Different reactions to our front page story of last Friday concerning the unfortunate Claire Swire.

The Sussex woman wrote a somewhat saucy private email to her boyfriend. He passed it on to work colleagues and it ended up being seen around the world.

Matt Palmer - an email correspondent, naturally - says: "I found the article to be pointless and uninformative. It is a disgrace to journalism when this sort of pap makes front page news.

"Forwarding emails, personal or otherwise, is common place in the internet age and the comment regarding one recipient in Australia is now irrelevant as email is not confined to geographical location and almost certainly went to a friend."

Okay, Matt, it may not have the been the hardest new story in the world, but it was good enough for the front pages of most of the broadsheets but only the inside of some couple of the so-called downmarket tabloids.

Furthermore, the protection of emails at work is one of the hottest news topics of the moment, particularly with the Government's new powers to allow employers and itself to see any staff emails they choose.

Vicky Winstanley, of Hove, reacted differently to the story: "In the age of emails and this story, I thought I would send you this picture of my parents.

"They send them to all their friends every year, each being on a different theme, and don't seem to mind if all their friends see them like this. As I took the picture, I wouldn't have thought they would mind if the whole of Sussex saw it too. Merry Christmas mum and dad!"

It's the picture at the top of the page ...

Councillor Mark O'Keefe agreed with our special report about the large number of professional charity fund-raisers to be seen on the streets across the South Coast.

He says that as someone who regularly gives to charity, he does not like being approached in the street and is concerned about the effect on traditional charities.

However, he adds: "Imagine my surprise, then, to find in the following Thursday Jobs supplement two positions advertised with one of these organisations.

"It would seem hypocritical to slate the company and then happily accept advertising revenue from it."

The truth is that The Argus editorial is completely free from the influence of advertising and we had no lawful reason to stop this organisation advertising.

Keith Salvage, from Brighton, points out that in some editions of last Thursday's Argus, we gave the date on the front page as December 12, when it should have been December 14. Good spot, Keith.

Our Devil's Dyke walk in last Saturday's Weekend section said that at point seven "After 300 yards turn left down a bank . . ." and not 30 yards as it should have done. Thanks to the walk's author, Ben Perkins, for pointing out the error.