Determination
112
Minnesota
News Council
In the Matter of the Complaint of
Northwest Airlines against
WCCO-TV, Channel 4
Attending the hearing at the Lutheran Brotherhood
Auditorium, representing Northwest Airlines were Jon Austin, Director,
Corporate Communications; Ruthie McKee, Sr. Vice President, Customer
Service and Line Maintenance; Dr. Clayton Foushee, Vice President,
Flight Operations, and Christopher Clouser, Sr. Vice President, Administration.
Representing WCCO-TV were Jacquee Petchel, Senior Producer; Don Shelby,
Anchor and Reporter; John Culliton, former General Manager; and Ted
Canova, News Director.
A number of members recused themselves from participating
in the proceedings due to conflicts of interest. In order to attain
a full board, several former board members participated in their stead.
These included John Finnegan (media), Bob Shaw (media), Mary Ziegenhagen
(media) and Ron Graham (public).
About 300 people attended the hearing, which was widely
covered by both print and broadcast media, including "60 Minutes"
and theWall Street Journal.
Background:
On April 29 and 30, 1996, WCCO-TV ran a two-part investigative series
about alleged shortcomings in safety at Northwest Airlines. After
receiving a strong negative response from Northwest Airlines, the
machinists union and members of the public, WCCO produced and aired
a third piece on May 22. Northwest Airlines first heard from WCCO
on April 19, 16 hours before promotional spots for the series began
running. The airline was holding its annual stockholders meeting in
New York. Staff members flew back to prepare answers to WCCO's questions
and met with reporters on April 26. Northwest Airlines was concerned
about the series and asked that a spokesperson appear on the newscast
to be interviewed after each part was broadcast. WCCO declined. Northwest
Airlines filed a complaint after the first two parts aired.
Northwest also complained about promotional spots,
an element the News Council had not previously considered. The parties
disagreed about whether the Council should hear that issue. The Council
chose to consider, first, whether promotional spots for news should
be held to the same standards as news. If the Council affirmed that
promos should be held to the same standards, then it would hear the
complaint that these specific promotions gave a distorted and untruthful
picture of the airline.
Complaint:
Northwest Airlines (NWA) contended that WCCO-TV failed to deliver
on the premise of its story and that its series violated the standards
of journalism. It complained about both the stories and the promos,
contending that:
I. "WCCO-TV painted a distorted, untruthful picture
of Northwest Airlines and the men and women who work there through
its choice of images, words and narrative, its improper juxtaposition
of unrelated facts and events, its failure to provide any appropriate
context and its failure to present any comment from the regulators
or from independent third-party experts." More specifically,
Northwest claimed the series:
a) Used poor sources
- It relied on the testimony of persons who were
suing the airline;
- It raised the unrelated claims of two women working
in other departments suing for sexual harassment and extended the
women's contention that an atmosphere of intimidation existed at
the company to suggest that such intimidation affected mechanics
as well;
- It allowed four anonymous sources who had no specific
allegations to make unsubstantiated or vague observations with no
context;
- It misstated the qualifications of the "whistleblower,"
Tony Digatono, by identifying him as a mechanic when he was actuallya
welder and therefore unqualified to give opinions about safety.
Further, the "secret tapes" used to suggest a lack of
regard for safety take on a new meaning when seen in the light of
Digatono's actual duties.
b) Lacked context
- It failed to provide quantitative information so
that viewers could make comparisons, such as accident/incident rates,
number of departures, number of Enforcement Investigative Reports
(EIRs) lodged against NWA in comparison with other airlines, the
size of FAA consent orders against other air carriers;
- It failed to include comment from the FAA or from
independent safety consultants, such as the Star Tribune
did on April 28 and the St. Paul Pioneer Press did on May
1;
- It ran highly magnified words across the screen
- "catastrophic failure," "investigation," "careless,"
and "endangered lives" - with no context.
c) Mischaracterized documents
- It misstated the nature of the government's oversight
of NWA and of the consent order and, further, made no effort to
explain the importance or significance of the nine incidents cited;
- It misstated the NWA filing with the Department
of Transportation in which NWA tried to convince the DOT not to
change reporting procedures to include mechanical difficulties in
its calculation of on-time flights.
d) Presented the series in a sensational manner using
audio and visual elements to suggest to viewers that ominous, sinister
and life-threatening misdeeds were rampant at NWA.
