Dr. L. David Mech identified 28 specific points of contention in an article printed by the Star Tribune. The News Council grouped these points under four general complaints. Mech complained that the story: Carried a prejudicial headline that implied he was guilty of ethical violations. Further, the framing strongly implied serious wrongdoing and set a false stage for all that followed. Second, the Star Tribune used inflammatory and prejudicial language to support unsubstantiated attacks on his character and behavior. Third, the article was based upon information from sources who were anonymous, biased or lacked the authority to judge his behavior, which made it difficult for readers to judge their reliability. Finally, the piece leveled charges against him without providing substantiation or context that would have provided balance.

More »

Mork complained that an opinion piece was based on false rumors. Her complaint contended that Andy Hilger, the editorialist, had an obligation to check Ringsmuth’s assertion that the MCGFDA committee had pulled books from school libraries without the authority or knowledge of the school board and that she was a prime mover in censorship, and offering an opportunity to respond after an editorial has already aired is not sufficient for fairness and balance, but that the editorial needed to include her version of the facts.

More »