A Call for a Fairer, More Dynamic Letters to the Editor Process at the Albany Times Union

My recent experience submitting a letter to the Times Union has left me frustrated—and I doubt I'm alone. While I’ve had a few letters published over the years, far more often I receive a call verifying that I wrote the letter and that it hasn’t been submitted elsewhere... and then I never hear back. Sometimes, there's no response at all.

Of course, no one expects every letter to be published. But the current process effectively silences viewpoints. Once your letter is “in the system,” you're asked not to submit it anywhere else, even if the Times Union decides—silently—not to print it. That’s not fair when they don’t print the letter, and it undermines the purpose of public commentary.

Suggestions for a Stronger, Fairer Opinion Section

Here are a few observations and proposals to make the Times Union’s opinion section more relevant, engaging, and representative. Both the newspaper and the readership would benefit from a thoughtful review of the process.

1. Improve Transparency and Communication

If a letter is verified but won’t be published at all, the writer should be notified within a reasonable time frame—say, within seven days. This would allow the author to revise it or submit it elsewhere while the topic is still timely. A policy that holds exclusive rights without follow-through on publication amounts to silencing voices.

2. Rethink the First-In/First-Out Rule

I was told that letters are published in the order received. While this sounds fair in theory, it ignores the reality of the news cycle. A letter responding to a breaking story is only relevant for a few days. Holding time-sensitive letters for weeks—or indefinitely—undercuts the value of public discourse. Prioritize letters responding to current events while balancing broader topics across the publication schedule. This may mean that some letters will get bumped to a later date.

3. Avoid Redundancy and Political Saturation

My letter was verified by staff and within the next two weeks, the Times Union published multiple letters on similar topics: climate change (10), Trump-related criticisms (6), and other national debates. Publishing too many letters on the same theme (especially when prompted by orchestrated letter-writing campaigns) drowns out diverse viewpoints. Instead, pick the most compelling one or two and move on. Don’t let the newspaper be used as a free tool by PACs or lobbying groups to promote their causes. You can tell this is happening when you get a large number of letters on a topic within a short time frame or the letters use similar language.

4. Focus on Local Voices and Issues

The Times Union is a local paper. Letters from residents of Maryland or Ithaca—unless tied to our community in some way—shouldn’t take precedence over local commentary. There are plenty of pressing issues right here: Albany’s speed cameras, the Bethlehem water crisis, and local crime are hot topics on forums like NextDoor. Why not reflect that interest in the letters section?

5. Be More Selective and Responsive

The Times Union claims they have nearly 50 letters waiting to be published but only print a few daily. Are they truly printing them all? Probably not—and that’s okay. But let’s be honest about it. The current approach feels passive and inefficient. A more dynamic editorial process would involve daily decisions based on timeliness, relevance, and reader interest—not just a queue.

6. Encourage Variety and Constructive Dialogue

Readers want more than political echo chambers. A vibrant letters section includes thoughtful debate, reactions to local stories, and unique personal perspectives. More diversity in opinion—particularly from different generations, neighborhoods, and professional backgrounds—would keep the section fresh and engaging.

In Summary

The Times Union has an opportunity to make its “Letters to the Editor” section more engaging, inclusive, and reflective of its readership. That means updating outdated processes, being more responsive to time-sensitive letters, prioritizing local voices, and encouraging real debate over repetitive political talking points.

Public opinion pages matter—when they truly reflect the public.