WE LIVE in a free country, and while your correspondent has every right to make fun of and belittle my efforts on animal welfare matters (Tongue in cheek, Readers' Letters, January 7), it's a shame he or she was not brave enough to reveal who they were. Such cowardice hardly adds to their credibility.
I would also like to question the editorial decision to grant this correspondent anonymity. I thought that The Press policy was that the paper should only withhold a correspondent's identity if they are at serious risk of genuine reprisals (such as violence or losing their job) from going public. This is clearly not the case here.
I am passionate about speaking up for the issues I believe in and have no problem in speaking up in public, engaging with opponents who contact me.
It's a shame The Press allowed a coward to lower the standard of debate to cheap jokes when the poor birds continue to suffer.
Coun Paul Blanchard, Chaucer Lane, York.
Editor's note: Only in exceptional circumstances does The Press withhold correspondents' names and addresses. The reasons for this are generally, but not exclusively, related to fears for the personal safety of the writer. The Press considers it inappropriate to discuss the reasons why an individual writer's details are withheld.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article