We live in an increasingly aggressive world, one in which people feel entitled to air their personal grievances publicly and recklessly. Social media promotes this type of self-serving righteousness by providing a platform for spontaneous outbursts. Yes — sometimes it is healthy to open a public discussion based on personal concerns. Sometimes, it is not.

Last weekend, an article appeared in the OBSERVER (Nov. 18) that raises concerns about what constitutes actual, report-worthy news versus a personal, slanderous attack. The article was, essentially, one woman’s unqualified, unsubstantiated tirade about a situation that she did not witness first hand. Since when does a personal issue become front-page news?

I am a teacher. One of the most important lessons that I reinforce (constantly!) in my classroom is that every argument must be backed up with evidence. There are always two (three? four?) sides to a story. Perspective is crucial when it comes to understanding and analyzing any situation fairly.

A newspaper has a responsibility to print newsworthy, relevant, unbiased articles. This article failed miserably. As a result, the line between public defamation and unbiased news reporting has been blurred. And as a result, a kind, respectable, giving, human being is being unjustly accused of ableism.

So here’s the problem: by publishing an article that presents one side of a situation, damage is done that cannot be undone. It is too late. A retraction, though appropriate, is too late. Biases have been formed. People, because we are so vulnerable to suggestion, have made up their minds. It is too late.

Melissa Leffel is a Fredonia resident.