- It used inflammatory rhetoric;
- It used old video clips of accidents although two
of the incidents were not related to the consent order or to alleged
FAA enforcement actions;
- It photographed an airplane still airborne, with
objects in the foreground, thereby creating the erroneous impression
that the plane was dangerously close to the ground;
- It photographed a 747 at an unusual angle that
created the impression that the aircraft was about to crash;
- It associated the unsolved murder of Su Taraskiewicz,
a Boston-based baggage handler, with the sexual harassment claims,
intimating that "troublemakers end up dead;"
- It taped maintenance crews at night, creating a
sinister mood, and interviewed all company representatives and on-the-record
sources using dim or no background lighting. Only Digatono was shot
in daylight.
e) Factual errors
- It represented the FAA allegations as being "uncovered,"
"exposed" for the "first time." In fact, the
consent order had already been made public in a Star Tribune
article;
- In the introduction to parts I and II, it said
NWA had "endangered the lives of passengers," an assertion
that seems to have come from a 1993 incident on a ferry flight between
Boston and Minneapolis. A ferry flight carries only cargo, no passengers;
- It quoted an FAA statement about an individual
airplane and a single incident as if it applied to the airline as
a whole;
- It characterized a letter from the FAA to Digatono
as a "thank you" letter, when it was a letter acknowledging
receipt of information;
- It said Julie Lewis was Northwest's highest-ranking
personnel officer; she is not;
- It stated that Northwest carries 90 percent of
the passengers in and out of the Twin Cities; in fact, Northwest
carries approximately 70 percent.
II. WCCO-TV's promos painted a distorted, untruthful
picture of Northwest Airlines.
Response of the News Outlet:
The Northwest Airlines complaint takes WCCO-TV and its stories to
task for many things. And yet, few of the allegations, if any, deal
with the most critical question of all: were the core assertions in
WCCO-TV's reports true? The station said its reports focused on three
important issues:
- Northwest was fined $725,000 for violations of
FAA safety regulations over a period of years, violations which
included a significant number of maintenance failures that compromised
passenger safety;
- Employees said they felt pressure to get planes
out "on time" and believed this pressure caused them and
other employees to make inadequate repairs in some cases;
- Employees said they feared retaliation for reporting
maintenance problems.
WCCO said, "We stand by our reporting on each
of these issues and we submit that Northwest's complaint provides
no evidence that we were incorrect. Northwest Airlines does not claim
that WCCO was wrong in its underlying contention that mechanics, from
time to time, are put into a position of conducting work in violation
of safety standards. And Northwest's contentions that employees did
not believe pressure caused maintenance errors and that they did not
fear retaliation for reporting problems fly in the face of the evidence.
"WCCO-TV stated Northwest Airlines was one of
the safest airlines in the country, despite the fact that other investigations
had found otherwise. The Council must understand that the airline
industry does not have one standard by which safety is judged. But
WCCO reported what it believed to be the truth, that Northwest Airlines
is one of the safest airlines in the country."
However, "Northwest had violated aviation regulations
on dozens of occasions and paid fines amounting to $725,000 for those
violations. Northwest asserts that the FAA consent decree contained
only 'unproved violations,' yet Northwest itself does admit it paid
the penalty and proceeded to implement changes suggested by the FAA.
In courthouse jargon it is simply a case of saying, 'We have done
nothing wrong, and we promise never to do it again.' Despite Northwest's
assertions to the contrary, FAA officials told us the fines were substantial
and among the highest levied."
Addressing specific complaints:
Irrelevance of sources (I a 1): "We had a sizable
base of sources, both former and present employees, both confidential
and not confidential, from whom we received credible evidence, evidence
that has been further corroborated by the National Transportation
Safety Board's findings. In our stories, we explicitly stated which
of our identified sources had filed lawsuits against Northwest."
