Last Friday, the AJC announced a drastic change in its editorial content: it would no longer be offering endorsements of local political candidates. That means no Atlanta mayor endorsement this year, no governor endorsement next year, and so on.

We have heard from readers — and we agree — that you don’t need us to tell you how to vote. What readers tell us they need is information on who the candidates are, what they have done and what they want to do in the new job.

That world has changed, steadily and more rapidly in recent years. We see our role now as providing you with information to help you make decisions — and not trying to make them for you. This is consistent with our move earlier this year to make the editorial pages more balanced — offering a wide array of opinions.

This morning, Creative Loafing, speaking through its urban politico reporter Thomas Wheatley, replied to the change.  To put it succinctly, CL’s official response was “Horsehockey!”.

While this sounds very forward-thinking and probably could be spun as “bold new thinking” in NewspaperLand, we think it’s hogwash.

The explanation the paper gave for its decision to quit endorsing just doesn’t jibe. The paper can still provide information about the candidates’ stances on the issues — while issuing endorsements of its own. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.

Perhaps the true reason the paper is giving up on endorsements has something to do with the AJC’s attempt to render the paper devoid of any opinion that could offend anyone.

What do you think?  Is the AJC’s move to suspend political endorsements something to be hailed or derided?  And here’s my own follow-up to that – if the AJC is now only in the business of presenting “facts”, who’s got the clout to pick up and lead the Atlanta conversation?