I especially was glad to see the recent article in The Democrat by S.L. Frisbie. The subject was “special interests.”
What Mr. Frisbie writes has been a special interest to me for the sixteen years since I moved to Bartow from Connecticut. Much of my professional and academic years have involved journalism, and I was delighted to find that The Polk County Democrat was a quality newspaper. S.L. Frisbie has been a key ingredient in this quality, and I hope will remain so. When my eyesight failed about five years ago and I could no longer read, I continued my subscription to The Democrat and arranged that someone read whatever Frisbie wrote for it. I have just celebrated – as the expression goes – my 97th birthday anniversary.
The article on our common use of the term “special interests” is an example of Mr. Frisbie’s astute understanding of our language, and calls attention to our corruption of the term “special interests,” especially in politics. Perhaps “corruption” is not quite the proper word, but we should deplore popular use of “special interest” to apply only to the selfish interest of big money corporations. Many people assert that they are opposed to special interests at the moment they write a check to, say, cancer research, suggesting that such research is not a special interest. No need to go into a multitude of such examples.
I recommend that readers reread the S.L. Frisbie essay and think about how we use our language. Perhaps we are unable to find or invent a more suitable term for what we typically label “special interests.” I hope we can, and I thank S.L. Frisbie for calling the term “special interests” to our attention.
ARLAND R. MEADEBartow