Irrelevance of sources (I a 2): "While it may
be Northwest's opinion that the case studies were irrelevant to the
issues of flight safety, we disagree. Based on the information the
women in our report provided, we believe that these women encountered
the same atmosphere of hostility and recrimination when they reported
the harassment they faced that our mechanic sources told us they faced
when they 'rocked the boat.'"
Irrelevance of sources (I a 3): "Journalistic
privilege allows us to keep confidential sources who provide us with
critical information. Sources often wish to remain confidential for
fear of reprisals, and the Council should not wonder at our sources'
desire not to be identified in this case. Once again, we point out
that Northwest mechanics made more anonymous calls than all but one
other airline to the FAA complaint hotline."
Lacked context (I b 1): "Northwest complains
that we didn't compare the Northwest consent order to that of other
airlines. We chose to focus on the airline so many of us and most
of our viewers fly on a regular basis. These stories were not a comparative
survey of the safety records of U.S. airlines, but a series of in-depth
reports on maintenance problems at Northwest. Northwest seems to imply
that providing detailed comparison is a journalistic standard. It
is not. It is an approach to a story. If the story is about violations
of procedure and why they occurred, comparison is not necessarily
called for.
"Northwest repeatedly refers to reports by other
news organizations on the FAA fines. The two most prominent of those
stories appeared contemporaneous with the WCCO reports. WCCO finds
them lacking in investigative merit. Both stories did report the fines
levied; however, neither newspaper reporter chose to ask why the violations
occurred.
Lacked context (I b 2): "We talked extensively
to the FAA. Officials at the FAA refused to go on camera, and routinely
do. We also talked extensively to aviation experts."
Factual errors (I e 1): This is nothing more than
subjective criticism. We did reveal new information to our viewing
public.
Factual errors (I e 2) and (3): The following information
about safety incidents was received by WCCO from the FAA:
- Northwest installed passenger video systems on
42 jets with defective wiring, creating direct contact and chafing
with oxygen masks and direct contact with pilot/static aircraft
instrument lines that indicate speed and altitude. The FAA letter
stated, "NWA's accomplishment of check visit reinspection did
not occur without constant FAA surveillance and prodding."
- An NWA takeoff was aborted because of engine trouble,
after which it was discovered that the engine had been missing three
bolts for two months and had flown 291 flights in what the FAA called
an "unairworthy condition."
- NWA had repeated problems with oxygen masks on
22 Boeing 747s between May 1993 and October 1993, making them unairworthy,
according to the FAA.
- NWA repeatedly failed to properly repair directional
and radio equipment on a jet that flew in an unairworthy condition
on 33 flights for 18 days. On the 18th day, while flying through
bad weather, the pilots warned that they were "down to a basic
gyro and mag compass."
- An engine caught fire and nearly fell off while
landing at Narita Airport in Japan because parts to hold the engine
on the plane had been left off during a maintenance check in Minneapolis
10 days earlier. The plane had flown 14 flights in this condition.
Factual errors (I a 4) and (I e 4): "We clearly
identified Digatono as a welder several times in the stories. As a
matter of semantics we referred to him as a mechanic several times
as well. We talked to many Northwest employees who confirmed that
the term mechanic is often used in a generic sense. Regarding the
issue of how the FAA responded to Digatono's complaint, it confirms
that Digatono's concerns were warranted. Further, NWA official John
Kern did admit on camera that much of what Digatono complained about
to the FAA, indeed, was a problem."
Factual errors (I e 5): "We said in our script,
'Hochhalter says she was afraid at first to complain and when she
did, it was to the company's top personnel officer.' Hochhalter indicated
Ms. Lewis was the top officer. Clearly she was the highest ranking
authority to deal with the sources in our story."
Factual errors (I e 6): "WCCO did not say Northwest
Airlines carries 90 percent of the traveling public. Don Shelby said
'... because 90 percent of the time, we fly Northwest Airlines,' a
colloquial expression that refers to the fact that most of us use
Northwest more than any other (airline)."
Discussion
Public member Tom Keller asked about the relevance of the Narita incident
or of the harassment lawsuits and murder case. If it was present safety
concerns, why not present a graphic report comparing them with other
airlines?
