Shame on you for printing tobacco advertisements! I was greatly upset by the full-page cigarette advertisement on the back page of the July 3 issue. I have been recommending City to friends and many young people as a resource about things to do and good reporting. I do not want them to be exposed to tobacco advertisements, particularly this misleading piece promoting "natural" cigarettes. They are just as bad as any other. Are you in such bad financial shape that you have to do this?

Zsuzsanna Marchl, MD, Portland Avenue, Rochester

Editor and co-publisher Mary Anna Towler's response: I appreciate and understand your concern. We're as opposedto cigarette smoking as anyone. Cigarette smoking causes cancer and heart disease; the health-care cost to the nation is enormous; and there are no "safe" cigarettes. We've written editorials about the dangers of tobacco use, and we've supported legislation to ban smoking in public places.

That said, we also have a commitment to support and protect freedom of speech. As part of that commitment, we make our advertising space available for the promotion of any legal product.

If we refuse to accept advertising for products we're opposed to, should we also refuse to accept advertising from organizations and political candidates with whom we disagree? Should we refuse to accept letters to the editor if they promote a viewpoint with which we disagree?

Our writers and editors have a chance to express their opinion 52 times a year in print - and every day on our website. We consider our advertising space to be a kind of public marketplace. And we hope readers recognize it as that.