Determination 45: Proctor City Council v. Proctor Journal
The Proctor City Council complained that the weekly paper:
- Unfairly and incorrectly reported the city’s financial status with respect to tax increases, budgets, and other fiscal matters during 1981;
- Stated and implied that city council members were racists and bigots;
- Falsely accused the city council of law violations;
- Quoted councilor Jake Benson as making statements at council meetings that were, in fact, not made (Benson is also editor and publisher of the Proctor Journal);
- Exceeded the bounds of journalistic propriety in its comments about the personal integrity of individual council members.
The News Council also chose to review a sixth point, a counterclaim of the newspaper’s that the city council members had ample opportunity to respond in the paper to any comments they did not agree with, but failed to do so.
Determination of the Council: The Council considers the crux of the case to be the failure of the newspaper to follow ethical standards generally accepted by the profession. The Council will comment briefly on each of the six points considered.
In the News Council’s view, the paper failed to show that figures reported in the newspaper were accurate, or that errors were due to what it alleged were inaccurate city budgetary reports. Further, Benson, the source of the paper’s governmental coverage, told the News Council he did not understand municipal finance. The paper’s coverage, through incomplete and faulty reporting techniques, was inaccurate and misleading on a matter of crucial importance to the community.
The paper did indeed imply, with such force as to amount to a statement, that city council members were racists. Through use of repeated accusatory and inflammatory language the paper could not have failed to leave this impression in the reader’s minds. The News Council does not find that the city council’s silence on that matter constituted overt racism.
The paper failed to show that a violation of the Open Meeting Law took place. Depositions submitted were not relevant to the incident cited in the grievance. Consequently, the paper made claims about violations without a factual basis for its allegations. Without such facts, the News Council cannot deny the city council’s charge. The paper failed to offer evidence to support its implications of misuse of funds or to get comment from (the accused councilor). In this instance, sloppy writing resulted in unclear, unfair, incomplete and misleading coverage.
By his own admission, Benson said at the hearing that he did attribute statements to himself that he did not make at city council meetings. The News Council finds such a practice irresponsible and abhorrent. It deplores the paper’s method of coverage at city council meetings and its failure to furnish full and accurate accounts of its proceedings.
Language used by the paper to describe city council members far exceeded the bounds of objectivity and went far to belittle and tarnish the integrity of council members. The News Council deplores the paper’s use of pejorative words and phrases in news stories. It does not agree with Benson’s assertion that advocacy journalism requires an “always open season on public officials.”
It is not the responsibility of the city council to balance the news by responding to each case of misrepresentation by the paper. The public would be ill served if news were reported in a format of statement and rebuttal. The public’s right to access and reply are of paramount importance. Those rights do not, however, relieve the publisher of responsibility for complete and accurate coverage in the first instance. In its Statement of Principles, the American Society of Newspaper Editors calls upon the practitioners of journalism to be not only industrious and knowledgeable, but also to pursue “a standard of integrity proportionate to the journalist’s singular obligation.”
The purpose of journalism, the statement says, is “to serve the general welfare by informing the people and enabling them to make judgments on the issues of the time.” Without endorsing any code or statement of principles, it seems evident that journalists should attempt to assure that news content is accurate, free from bias, and in context, and that all sides are presented fairly. Journalists should also be careful in pursuing any activity that might compromise or seem to compromise their integrity.
The Council finds little evidence that the paper attempts to be fair and accurate. Indeed, the paper’s “singular obligation” appears to be to attack the persons and activities of the Proctor City Council without regard to fullness, fairness or accuracy. The ethical journalistic principles described here may govern newspaper coverage without damage to the First Amendment.
The complaint against the newspaper is upheld.
Concurring: Allen, Brommer, Brooks, Earley, Egert, Foley, Myers, Peek, Simonett,* Staples, Ziegenhagen
Concurring in part, dissenting in part: Carlson, Fairbanks, Fushan, Graven, Higgins, Kramer
*Abstaining: Simonett abstained from participating in the portion of the determination involving the Open Meeting Law.
Tags: Proctor Journal