Determination
11
Minnesota
News Council
In the Matter of the Complaint of
Elizabeth Guthrie against the Minneapolis Tribune
Elizabeth S. Guthrie of Orono complained that the
paper's aggressive reporting about a local kidnapping endangered the
life of the victim when it assigned a reporter to follow the course
of ransom-drop attempts. She claimed that the paper acted illegally
when it monitored and reported on police-band radio broadcasts about
the kidnapping because a federal statute prohibits such reporting
without permission from the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Background: Guthrie is a neighbor of Mrs. H.C.
Piper, Jr., who in 1972 was kidnapped and held for ransom. The conduct
of the media at that time had worried Guthrie, and it concerned her
again when she saw this conduct repeated following the March 1974
kidnapping of Eunice Kronholm.
Following the Kronholm kidnapping, the newspaper informed
the FBI that many citizens' radios were picking up police broadcasts
about the case; the paper received no request from any official to
withhold the information being broadcast by the police. The paper
dispatched a reporter in an automobile and conveyed to him the ransom-drop
instructions given in the police broadcasts. The reporter followed
the course of several unsuccessful ransom drops and the story was
published the following day.
The presence of the Tribune reporter - and of many
other media persons - caused the FBI and police to take two extraordinary
measures: first, no police or FBI surveillance took place for the
last of the planned ransom drops; second, a primary suspect was arrested
before Kronholm was released. After the suspect was arrested, the
media broadcast the news and Kronholm successfully convinced her captors
to release her.
Response of the News Organization: The newspaper
indicated at the hearing that while the method of acquiring the news
story may have been questionable, the published story was sufficiently
vague that it could not have caused further jeopardy. Following the
kidnapping, the Tribune adopted new policies designed to ensure that
the paper's reporters would not endanger human life by their newsgathering
activities and would not disseminate information picked up from police-radio
broadcasts.
Determination of the Council: The ransom drop
in a kidnap case involves a time of substantial tension; interference
can further imperil a victim. The newspaper did not exercise proper
journalistic responsibility in the manner in which it gathered the
news of the Kronholm kidnapping ransom drop by monitoring police radios
and relaying the information to a reporter attempting on-the-scene
coverage. Further, the newspaper did not act responsibly in publishing
its story about the unsuccessful ransom drops. The paper's newly adopted
policy advising reporters to let "common sense and human compassion
temper our decisions" is commended. (The newspaper's stated policy
follows this summary.) The complaint against the newspaper is upheld.
April 12, 1974
Tribune Policy
On March 22, 1974, the Minneapolis Tribune adopted
Staff Memo No. 151:
Coverage of a kidnapping is a tricky thing. We need
to talk about it, in view of some media activities in the Kronholm
ransom drop. All staff members should learn two lessons from our experience:
Tribune staff members cannot and must not become involved
in any activities that could cause a person's injury or death. We
are here to cover the news, not to make it.
There are times when the mere methods of coverage
can affect the news. Several hard-to-answer questions are involved:
Does a newspaper withhold news of a kidnapping if it is believed release
of the news will endanger the life of the victim? Does a newspaper
try for a scoop - either in story or in pictures - if there is danger
to the victim? In the Kronholm case, should a newspaper - or radio
or television station - have become involved in attempting to follow
a ransom drop?
The answers aren't easy because they involve the conflicts
of aggressive pursuit of the news and our responsibility to a society
and its individuals.
But one thing is clear: We should engage in no news
activity that is likely to bring injury or death to a person because
of our methods or actions. We need to get the news - swiftly and fully
- but not irresponsibly. No news story is worth a human life. You
have only to imagine what would have happened had Mrs. Kronholm been
killed, with the media sharing part of the blame.
So let's be sure common sense and human compassion
temper our decisions.
The Tribune should not disseminate material picked
up from police-radio broadcasts. We have the right to monitor the
broadcasts and take action on them; it is against the law to print
the matter which is broadcast.
Use of the contents of monitored broadcasts is prohibited
by Section 605 of the Federal Communications Act. What do we do instead?
We monitor such broadcasts and then talk to the police sources involved.
We tell them we have heard the broadcasts and we ask for authorization
to use the material. If the police say no, we ask the questions necessary
to get our story.
At the time of the grievance hearing, Charles Bailey,
editor of the Tribune, said that on May 18, 1974, he had distributed
an additional policy to all members of the Tribune staff to be followed
where a person's safety may be in jeopardy. The policy read as follows:
The Tribune does not always need to be first with
a story. We should never let other media set our standards.
It is always possible, though by no means automatic,
to delay publication of a particular item of sensitive information
if requested to do so by a law-enforcement official in charge of a
case. I might note at this point that so far as I am aware we received
no request relating to any phase of our news coverage of the Kronholm
case from any FBI official.
We should, in such situations, avoid highly visible
reporting activities.
In dealing with subjects that raise the possibility
of injury to persons involved in the story, reporters must seek direction
from their supervisors, and those supervisors must consult the editor
of the Tribune or, in his absence, the managing editor.
Read
Determination 12
Back
to Main Determination Index
Want
to comment? Send a message
to the News Council.
