I would like to respond to a couple of popular headline topics. There needs to be freedom of speech; real freedom of speech, not selective freedom of speech. At the same time, journalists, cartoonists, newscasters and anyone who is in the public eye frequently must be careful about the topic they are addressing, how they are addressing the topic and how often.

To be further cautious, the public must be keenly perceptive about news topics being used to manipulate public perception and views. This is done constantly and some people might find this commentary of mine designed to do the same thing. It is unfortunate, however I feel most communication is designed to manipulate rather than inform. This can be difficult to discern and I urge people to compare stories that are presented by different journalists and certainly closely examine any political statements.

For a publication to present a negative view with regularity of some topic or individual, might this be the same as the topic of bullying? To regularly publicly denigrate someone, some organization, might anger many people. It can also be perceived as an act of violence!

My question is: What is most universally important to communicate, a communication that transcends cultural differences, sex and age differences and religious differences? Is this even possible? Some people who have studied communications and human behavior feel that it is possible for people to resolve differences meaningfully and cooperatively. It is felt the entire human community can develop beyond the terrible condition that we function from today. Obviously this will take a huge effort to overcome all of the human created obstacles that we see playing out presently.

Joe Ciarrocca
Brunswick