I write to the Bulletin not to convince readers to change their minds about a contentious issue, but to give the other side of the argument.
In the 1960s when I was at university, I subscribed to the Ottawa Journal and the Ottawa Citizen. Why both? One (Journal) slanted to a conservative view; the other (Citizen) was liberal. I figured "the truth" was somewhere in the middle and so formed my opinions by synthesizing the different sources.
Today, Postmedia runs both the Ottawa Sun and the Citizen. What was a "trusted" news source (Citizen) is now a "suspicious" newspaper. Why is that? Because it is now perceived as a right-leaning newspaper and therefore not to be trusted. (I see this in other forums, not just in the Letters pages of the Bulletin d’Aylmer.)
Ron Lefebvre's and Craig Gaston's letters of June 15 are both open-minded, whereas Randy Black's letter indicates he has been indoctrinated by the pervasive left-wing media. That's fine, but for him to perpetuate the view that anyone who supports the economic advantages available underground in Alberta - or elsewhere in Canada - makes them "climate change deniers" is wrong.
I write to other forums and my research is not restricted to the Ottawa Sun. Among my sources are the CBC, the National Post, the Guardian, Huffington Post, Maclean’s Magazine, and The Globe and Mail. People who try to take me to task always say that the Sun media is my sole source. That’s very simplistic. My advice: 1) Don't look at "surface" news; try digging a little deeper. 2) Look at other perspectives, then you can synthesize your opinions and (probably) get closer to "the truth".