Determination
13
Minnesota
News Council
In the Matter of the Complaint of
Mel Hansen against the Minneapolis Tribune
Senator Mel Hansen complained that the newspaper treated
him unfairly when it edited and deleted portions of his letter to
the editor without discussing the changes with him before publication.
The letter had been solicited by the paper as a means of satisfying
a complaint Hansen had over a previous story.
Background: A story in the newspaper erroneously
stated that a committee calling itself "Invest in Minnesota"
was an effort of the state GOP Central Committee to raise money for
the Republican Party. Hansen, co-chairman of Invest in Minnesota,
discussed the inaccuracies of the story with the paper's reader's
representative, who agreed the newspaper would print a correction
and a clarifying letter to the editor from Hansen.
A brief correction was printed. Hansen's letter then
appeared in the letters column with its last two paragraphs deleted.
Hansen said the newspaper's spokesman had assured him the letter would
be printed in its entirety if kept to one page in length. The brief
correction and the shortened letter were inadequate correction of
the original inaccuracy, Hansen said. The paper's spokesman said he
gave no assurance the letter would appear unedited. He further claimed
Hansen had told him the last two paragraphs of the letter could be
cut if space limitations required it.
Response of the News Organization: The newspaper's
managing editor said that no promise can ever be made in advance that
a letter will be published in full, and that all letters are subject
to editing and trimming. The paper admitted, however, that solicited
letters require special handling and that Hansen should have been
consulted before the deletion was made.
Determination of the Council: The dispute arose
because of a misunderstanding between two parties. Although the paper
did not make its letters policy clear to Hansen, it acted fairly in
its efforts to correct its errors. While Senator Hansen felt it was
improper for the paper to edit his letter in the absence of an agreement
with him, the paper does have the right-and it is so expressed in
its letters policy. Newspapers should make clear to the public their
policies on letters to the editor. Periodic reiteration of such policies
in print is the best means of clarifying them to readers. The complaint
against the newspaper is not accepted.
October 10, 1974
Tribune Policy
As a result of the dispute, the Minneapolis Tribune
adopted a new procedure for handling letters solicited by the newspaper
from aggrieved sources to ensure that writers of such letters will
be fully aware of the newspaper's letters policy and will be informed
that editing and trimming may be required. Wallace Allen, Tribune
managing editor, told this to the News Council on November 7, 1974:
The reader's representative, acting on behalf of the
editor of the Tribune, will work out the form of such a letter in
consultation with the managing editor and editor.
The reader's representative should make sure in his
negotiations with an aggrieved party that any understanding about
possible trims in a letter is recorded in writing-preferably signed
by the complaining party.
The reader's representative must make sure that the
letter is published as finally submitted. In other words, such letters,
when delivered to the editorial page editor by either the managing
editor or reader's representative, will be published without further
editing.
If any problem arises in the editorial department
over a possible trim, no trim should be made until and unless it is
approved by the editor, managing editor or reader's representative.
Read
Determination 14
Back
to Main Determination Index
Want
to comment? Send a message
to the News Council.
