Background: In connection with the annual convention of the Minnesota Education Association (MEA), the publisher of the newspaper agreed to publish a newspaper facsimile edition, with front and back page news and photos provided by the MEA, to be distributed to MEA members at the convention. The body of the paper was to be the same as in regular editions of the paper for that day. The special edition of 20,000 newspapers was printed and delivered to the convention site.A small disclaimer on the front page of the facsimile edition explained that the material on the front and back pages was not the newspaper’s regular news but was provided specifically for the convention by the MEA.

The Minnesota Federation of Teachers (MFT) complained that the small disclaimer on the front page could be too easily overlooked, causing the paper to be potentially misleading to readers, who might mistake the MEA publicity for objective, factual journalism. The MFT added that the delivery of the special editions to a location near a delivery point for the regular paper made it likely that people other than those attending the convention received copies of the facsimile, and that these readers would likely be more apt to mistake the MEA material for news.

The MFT claimed that a public retraction by the newspaper was needed.

Response of the news organization: In response to the complaint, the paper reviewed its procedures regarding the printing of special editions and adopted a new policy whereby the newspaper would reject any request for a special edition in which the special copy would promote a product, an enterprise, or a point of view.

Determination of the Council: The practice of making over front pages in specially produced promotional editions should be discouraged, as it tends to debase the integrity of a newspaper. When newspapers do print facsimile editions for special occasions or upon special order, they should also publish a disclaimer that is so readily apparent that even the most casual reader might be alerted to the special nature of the newspaper facsimile.

In this instance, the fact that the paper carried a disclaimer on the front page was evidence that it did not intend to mislead or deceive readers about the nature of the “news” in the special edition. No retraction or apology from the newspaper is warranted, and the newspaper is commended for reviewing its procedures and developing a new policy on special editions.

The complaint against the newspaper is not accepted.

Addendum: In response to the initial letter of complaint, St. Paul Dispatch-Pioneer Press publisher Thomas L. Carlin explained the existing policy in a November 25, 1975, letter:

“Over the years, permission has been given for special printings involving a regular issue of one of our newspapers. Almost always this special front-page issue has been limited to a single picture or story of a parochial nature and there have never been any ensuing complaints or criticisms. It was not realized that a variety of stories oriented to the MEA program were going to be used and had this been brought to the attention of our management, we would have insisted on a change in approach or a cancellation of the project. ‘Your letter has caused us to examine our present procedures in accepting these printing requests and new policies are being formulated….’”

A Dispatch-Pioneer Press Policy Memo from publisher Carlin dated November 25, 1975, addressed the subject of “Acceptance of Special Printing Requests for Souvenir Editions”:

“In the past we have occasionally accepted a request to print copies of a regular edition of one of our newspapers. Normally, this has involved a special front-page makeover.

“It will be the policy not to accede to any requests where the special copy promotes a product, an enterprise or a point of view. Authorization will be given only in those instances where no commercializing of the newspaper name is involved. All special copy and art are subject to approval.

“Permission for the printing must be obtained in advance from the publisher.”