On April 18 the Monitor ran a letter from Gleb Teryohin of Moscow, in which he shared his hopes for immigration to the US. Dozens of our readers wrote to Mr. Teryohin, and Moscow bureau chief Daniel Sneider visited him. Below, his thanks.
DEAR MR DANIEL SNYDER
DEAR CHIEF EDITOR OF THE NEWSPAPER THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
DEAR CONTRIBUTORS OF THE PAPER
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN
LET ME EXPRESS MY DEEPEST GRATITUDE TO YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION AND SUPPORT PROVIDED TOWARDS ME I AM ENDLESS HAPPY THESE DAYS I HAVE FELT SOME BURST OF NEW POWER AND CONFIDENCE IN THE FUTURE. I WILL ALWAYS REMEMBER YOUR EXCLUSIVELY KIND ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE SIMPLE SOVIET MAN WITH DEEPEST RESPECT TO YOU
SIGNATURE (GLEB TERYOHIN)
ON MAY THE 14 1991 THE CITY OF MOSCOW.
Executions and television Regarding the article ``California Public-TV Station Seeks `Live' Coverage of Execution,'' May 10: As an opponent of both abortion-on-demand and capital punishment, I fear that live coverage of a public execution would confuse issue with image. Is KQED's objective to shock wrong-thinking citizens into a newfound appreciation of life? What is the ``deterrent value'' of this sure-to-be-prime-time offering for such thinking? What other agenda does KQED have for such an antisocial bit of programming?
The station runs the risk of alienating those of us who would support the civilized public debate of an issue it would so simplistically reduce to a profane, multisecond portrait. Such a murderous voyeurism may be ``trendy'' in the California arts and entertainment community, but ``hip'' it is not.
Alan Hull, Marietta, Ga.
What, in essence, is the ``constitutional right'' of the media? It is overly cited, too often without clarity, to rationalize the need for public exposure and precious ratings. The real question is the duty of the media to the public. The media's demand to exercise a ``constitutional right'' amounts to finger-pointing at supposedly less-than-decent people, which the media have judged unworthy of any dignity or respect as human beings. The media's duty is to inform and enlighten the public, not to exploit, judge, and punish them.
Hye Sun Han, New York
As a condemned man on California's Death Row, I believe that KQED should be allowed to cover and air any execution with the condemned man's consent. When my time comes I will agree to having my execution shown. My reason is that if it saves even one life, then it is worth it. The news already shows people getting killed nearly every night without those persons' permission. William M. Dennis, San Quentin, Calif.
[Editor's note: A judge refused KQED's petition June 7, but debate continues.]