That Stacey Peterson is missing is news

This is in response to your Dec. 18 editorial, "Are we out of touch? Or are others in the media?"

It would seem that your concern is that news reporters are always finding a reason to talk about this or that, and in the process fail to ascertain whether the information they are reporting is true.

Is that correct?

And that there are times when the facts that are reported don't seem to stick.

I agree this does happen sometimes, but to totally ignore the facts of the Stacy Peterson disappearance is to stick your head in the sand and sweep it under the rug, which appears to be what the Bolingbrook Police Department has been doing for years.

The citizens of Bolingbrook have a right to know what is going on in their own community.

There are many facts in this case that are worth reporting and the most important of these is that a person, a wife, mother, sister, daughter, is missing!

What I am concerned about is that there are facts in your reporting that are missing.

To entirely focus on one principle in life -- "innocent until proven guilty" -- is not informing your readers of the facts, which leaves you to be the one that is out of touch.

Media should not completely ignore important issues based on one principle. I have to question your motives. Maybe you are asking yourself if this story is truly newsworthy?

Well I say yes, it is! If it helps to find Stacy, is informative, and if it prevents further crimes against people that you are reporting to.

If the media sends the message that it is unnecessary to check their beliefs against facts, then should we be surprised when others don't?

If, as you fear, untruths are published, then that is what retractions, clarifications and reported corrections are for.

I urge you to reconsider your position and fulfill your public service mission to inform and report the news. Because the last time I checked, a missing person qualifies as news.

Brenda Korneder

Bolingbrook