How to Write a Letter to the Editor

Start with the basics: a letter to the editor

Everyone, from the local newspaper reporter to the governor of the state, wants to know what you think on the issues. A letter to the editor is a great advocacy tool because it can spark local or regional discussion and action. Well-organized letters are more likely to get published. The following are a couple of tips for writing a successful letter to the editor, along with the e-mail addresses of some of Wisconsin’s daily newspapers.

• Be timely, focused and concise.
  Most Wisconsin newspapers limit letters to 200 words or less, and a short, pointed letter is more likely to be printed and read. Editors will want letters discussing recent news or events.
• Include specific references and facts.
  Let the editor know what article or matter you are referring to. Examples:
  • I am impressed with the governor’s choice to support the Great Lakes Compact.
  • I disagree with Jack Smack’s article, “Cold Winter Rebuts Global Warming Claims.”
  • This newspaper’s lack of coverage of vitally important water access issues is frustrating.
• Be logically organized and compelling.
  • Write about your unique perspective, supporting it with facts and also using aspects of the issue that haven’t been addressed yet.
  • Localize the issue, articulating how the reader is affected.
  • Try to be witty or humorous, staying within the bounds of good taste.
• Type and sign your letter, including your contact information.
  Editors will want to verify that you actually wrote the letter.
• Be choosy about where you send your letter.
  Small newspapers have less competition for letters and are more likely to print one; bigger newspapers are more competitive for printing letters, but get more readership
• If at first you don’t succeed…remember another Napolean quote, “Victory belongs to the most persevering.”
  Newspapers don’t always have room for all letters. If they don’t accept yours, ask a friend to submit it, try again, or try a different newspaper.
• Below are some of Wisconsin’s daily papers and e-mail addresses to submit letters to:
  • Appleton Post-Crescent: pcnews@postcrescent.co
  • Ashland Daily Press: ashpress@win.bright.net
  • Capital Times: dzweifel@madison.com
  • Eau Claire Leader-Telegram: leadertelegram@ecol.net
  • Fond du Lac Reporter: mail@thereporter.net
  • Green Bay Press-Gazette: pgnews3@netnet.net
  • Kenosha News: cswanson@kenoshanews.com
  • La Crosse Tribune: letters@lacrossetribune.com
  • Manitowoc Herald Times: htimes@lsol.net
  • Marinette Eagle Star: eagleclss@cybrzn.com
  • Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: jsedit@onwis.com
  • Superior Daily Telegram: telegram@superior-wi.com
  • Shawano Evening Leader: ktempus@shawanoleader.com
  • Wisconsin State Journal: wsjopine@statejournal.madison.com

Clean Wisconsin member Arlyn Olson of Racine writes to the Racine Journal Times…
and points out the need for more consistent public policies (printed in May 2005).

Thank you for two recent examples of responsible journalism. The article on trees (4/15/05) presented an excellent summary of their benefits and promoted a practical program through which concerned people can contribute to the aesthetic enhancement and environmental enrichment of the community. Many people want to participate in programs that contribute to the common good. We need only to be informed of them. So please continue to publicize them as they are offered. 

I also appreciated the editorial (4/14/05) which promoted a more aggressive plan to limit mercury emissions than the one proposed by the Bush administration. You rightly frame this issue in terms of public health and economic vitality.  The incoherence of public policy is mind-boggling! On the one hand Gov. Doyle is justifiably suing the EPA over its attempt to allow more mercury emissions. On the other, the DNR permits We Energies to emit even more of this heavy toxic medal. On the one hand, the EPA has designated the entire western shoreline of Lake Michigan as an ozone non-compliance area. On the other, the DNR permits We Energies to discharge even more pollutants. On the one hand, state law prioritizes the type of energy sources to be used. On the other, the PSC and the DNR permit the increased use of coal at Oak Creek, a source low on the list of sources. This defies comprehension and common sense. Perhaps a future editorial could consider the source of such social schizophrenia.  If neither the state supreme court nor the Army Corps of Engineers brings coherence to this matter, I trust responsible journalists will expose and protest these assaults on the earth and all its inhabitants.