Shelby said that the Narita incident happened during
the time period covered by the FAA reports and that few people knew
why it had happened, that it was the result of servicing by an untrained
crew normally assigned to the interior. He said the harassment stories
were relevant because when mechanics spoke up about safety concerns
they were often criticized; the stories of the women represented that
same kind of hostile and recriminatory environment. Shelby said that
one of the women became so depressed about the harassment that she
said she felt as though her situation resembled that of the murder
victim, but WCCO never said the airline was involved in the murder.
Austin said that was not how WCCO presented the Taraskiewicz
murder. "WCCO said, 'It reminded us...' and then cut to the murder
scene." Austin asked why, if they were talking about mechanics
being subjected to recrimination, they didn't talk to mechanics. He
complained about lack of context.
Shelby said WCCO provided context by starting every
broadcast saying NWA was a safe airline, but.... He said it was his
(Shelby's) decision not to compare airlines because most Minnesotans
don't use other airlines and also because there are many ways to report
safety, some that would show NWA as the best, some as the worst, and
there is no way to make a direct comparison of fines. Austin said
that WCCO didn't explain that diligent airlines, which report all
incidents, show up worse on FAA reports than airlines that are lax
about reporting.
Media member Jim Pumarlo asked about how long the
reporting took. Culliton said WCCO began collecting records a year
ago, and gave NWA a week and a half to respond, which he said was
extremely generous in television news. Clouser said 16 hours to respond
before the promos aired and four working days to respond to a year's
work on the part of the station was inadequate.
Public member Carol Pine asked why, given the considerable
lead time WCCO had in preparing this report, the station used only
sources with an ax to grind. Why no FAA representatives, no pilots,
no one from operations? Shelby said the FAA wouldn't speak with the
station, but told them the records spoke for themselves. He said that
information given by the witnesses wasn't used unless it could be
verified by other sources and that Digatono's accounts were verified.
He said WCCO did speak to pilots, flight attendants and mechanics
but none were willing to go on camera.
Media member Don Smith asked NWA how WCCO could have
been more fair in its reporting. Clouser said NWA had asked to have
a representative at each broadcast to make a live comment after the
story. Also, WCCO was running promos for the series before NWA had
had an opportunity to respond. Culliton said he offered after the
series to hold a town meeting, but Austin had declined. Austin said
the stories had already aired, it was too late.
Media member John Finnegan asked when WCCO received
the FAA records (NWA asserted that WCCO received the bulk of the records
only days before the series and therefore did not have adequate time
to examine and understand them). Series producer Jacquee Petchel said
the largest batch of records arrived on April 16th and 17th, but some
records arrived one year ago.
Public member Laurisa Sellers asked if the tone, the
lighting, the flashing lights on the runway, didn't convey an image
of danger. Shelby denied any such image, saying that they filmed it
because it was true, lights do flash on the runway. "They said
we were devious, shooting the hangar at night, but the mechanic (Digatono)
during the day, but we were denied entry to the hangar until the last
day." He explained that the camera couldn't shoot during the
bright daylight into a darkened interior and that was why it had to
be shot at night.
Public member Barry Cytron asked why WCCO let Digatono
speak and then waited five minutes before telling the viewers who
he was. Shelby said what Digatono said spoke for itself; further,
"we didn't have to tell you at all." Austin said that not
everything Digatono said was corroborated and that he wasn't identified
until the second broadcast, but no personal history was ever given;
at no time did WCCO report that Digatono was fired for violence on
the job.
Media member Ruth Denny asked WCCO why more disgruntled
employees were pictured than satisfied employees. Shelby said that
was not true, if you counted them you would find fewer disgruntled
employees on camera than satisfied ones. He said they included the
mechanics because they wanted to be heard.
Public member Nedra Wicks asked WCCO about its code
of ethics. Culliton said Shelby had tried to write a code but that
what they had now was more an unwritten list. Shelby said that list
begins with a story needing to be "absolutely correct."
He said fairness, accuracy and balance are the three elements that
most closely approximate objectivity for journalists. Yet even when
reaching for these standards, Shelby admitted, "We've been unable
to be fair in all situations." In this case, however, even given
the differing reports in the newspaper, the news staff all felt the
story was justified.
