. Your latest behavior in dealing with my column, confirms the opposite.

I have complied with all your demands to submit a column to the Dispatch.

I obviously have the scientific credentials to state my opinion. Furthermore, the column I submitted is well written and adds significant information to the debate. So there is no reason from a journalistic standpoint not to print it.

You have stated that the debate is over because we won. Obviously, this is not the case if the Dispatch continues to publish editorials after the final board vote in March. You specifically printed one editorial and one letter to the editor in support of your position. Now you are just sitting on my column in hopes that I will just go away.

The Dispatch has chosen to vilify opponents to its position by printing letters to the editor that do nothing but attack the person. A prime example is the letter to the editor you allowed that personally attacked a well-respected Entomologist from OSU named Glenn Needham. Conversely you would never allow anyone to attack the people whom you agree with on this subject matter.

I have written dozens of letters to the editor on this subject with only one being published in the last two years. Even then, you would not allow my letter to be published without an editorial in rebuttal.

My guest column demonstrates the blatant atheism behind the militant evolutionists that the Dispatch supports but you refuse to print this truth. You however, choose to print bilge about Dr. Jonathan Wells and Philip Johnson that is only a one sided view of a very complex subject.

The Dispatch is well known as the most biased newspaper in the state of Ohio on the subject of the Ohio science standards and evolution. The Cleveland Plain Dealer and Cincinnati Enquirer, while they may disagree, are at least willing to allow balance to the discussion.

In 1995 you wrote a book titled “Reporter and Editor Checklist.” In this book you state,

"It is one thing to be ignorant and to be aware of that ignorance. There is hope for someone with that awareness. What is frightening is to encounter the ignorant who are unaware of how ignorant they are..”

Sadly you have unwittingly fallen into the category of a the same frightening person you describe because you are grossly unaware of your ignorance.

I would like to thank you for again, proving my point that the Dispatch is completely biased and will not print anything substantial against evolution. Especially from a well credentialed scientist.

Patrick Young, Ph.D.
Canal Winchester, Ohio 

E-mail your comments or questions to Dr. Young

Copyright © 2004 Patrick Young. All rights reserved. We are happy to grant permission for items on Dr. Young’s web pages to be reproduced in their entirety, as long as the following stipulations are observed (1) Patrick Young must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Web site URL must be noted; (3) Dr. Young’s name must remain attached to the materials; (4) any references, footnotes, or endnotes that accompany the article must be included with any written reproduction of the article; (5) alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, quotations, etc. must be reproduced exactly as they appear in the original); (6) articles, in whole or in part, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; (7) articles may not be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites; (8) Links directly made to figures, images etc that are part of an article are forbidden but links to the complete article posted on the Web site are permitted.

Top   |   Home