Being a responsible journalist does not mean giving equal time to every possible perspective. It’s not censorship to filter out nonsense.

Ever since the survivors evacuated to the underground storm shelter, the remaining members of our town have been sheltered from not only Trallonous’ ten thousand teeth, but from new ideas as well. It is hardly editorializing for us to state that our bunker has become a literal echo chamber, where every discussion focuses solely on “how do we signal to the outside world for help” and “what we are going to do once we run out of food?” The constant focus on these matters strikes us as myopic, and if it takes publishing an op-ed from a seemingly indestructible sea monster who wants to eat us all alive to challenge the status quo, then so be it.

We understand many readers find the kraken’s point of view dangerous, but that is why we offered it for public scrutiny and debate. Though Trallonous’ position may have seemed clear from the moment he regurgitated thousands of sailor bones to block every exit out of town, it is always important to critically examine where the other side is coming from. Doing so allows us to better understand the sea demon’s perspective (we should be his food) as well as our own (no we shouldn’t). If we are truly convinced of our own position, then we should be able to defend it when it is attacked, rhetorically-speaking, of course. Practically speaking, we obviously have no defense against a giant ocean colossus. With that said, we acknowledge Trallonous actually made some pretty decent points. —McSweeney’s