The Post's Ethics Error

It is interesting to watch Post publisher Katharine Weymouth and executive editor Marcus Brauchli scramble to extricate themselves from salongate. Weymouth said that she was out of town and never saw the flier inviting corporate participation in the planned policy dinner, and Brauchli said that if he had known what it said, he would have forbidden reporters and editors from attending the function at his boss's house ["Post Co. Cancels Corporate Dinners," Style, July 3; "Post Publisher Acknowledges Mistakes," news story, July 5]. And, of course, a Post marketing executive, who maybe needed a little more explicit guidance from his leaders since he was new to his position, was assigned much of the blame.

Weymouth took "responsibility," just like politicians and business leaders whom The Post excoriates routinely, sometimes even calling for their resignations, when they use the same word, but what really is the cost to her? Nothing.

I know that Weymouth and Brauchli are somewhat new to their positions, and I hope that they do more than just apologize or take "responsibility," with no real impact on their positions at The Post.

Otherwise, the top headline on the July 5 editorial page, "Hypocrisy on the Hill," opposite Weymouth's letter on the op-ed page, could be reworded to say "Hypocrisy at The Post."

-- Larry Stewart

Vienna

--

What Katharine Weymouth made was not a mistake but a conscious business decision to maximize revenue over any other value system.

While my husband and I continue to read The Post because we are of the generation that needs to hold newsprint in our hands, we are watching Weymouth's newspaper bend to less-than-appropriate decisions that do not serve the public, whether they involve improper "salons" or the elimination of Book World as a separate section.

-- Anne Harding Woodworth

Washington