Padding policy

(Retrieved from deep freeze)

Some time back Gautam Adhikari wrote an editorial explaining TOI editorial policy. Let's ignore the absurdity of TOI having any policy, he wrote,

We take this stance because we are a ‘liberal’ newspaper in the classical sense of the term. Our job is to offer you a wide variety of opinions to help you reflect and form your own views. When we want to express opinions as a newspaper, we do so in our editorials.

I can only assume that he implies classical liberalism. Now I am hardly an expert on classical liberalism, but I always believed that classical liberalism was more concerned with individual rights and freedom, specifically in context with state, such as property rights, due process, civil liberty. What it has got to do with the editorial policy of TOI, is beyond my comprehension.

Now it is possible he was meaning to say that TOI welcomes diverse opinions. However while there is no doubt that classical liberal welcomed diverse opinions, I am sure they were not the only one to do so. I will go so far as to say that during those days even the socialists, monarchists and conservative must have been eager to debate contrary opinions, so that doesn't make much sense either.

Really why do people have to throw around buzzwords. At least he didn't invoke Coase. That would have been too unforgivably annoying.

PS. Padding as in resume padding.