To: The Dallas Morning News 
Date:  March 18, 2008
Subject: Editorial: Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban is dishonest
Result: declined 

Dear Editor,

In a recent editorial (March 13), you had some very disapproving and cynical words for Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks. It seems he locked one of your highfalutin "journalists" – that is, for the purposes of The Dallas Morning News, somebody who accepts money to write what you tell and allow them to write – out of the locker room. Only, it wasn't just your particular representative, Tim MacMahon, that was banned. Rather, since he called himself a "blogger", Mr. Cuban devised a "policy" (a word placed in quote marks 3 or 4 times in the editorial), under which no bloggers will be admitted to the locker room, based on the idea that "if the team lets one blogger in, it has to admit them all."

Why couldn't Mr. Cuban have had the "courage" to just ban Mr. MacMahon, if he didn't like him, rather than making a "policy" against all bloggers, you ask. Why couldn't he have done what you would have done, which is, if there was somebody who you wanted to keep out of your building – or, no doubt, the pages of your newspaper – you would have done so "honestly, instead of hiding behind some fake 'policy'"?

And then, after all that pious reprobation, I look over about one inch on the page from the editorial, and there is your "policy", by which you justify your unrelenting censorship of myself, based on the idea that you just have too many letters and too little space to allow my voice to be heard. One way to have done that would have been to print one of my submissions to the Viewpoints page. And if you had, by golly, you would have named my blog-predecessor, "radicalview.com". You made a statement about your liberality in that regard in the editorial. Because that's just the honest, courageous kind of folks you are. But then, darn it, there's just never any space for me, so therefore you are forced, by merit of your "policy", to keep me hidden from your readers.

Mr. Cuban, you note, published an "extensive defense of this indefensible move" on his personal blog. At least he bothers to defend himself – unlike you, who do no more than cite your platitudes and your "policies".

But then, of course, another very large difference between Mr. Cuban and The Dallas Morning News is, he is not in the free speech business. You are. He was not entrusted by the U.S. Bill of Rights to be a watchdog and the safeguard of democracy. You were. Therefore, I'm sure you will agree, you commit the far greater sin.

I do have to respond to one more statement in your editorial, it was so amusing. That was where you distinguished between "journalists" and "goofs-in-their-underwear types". To clarify what you mean, you're speaking of those "passionate" (referring to your recent major marketing campaign), truth-seeking "professionals" employed by your newspaper, so honest and full of integrity, and I guess capability – compared to the likes of  me.

In defense of myself, I never hang around the house in my underwear. However, I guess I am pretty goofy. For one thing, I continue to address The Dallas Morning News, like maybe someday you will become the actual, honest people you are supposed to be, and regularly commend yourselves and receive awards for being, but you're not.

Thank you, John Vehon