Determination
60
Minnesota
News Council
In the Matter of the Complaint of
John Meiners against the Delano Eagle
Background: John Meiners, who had been appointed
a member of the Delano City Council, ran for election to that position
in the November 6, 1984, city election. Eight days before the election,
on October 29, the local newspaper, the Delano Eagle, had this political
advertisement:
DELANO VOTERS
Be aware of your vote in the upcoming city elections.
Be aware that John Meiners was the only present Council member who
consistently voted no on almost every official vote before him to
allow the new bowling alley project to be built in Delano. Delano
needs progress - not blind negativism. Elect someone who cares about
Delano's future. John's vote is public record. . .
CHECK IT!
At the bottom of the ad was stated "Paid for exclusively
by Clyde K. Waddell, Rt. 2, Box 146, Delano, MN."
In its next issue, Monday, November 5, 1984, the
Delano Eagle contained a much larger advertisement, again inserted
and paid for by Clyde K. Waddell, stating, "The statements I made
in last week's Eagle are false and untrue," and continuing on with
a retraction and an apology to Meiners. The wording of this retraction
was to Meiners' satisfaction, and, indeed, the wording was in large
part his own. In fact, from the evidence presented to the council,
Meiners had not consistently voted no on the bowling alley project
and, in fact, had supported the project with his votes.
Meiners contends that the newspaper was at fault
in accepting and publishing the October 29 advertisement, and that
the newspaper should also have publicly acknowledged its fault and
apologized. Waddell, who submitted the false ad of October 29, was
one of the owners of the bowling alley project. He was not himself
a candidate for the city council, nor was he supporting any of the
other candidates. Apparently, he placed the ad for his own reasons.
Meiners, the grievant, claims that the Delano Eagle should have known
that the ad about his voting record was incorrect because the newspaper's
reporter covered all council meetings and published the council minutes.
In any event, he claims that the newspaper should have verified the
facts of his voting record, or at least have called him about it.
Meiners points out that Waddell's retraction in the
November 5 issue came too late. The newspaper publishes on Monday.
The election was the following day. Meiners believes that the false
ad had an adverse effect on his campaign. He lost the election by
a vote that was so close it required a recount.
Response of the News Organization: The Delano
Eagle points out that Waddell was a reputable local businessman and
they did not suspect his ad was in error. The paper felt that to refuse
the ad would suggest censorship. An Eagle employee, Bob Germaine,
who had covered the city council during much of the period when the
bowling alley was under discussion, had showed the ad to Mr. and Mrs.
Larson. Germaine assured the Larsons that the statement on Meiners'
votes was accurate. Germaine also had asked Waddell if his information
was accurate and Waddell said he had "checked it out." Mr. and Mrs.
Larson had acquired the Delano Eagle only that previous spring, did
not live in Delano, and were not closely acquainted with local issues.
The newspaper also felt that Waddell's retraction
was a sufficient apology for what had occurred, and that there was
no need for it to add a further apology. The newspaper had cooperated
with Meiners in assuring that the retraction was published in a prominent
manner. The newspaper advised Meiners if he sought further redress
to bring his grievance to the News Council.
Determination of the News Council: Paid political
advertising, especially in small town newspapers which provide virtually
the only conduit of information to the voters, can be a troublesome
issue. Such ads affect reputations and, especially if timed for immediately
before election, when there is little time for effective rebuttal,
can affect the election results.
An advertiser, of course, is responsible for the
contents of his ad. We also believe, however, that newspapers should
make it their business to hold political advertisers to a standard
of factual accuracy as high as that to which editors hold their own
reporters. In this instance, the News Council believes that appropriate
newspaper practice required that the newspaper check further about
the candidate's voting record before accepting the ad for publication.
We say this for two reasons: First, the ad raised a new, substantial
issue in the election campaign. This is recognized by Mrs. Larson,
who testified that if the ad had been submitted for publication in
the last issue before the election, it would not, under the established
policy of the paper, have been accepted because it raised a new issue.
Second, the ad should have raised suspicion because it was submitted
by someone having a direct, personal business interest in the subject
matter of the ad, namely, the bowling alley. These two circumstances
should have alerted the newspaper to have made some further inquiry
on the somewhat ambiguous factual statement in the ad that Meiners
"was the only present Council member who consistently voted no on
almost every official vote. . . ."
Frequently, where political controversy is created
by ads, newspapers will publish a news story about the controversy,
often on the same page as the ad. Here, if the ad had been factually
accurate, a news story would likely have pointed out that Waddell
was a developer of the bowling alley and had a personal stake in the
council's action. In this case, the ad was false, there was no identification
of Waddell's interest in the matter, and Waddell's subsequent retraction,
published only the day before the election, may have been too late
to undo the harm done.
The grievance on the October 29 false ad is sustained.
Additional Item: Meiners also complains that
the Delano Eagle failed to publish two of his own ads prior to October
29. The News Council finds that the newspaper's failure to publish
these ads was inadvertent, resulting from communications problems,
and not from any attempt by the Delano Eagle to suppress Meiners'
views.
Concurring: Bednar, Brooks, Gilson, Higgins,
King, Peek, Simonett, Sundin, Warder and Ziegenhagen Dissent:
Falkman, Selby - The hectic pace before an election creates an avalanche
of information that must be put together at the last minute by a small
weekly newspaper staff. It's difficult to check everything out completely.
I'm not suggesting that small newspapers should have
a different standard of ethics, but only that I feel the Larsons acted
in good faith when they carried the first political ad about Meiners'
voting record. It's easy to see, after the fact, that the situation
could have been handled in a better way. But, at the time, they believed
they had the facts . . . that they had adequately "checked out" the
truth of the ad by questioning the persons who placed the ad, a man
well-respected in the community, "an impeccable resident," who said
he had checked out the record.
My recommendation to the newspaper, after the first
ad appeared, would have been to publicly apologize in a news story
(explaining how the mistake occurred) after it had printed an ad which
probably harmed Meiners' reputation in the community, and perhaps
even cost him the election.
Dissenting Opinion: Persons, joined by Selby
- As a long-time small market radio station owner/manager I understood
so well the Meiners-Delano Eagle conflict. In a small market there
are always too few people having to do too many things and mistakes
do happen but they are honest mistakes and are in no way malicious.
In listening to Mrs. Larson's testimony I could detect no malice,
only honest mistakes. In fact, I understood her testimony so well
that if she had substituted the word "radio" for "newspaper" she would
have been telling the story of my life. The Council, however, in its
decision, felt that Mrs. Larson should be running a perfect newspaper
which is impossible in a small market, no matter how hard everyone
tries, and we do try. Let us remember we have to live in the real
world.
June 14, 1985
Read
Determination 61
Back
to Main Determination Index
Want
to comment? Send a message
to the News Council.
