Determination 12: DFL Chair George Melink v. Dakota County Tribune
On July 22, 1974 George E. Melink submitted to the Dakota County Tribune an “Open Letter to Representative Bradley G. Pieper.” This letter was written in a response to an “Open Letter to the People of District 53B” by Rep. Pieper which had appeared in the July 18th issue of the Tribune. In Rep. Pieper’s letter, Mr. Melink was accused of “smear, exaggeration, inaccurate statements, and insulting the intelligence of the voters.”
Mr. Melink took his letter to the Burnsville office of the Tribune Monday morning, July 22nd. At that time, he was told the letter could not be published as an “open letter” but it would appear as an advertisement for which he agreed to pay $40.00. Mr. Melink’s letter did not appear in the issue of July 24th because, according to a telephone conversation with the publisher, Ms. Joyce Clay, it was not submitted on time. (The deadline for ads is 5 p.m. Monday. News items must be submitted earlier.)
On Monday, July 29th, Mr. Melink talked with Ms. Clay and was told his letter would appear as a news item in the July 31st issue. The next morning, July 30th, she called him to say she was not going to print his letter either as a news item or an ad because she felt it might be libelous.
Mr. Melink then consulted with Mr. Gordon Spielman, secretary of the Minnesota Press Council, as to the proper procedure for making a complaint. A formal letter of complaint was sent to the Press Council on July 30, 1974. Mr. Melink stated his grievance: “That I was not afforded the space in the Dakota County Tribune to rebut Mr. Pieper’s false statements about me. Ms. Clay refused to print my statement as a news item or a paid advertisement with my name and address as a disclaimer.” On July 31st Mr. Melink met with Ms. Clay in her office in Farmington, Minn. The matter remained unresolved. The Grievance Committee of the Minnesota Press Council was convened for a hearing on this grievance Aug. 23rd at the St. Paul Athletic Club. In compliance with procedural rules of the Press Council, Mr. Melink signed a waiver for any legal cause of action that he might have against the Dakota County Tribune and its publisher, Ms. Joyce Clay, or members of the Minnesota Press Council.
Summary of Facts: Mr. Melink is first precinct chairman of the Democratic Farm Labor Party of Burnsville. At his county DFL convention he received a file of background material on Rep. Pieper including information on numerous businesses purported to be owned by Rep. Pieper, the endorsed Republican candidate in District 53B, campaigning for a second term in the state legislature. The following week, Mr. Melink attended a Burnsville City Council meeting at which an obscenity ordinance was being discussed. Mr. Melink said he was concerned about the ads appearing in magazines on sale in Burnsville that carried ads for a number of “sex clubs” that are allegedly owned by Rep. Pieper.
On the front page of the June 27th issue of the Dakota County Tribune were two articles relating to this council meeting, carrying the following headlines: “Melink Invites Pieper to Discussion Meeting, ” and “Pieper Wants Melink to Apologize.”
Mr. Pieper did not appear at the “discussion meeting” July 2nd. The Dakota County Tribune carried a brief item on the meeting with no comment about its content.
In its July 18th issue, the newspaper carried Rep. Pieper’s three and one-half page unexcerpted “Open Letter to the People of District 53B” as a news item. In its July 24th issue, it carried an excerpted statement from Richard Helgeson, another Republican candidate in district 53B. This was handled as a news item under the headline, “Helgeson Answers Pieper Explanation.”
Although Mr. Melink is not one of the candidates for representative from District 53B he as been identified by the Dakota County Tribune as being involved in that district’s campaign. Mr. Melink’s major concern is “that the public has a right to know the business interests an elected official is involved in.” Mr. Melink cared enough to use his own funds to have his “open letter” appear as an ad if it was not to be carried as a news item.
Ms. Clay originally told Mr. Melink she would publish his letter as a news item as “an answer to defamatory remarks by Mr. Pieper in a story in our paper.” However, after reading Mr. Melink’s letter, she feared it might be libelous. She consulted Mr. Robert Shaw, manager of the Minnesota Newspaper Association, who advised her to seek counsel from her own attorney. This she did, and her attorney advised her not to publish the letter as submitted. Ms. Clay stated at the Press Council hearing that she had no intention of printing Mr. Melink’s letter and would have sought advice from other attorneys until she got the opinion she wanted. In her letter to the Press Council she stated: “I consider this to be a political feud between certain parties using myself and my paper as the scapegoat in the middle. I will not be used in this fashion by Mr. Melink or anyone else.” It was reported in the Burnsville office of the Dakota County Tribune has a rather complete file on Mr. Pieper, including his varied business connections.
Ms. Clay stated that her paper had no policy on open letters, candidates’ statements and other campaign matters before this particular case came to her attention. The present policy, however, is to print only releases from declared candidates.
Discussion: The Press Council is not concerned with the validity of the statements made about Mr. Melink by Rep. Pieper. The news item headed “Pieper Wants Melink to Apologize” published June 27th and the other “Open Letter” from Rep. Pieper published as a news item in the July 18th issue of the Dakota County Tribune were challenges to Mr. Melink. The Press Council is concerned with the fairness and responsibility of the newspaper in making itself reasonably available to all persons involved in newsworthy events.
The present policy of the Dakota County Tribune limiting the publishing of campaign materials to releases of declared candidates only does not cover this situation. News stories alluding to the concerns of Mr. Melink and containing charges and countercharges were published. The Press Council believes Mr. Melink was denied equal access to the newspaper’s reading public.
Ms. Clay states that “freedom of the press is a must, and I will not be intimidated by anyone.” The Press Council believes that if she expects her readers to come to her defense in support of the freedom of her newspaper, she must assume the responsibility of providing full, fair and accurate reporting. This means that the newspaper cannot discriminate between individuals and causes in making its news space, advertisements and letters to the editor available to its public constituency and to its readers. Here, Mr. Melink has clearly been denied access to the Dakota County Tribune’s readership in a situation where he personally was identified by news stories and story headlines, and where fairness requires that he be given an opportunity to reach the same public through the Tribune.
The Dakota County Tribune does have a section for letters to the editor. A number of letters concerning the Piper-Melink “dispute” have appeared in this section. The Council questions the consistency and fairness in handling some letters in the section to letters to the editor, and others as news items.
The Press Council did not concern itself with the question of the libelous content of Mr. Melink’s letter, although much, if not all, of the factual content had been previously published in the Dakota County Tribune in other contexts. The “Open Letter” of Rep. Pieper had not been excerpted; however, it was reported that Richard Helgeson’s reply to Rep. Pieper had been excerpted after discussion with Mr. Hegelson about some questionable statements. At no time did the publisher discuss with Mr. Melink a rewriting of his letter so that it might not be considered libelous.
Findings
1. It is the determination of the Minnesota Press Council that Mr. George Melink, in this controversy to which he was a party, was denied fair access to the Dakota County Tribune to air his views.
2. In an important public controversy such as this, in which a public official’s fitness to serve is being scrutinized and challenged, a newspaper has an obligation to cover all sides, giving a balanced objective report. Publishing self-serving “statements to the public” should not be considered as a substitute for such coverage.
3. While a responsible newspaper does not knowingly print libelous matter, it is equally clear that the paper should seriously consider and resolve what portion of the material may be libelous and so advise a person seeking access to its readership.
4. Merely labelling of material as libelous should not be used as a device to avoid the newspaper’s general obligation to provide reasonable access to its readership.
5. The Minnesota Press Council requests that this determination be published by the Dakota County Tribune and be released to the media generally.
Tags: Dakota County Tribune