When we relocated to Beaufort last October, we started reading your newspaper. I've written opinion letters you published. Having 38 years experience in broadcast, print and direct mail advertising, I know the value of a responsible publication. I also know the difference between an editorial and an advertisement: it's called an "advertorial," and that's the subject matter of this letter.
I understand that letters from we "common people" are limited to 250 words, and why you afforded William B. Danzell, president and chairman of iTraffic Safety, much more than that in his "advertorial" Feb. 23. That being said, may I remind you everyone's got an opinion, including me. However, his article was nothing more than a blatant attempt to sell something besides an opinion.
In his sanctimonious ramblings, he showed no real proof that his firm's intrusive traffic cameras in Ridgeland actually work. If they did, there'd be no speeders on that road, therefore negating his research statistics. One would draw the conclusion that it's a -- dare I say -- moneymaker disguised as a safety issue. And as for jobs, how many? How long is that stretch of highway in question?
In his government-intrusion statement, I must have missed something because the issue is still before the South Carolina legislature. Perhaps giving state Sen. Larry Grooms' Bill 366, with amendment proposed by Sen. Tom Davis, an opportunity to make a sane and rational decision on laws is in order. They are the ones we voted for, not Danzell.
Joseph W. James III Beaufort