The missing letters

For the first time in the last 49 years Parsiana is not carrying a Readers’ Forum column. There have been times in the past when letters were scarce but we always managed to publish at least a page or more. When the present management took over the reins of Parsiana in 1973, the second issue under our stewardship had a "Letters" column, as we then termed it. The letters provided an insight into the community’s thinking and priorities, and formed a valuable archive. It became a forum in the true sense of the word. From lay people to scholars to trustees, letters poured in. Readers took note of the letters and they often became a talking point.

We used to allocate four pages to the column and still had to hold over letters due to space constraints.As our community numbers age and decline, so do the volume of letters. Four pages became three, two and even one-and-a-half. We did ponder at times if we would have enough letters to fill a page and even included comments that subscribers wrote on their subscription renewal forms. But never did we anticipate a total dearth from a community known to be expressive (a single letter did come in from a 91-year-old subscriber as the pages of this issue were being prepared for the press).

Have we become less vocal? Not at all. Social media with its instant, uncensored, affordable and accessible features is a great outlet for venting one’s views. Many of the comments put up are brief, stating approval or disapproval of what was initially posted. They may comprise one word or only an emoji.

While comments on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and similar platforms reach a larger audience, WhatsApp chat groups, despite their limited reach, are the forum of choice. The number of comments posted on a Parsi chat group may exceed 100 a day.

Some viewers respond in a few minutes or hours, others may take days. The posts may result in a dialog between various parties, often with differing views. On many social media platforms the administrators are passive, not editing the comments nor verifying the claims. These dialogs can degenerate into diatribes. Sometimes the administrators appear unable or unwilling to remove quarrelsome or abusive parties from the group. Some participants call for sanity and civility to be restored; others leave the group in disgust or do not bother to access the chat platform.

One reads on social media misinformation and outright lies masquerading as facts or may view live streaming of mass shootings. Religious minorities are targeted, anti-Semitic and Islamophobic comments are aplenty as are attacks on lesbians, gays, transgenders and liberal political parties. Anyone and everyone is fair game. And due to the volume of material uploaded every second or minute, the personnel deputed to oversee the content are overwhelmed. No print medium in a democracy could function in such a cavalier fashion.

On our Parsiana Facebook page most posts will draw some comments. These are usually brief. Often a photo may draw more reaction than the text. We once received around 500 to 600 comments — not to mention a legal notice — for a few seconds’ video clip of an uthamna ceremony in an atash behram. Nothing we have published in print has ever drawn this much reaction and venom.

Closely monitored chat groups with a social objective can be a substantial force for development, social welfare and concern for the environment. They can serve the purpose of bringing people together and involving them in beneficial activities. Appeals for assistance and information are readily forthcoming on these constructive groups.

Print generally has a larger subscription base than community WhatsApp groups or an individual’s Facebook or Instagram account. Published material carries greater credibility. Publications are answerable to their subscribers, advertisers and well-wishers as well as the laws of the land. The articles, letters, columns remain on the records, and are archived for posterity in libraries and other institutions. Researchers scan old newspapers to obtain information on the past. Letters are often cited in their academic papers and books. They provide a peek into the values, mores and events of that era.

How does one achieve this with social media? There are trillions of posts, nearly all unfiltered for accuracy and authenticity. What information can one depend on and how much can one read? Were those posts put up by genuine people, imposters or robots/bots? A bot, as Wikipedia describes it, is a "a software application that runs automated tasks over the internet, usually with the intent to imitate human activity, such as messaging, on a large scale." Another site notes "while benevolent social bots exist, many social media bots are used in dishonest and nefarious ways."

Writing letters to the editor requires thought, knowledge and time. It requires the reader to have read the article, not just the few sentences that are reproduced from the publication. Not only are letter writers fewer, but also those who read print. It is not surprising to meet aspiring journalists who nonchalantly state they only read news summaries on their mobile phones or laptops. Even Facebook which carries longer posts is being outshone by Instagram which is heavily dependent on photographs with minimal text.

The era of thoughtful letters expressing a reasoned point of view is receding. All over the world letters to the editors are declining. There are exceptions. The New York Times (NYT), for example, receives more than a 1,000 submissions a day! The NYT online version has almost 10 times more subscribers than the print edition. The online edition is easily accessible anywhere in the world and is affordable. Of the submissions they receive daily, only a fraction make it to print. But that does not appear to be a deterrent to those submitting their opinions.

The British daily, The Guardian, with a print circulation of over 75,000 and online subscription of over 10,00,000 receives 200 to 300 letters per day of which "20 or so appear on the page, with a few more online," notes their website. Due to a constraint on space, many newspapers devote minimum space to letters with some carrying none at all. Those that receive a large number of submissions need editorial staff to select the ones that are suitable. This is an added cost.

At Parsiana, every genuine letter received, whether a hard copy or an email, is published. Some letters are handwritten but even these are keyed into the computer and used. Readers’ viewers are important. Often people in search of information write in to connect with parties that can provide it.

Every Readers’ Forum column states at the start, "Readers’ views are welcome on any subject of interest to the community." We greatly value our readers’ contributions and are immensely saddened if that crucial editorial input is missing.