Determination
66
Minnesota
News Council
In the Matter of the Complaint of
George
Grant against the Minneapolis Star and Tribune
Present at the hearing were George Grant, the complainant;
Tim McGuire, managing editor of the Minneapolis Star and Tribune, and
Lou Gelfand, readers' representative for the newspaper.
On May 12, 1986, the Minneapolis Star and Tribune
published an article about a new county land-bidding policy which
repealed the city's right to bid competitively on tax-forfeited, blighted
properties. A city councilman was quoted as displeased with George
Grant, the complainant, who had outbid the city on a house the city
had wanted to purchase. The article portrayed Grant as a landlord
troublesome to the city.
Thereafter, when the newspaper's reporter contacted
Grant for his side of the story, Grant gave an interview which resulted
in an article published May 20, 1986, with the headline, "Ex-legislator
spurned politics, farming to become controversial city landlord."
Grant claims this article is unfair, biased, and fails to tell his
story.
Background and Discussion: The article reports
that complainant was a five-term state legislator from rural Minnesota,
but now, 15 years later, has a new life as a rental property owner
in south Minneapolis. The article mentions that the city had brought
condemnation proceedings against six of Grant's buildings and that
the list of building code violations was long. Grant admits to a long
list of complaints against his rental properties but says his troubles
with the city housing inspectors are the result of complaints from
neighbors who object to his tenants, many of whom are American Indians
and Hmong He says he improves his properties, that his tenants are
pleased with him as a landlord, and that complaints against him are
racially motivated.
Two of Grant's disputes with city officials were
noted in the article. Two neighbors were quoted as dissatisfied with
the manner in which Grant maintained his properties. Much of the article,
however, was devoted to Grant's previous legislative career and his
current lifestyle.
Among other things, the article described Grant at
the interview as unkept, dirty, and dressed in a tattered shirt, and
driving a 1969 Rambler. Complainant points out that the article failed
to report that at the time he was tearing old floorboards out of the
attic of one of his buildings, and understandably his untidy appearance
reflected the work he was doing. Complainant felt, too, the reference
to the age of his car was unnecessary. It seems to the Council it
would have been more appropriate for the article to have explained
the circumstances under which complainant's appearance was observed.
The article mentioned that Grant talked about a kind
of spiritual relationship with animals and quoted Grant as saying,
among other things, that "I live like an animal." As Grant explained
at the hearing, his philosophy was to live in harmony with nature
and nature's creatures. The Council believes the article's description
of complainant's philosophy was not inconsistent with Grant's explanation.
Complainant charges that the article, in effect,
portrays him as a slum landlord. Grant says this is untrue and unfair.
He states he provides low-cost housing for poor people and that the
tenants are satisfied with his housing. At one point in the article,
it is stated: "Olson said he is now trying to form a partnership with
at least 10 other homeowners in the neighborhood to buy dilapidated
housing before Grant and other undesirable landlords buy it." The
newspaper points out the reference to ̉undesirable landlords" is attributed
to Olson and is not editorializing on the part of the newspaper. Grant
contends that more of his side of the housing story should have been
given, but the article does quote one of Grant's tenants who said
Grant was a good landlord who fixes things when they need fixing.
A city housing inspector is also quoted as saying that Grant "honestly
believes he's helping these people out there."
Complainant maintains that an independent inspection
of his properties would establish that his buildings are not substandard.
It was not incumbent, however, on the newspaper to participate in
an independent investigation off the properties, regardless of who
would pay for the study - and Grant did offer. The newspaper article
was not a project in investigative reporting. It was simply reporting
on a controversy that was in the news.
The newspaper article was really a profile piece
on complainant, who had become newsworthy because of his former public
service in the legislature and his now quite different lifestyle.
Complainant was described at one point in the article as an "enigma"
and another time as an "anomaly" to those who know him.
We might add that the headline which says Grant has
spurned politics is inaccurate, except as "spurned politics" could
be taken to mean "spurned elected office." As Grant explained at the
hearing, while he no longer seeks political office, he still maintains
an active interest in politics.
Decision: The article portrays complainant,
as the headline states, as a "controversial landlord," and contains
quotes from many persons, from former legislative colleagues to city
officials and neighbors, to tenants, but the newspaper article does
not editorialize. Complainant is depicted as a person who, following
Thoreau's dictum, marches to his own drummer. We think the article,
taken as a whole, is reasonably fair and balanced. The grievance is
denied.
Concurring: Ashmore, Beaulieu, Bednar, Chucker,
Dornfeld, Falkman, Larson, Mundale, Ryan, Simonett, Stone, Sundin,
Swain, Tanick, Warder
Special concurrence: Ashmore - Grant's situation
merits continued monitoring by the Star and Tribune news staff. Some
effort should be made to determine the veracity of his charge that
city officials are using the inspections department to displace Indian
tenants. Simply asking one of the inspectors, as the newspaper said
the Star and Tribune did, would not reveal this kind of information.
Special concurrence: Dornfeld - The Minneapolis
Star and Tribune article on George Grant clearly was intended to be
a profile on a colorful public figure, rather than an in-depth investigation
of city housing inspection problems.
Nonetheless, since questions were raised about Grant's
track record as a landlord, he should have been given the opportunity
to present his side of the story - that his troubles with the housing
inspectors are the result of complaints from neighbors who object
to his tenants, many of whom are American Indians.
March 27, 1987
Read
Determination 67
Back
to Main Determination Index
Want
to comment? Send a message
to the News Council.