Determination #1:
Council members focused on concerns over lack of context and inadequacy
of sources. There was overwhelming agreement that the lack of comparisons
to other airlines was a serious omission and that the harassment issue
was irrelevant. Media member John Kostouros said linking sexual harassment
to airline safety was "dangerously close to bait and switch."
Most members felt the station hadn't supported its conclusions.
Media member Maureen Reeder said, "What we're
seeing here is in one sense the best of TV journalism and in another
sense the worst of TV journalism. It's the state of TV journalism
today. [This series] may win awards; it has all the elements. It also
has a style of reporting that's losing favor with the public. We're
asking for a kind of context that isn't possible in the type of journalism
being used on TV news today."
Determination #1: The Council upheld the complaint
that WCCO painted a distorted, untruthful picture of Northwest Airlines
and the men and women who work there.
Concurring: Barkelew, Conner, Cytron, Denny,
Finnegan, Graham, Hoben, Keller, Kostouros, LeGrand, Peterson, Pine,
Pumarlo, Reeder, Sellers, Seltzer, Shaw, Smith, Wicks
Dissenting: Thompson, Ziegenhagen
Abstaining: Anderson
Deliberation #2:
Should promotional spots for news be held to the same ethical
standards as news?
Northwest's primary complaint about the promotional
spots was the use of the shot of an airplane taken at an angle that
suggested it was going to crash. Culliton said that the shot was a
creative decision by the photographer, not meant to distort reality,
but that when Shelby was alerted to the promo by Austin he called
for that image to be immediately removed.
Sellers asked Culliton to describe the functional
breakdown at the station: who is responsible for the promotional spots?
Does the newsroom control them? Culliton said that as the general
manager, he has control of the spots but the newsroom has input, and
another department actually produces them. Culliton agreed that clearly
the promos build into the image of the news, but said they were not
news.
Media member Nancy Conner asked Shelby if he personally
felt that promos should be held to the same standards as news. Shelby
said yes, that just as a headline should be accurate, a promo should
be accurate, but it need not be complete.
Reeder said that the news and promos are intertwined,
but viewers all know they are advertising, with all the hype and tease
that involves. Public member Sandra Peterson didn't think viewers
were so discriminating and she resents the manipulation that such
advertising entails.
The Council agreed that promotional spots for the
news should be held to the same ethical standards as news.
Concurring: Barkelew, Conner, Cytron, Finnegan,
Graham, Hoben, Keller, Kostouros, Peterson, Pine, Pumarlo, Sellers,
Shaw, Smith, Wicks
Dissenting: Denny, LeGrand, Reeder, Seltzer, Thompson
Abstaining: Anderson, Ziegenhagen
Determination #3:
Did the promotional spots for the NWA series paint
a distorted, untruthful picture?
Austin said the promos had the same flaws as the series
and more, because they gave no chance for rebuttal. Public member
Ann Barkelew asked if a viewer, seeing the promo but not the full
news story, would walk away with an accurate picture. Austin said
the promos definitely portrayed NWA as unsafe. They showed the Narita
incident seven times.
Clouser complained that WCCO began promoting the series
on April 24th, two days before the station had even met with NWA officials,
before NWA had heard the questions. Shelby responded that the first
promos didn't have content and that WCCO felt confident they knew
what NWA's response would be to them because they already had NWA's
response to the FAA.
Public member Terry Thompson said that inasmuch as
the promotions may have contaminated the news environment, they were
distorted.
The Council upheld the complaint that WCCO's
promotional spots painted a distorted, untruthful picture of Northwest
airlines and the men and women who work there.
Concurring: Barkelew, Conner, Cytron, Denny,
Finnegan, Graham, Hoben, Keller, Kostouros, Peterson, Pine, Pumarlo,
Reeder, Sellers, Shaw, Smith, Thompson, Wicks
Dissenting: Ziegenhagen
Abstaining: Anderson, LeGrand, Seltzer
October 18, 1996
Read
Determination 113
Back
to Main Determination Index
Back
to News Council Main
Page
Want
to comment? Send a message
to the News Council.
