Determination 18: Candidates James & Laura Miles v. Minneapolis Tribune & Minneapolis Star
James G. and Laura H. Miles, independent candidates for governor and lieutenant governor of Minnesota, complained that the two newspapers provided inadequate and unfair coverage of their campaign.
Background: The Mileses sought to run a serious, low-budget, issue-oriented campaign. Central to their campaign strategy was a walk from one end of the state to the other, meeting the public and discussing the issues. They did not face a primary challenge, and they complained that because of this, their campaign was largely ignored by major Twin Cities newspapers, specifically the Star and Tribune. The Mileses’ concern was not with any adverse effect the coverage or lack of coverage might have had on the success of their campaign (they were not elected), but with the principles surrounding the presentation of candidates’ views on important issues.
They also complained about the unfairness of the two papers’ policies regarding coverage of candidates not included in primary elections, and about the inaccuracy of opinion poll results reported in the two papers.
Determination of the Council: First, regarding the use of public opinion polls, there appeared to be no improper use of either the Minnesota Poll (Tribune) or the Metro Poll (Star) during the campaign. The polls were conducted in proper scientific manner, and both papers included sufficient independent information regarding the content and limits of the poll in their reporting. The news media must be alert to their responsibility to remind the reading public of the limitations of poll results.
Second, on the basis of documented studies of campaign coverage, the Milses received less coverage in traditional news coverage measurement terms – issues covered, column inches reported, and stories published – than the other two candidates. But these traditional measurement devices do not establish proof of adequacy or inadequacy of news coverage; inequality of news columns does not prove discrimination. The conclusion in this case is that the Mileses were treated fairly in comparison to other gubernatorial candidates.
Third, there was no indication that either newspaper had or applied a policy of news blackout or denial of news access to the candidates for public office who were not facing a primary election. In pre-primary as well as post – primary coverage, the media have a commitment to present newsworthy happenings – involving any and all candidates, whether or not they face an impending election contestÑfairly and reasonably for public understanding. The media must, however, be allowed to exercise reasonable judgment in determining the news value, educational value, and space availability for political news as well as other types of news. It is also true that the techniques and timing adopted by a candidate could work against his or her own desire to use the media to present views; the Mileses’ walk frequently took the candidates far from the Star’s and Tribune’s regular reporting range.
However, it is questionable whether either paper provided sufficient coverage of the gubernatorial campaign generally in comparison to other types of news and features. While reporting thoughtful and studious analyses of candidates and major public issues may not sell newspapers or appeal to that portion of the reading public desirous of more entertaining news, newspapers should nonetheless remember their mission to educate and inform the public.
The print media have a unique responsibility to provide in-depth analyses of political issues and candidates, and must find ways of presenting these matters in a form that will be understandable and appealing to the public.
All Minnesota newspapers are encouraged to re-examine their policies regarding the adequacy of political news coverage, and to expand and improve their overall performance.
The complaint against the two newspapers is not upheld.