Dear James, I'm sorry if you found Ms. Blatchford's column offensive.

We knew, of course, that some people would have that reaction, and indeed I have received quite a few complaints. Please allow me to explain why I thought it was appropriate to print such a column. The bulk of Ms. Blatchfords criticism was aimed, not at Mr. Layton himself, but rather at the media coverage of his death, and more specifically the broadcast media. While you may disagree with her assessment, I think it was a perfectly legitimate reaction. The coverage was unlike anything weve seen recently on the passing of a public figure, with the possible exception of Pierre Trudeau. And without taking anything away from Mr. Laytons accomplishments, he had not attained the stature that Mr. Trudeau had over many decades of public life. Ms. Blatchford felt the coverage was over the top, and I thought it was fair comment for her to point that out. She also took issue with Mr. Laytons letter to Canadians. Her view was that the letter was a highly political document, in which he spoke at length about his own party, what it has done and where it should go, and also took partisan shots at his opponents, specifically the Conservatives. She felt and I agreed that if a public figure uses his final public communication to make political as well as personal points, then those points are open to criticism, like any other political communication would be. The National Posts coverage of Mr. Laytons death, in print and online, included no fewer than six columns, plus an editorial. With the exception of Ms. Blatchfords, all were laudatory. We gave over our entire front page to his passing, largely taken up with an illustration of the NDP leader that we commissioned for the occasion. The tone throughout was one of respect for his accomplishments, his devotion to public life and his optimism. There could be little doubt that we were paying respect to a well-loved and successful public figure. Ms. Blatchford is a strong, opinionated writer with a distinct voice who is always willing to challenge conventional wisdom. That's why we hired her. But her piece was part of a package, and not the only or even the most prominent part of it. I had hoped that readers would be able to see her article in that context. Some, clearly, have not. I take full responsibility for its publication, and I stand by it. I dont expect this will have done much to change your mind about our decision, but I wanted to let you know what the thought process was that resulted in the piece being published. Best regards,

Stephen Meurice Editor-in-Chief National Post

1450 Don Mills Road Toronto, Ontario M3B 2X7