These days, one has trouble opening a newspaper or cable news channel without having to adjust for bias in one political direction or the other. So I found it strange to read Suit Challenges Right to Report Political Slurs and keep a straight face. Plus, I was once, for a very short time, a 20-something local paper reporter covering similar municipal meetings.
The linked article concerns a libel case that has reached the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and only eight years after the initiating event too. One night in 1995, at a meeting of a dinky little town council, one councilman stood up and “called the council president and the mayor ‘liars,’ ‘criminals,’ ‘draft dodgers’ and ‘child molesters’.” Silly local politics, with no truth to the accusations, but the cub reporter was there and used the outburst as the lead in the next day’s article.
The indiscreet councilman has already lost the libel suit filed against him, and lost the next election too when his voters realized his, er, suitability for office. But based on the instructions given by the judge, the same jury found that the newspaper was not guilty of anything because the article accurately detailed the event and did not add any judgement. The slurred politicians were not satisfied, of course, and appealed, getting the appellate court to overturn the verdict based on the ‘incorrect’ instruction given by the judge.
So the question up to the PA Supremes is whether a newspaper has the responsibility and is required to ascertain the truth of potentially libelous statements before printing them, rather than simply being required to accurately quote public figures. I find this kind of sad, that in 2003 reporters and newspapers still have to defend themselves from stupid politicians; in my view, the people have an absolute right in America to know all the details of their government, at all levels, and this was an event that took place at a public meeting! Heck, in some states I think the concept of the shield law is still not firmly established. Independent or not, judges are still a part of the political machinery and so I shouldn’t be surprised by this. Saddened, though. Let’s just hope that the correct decision is handed down.
[via garret]
BillSaysThis 