Palm Beach Post

Uphold right to tell truth

Click to download PDF (5.5MB)

Florida Supreme Court should have easy call

The Florida Supreme Court soon will determine whether a newspaper can be punished for printing the truth. It’s easy to see where we come down on this one, but the public also should be on the side of The Pensacola News-Journal.

In December 1998, the paper published an article examining whether Anderson Columbia Inc., continued to get state paving contracts worth more than $300 million — despite what the News-Journal showed to be poor work — because of political connections. In the article, the News-Journal reported that Anderson Columbia CEO Joe Anderson had shot and killed his wife in 1988 while on probation for mail fraud, a conviction that later was reversed. The article also noted that the shooting had been an accident.

Mr. Anderson claimed that the article had cost him a $50 million contract. He sued for libel, but the two-year statute of limitations had expired. He then filed a “false light” lawsuit. Mention of an accident had not come immediately after the information about the shooting; there was one sentence in between. Therefore, he argued, the article had implied that he murdered his wife, casting him in a “false light.”

In December 2003, a jury awarded Mr. Anderson $18.28 million. He received nothing for “mental anguish” and got no punitive damages. The newspaper appealed, and in October 2006, the 1st District Court of Appeal in Tallahassee threw out the award. Mr. Anderson appealed to the state Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments this month.

As lawyers for the News-Journal and media organizations have argued, Mr. Anderson’s actions in court undercut his claim. To have won a libel suit, he would have had to show that the paper knowingly published false information. But he withdrew the libel suit in favor of a “false light” action, in effect acknowledging the accuracy of what the paper reported.

The appellate judges concluded that Mr. Anderson filed the second lawsuit only because he didn’t file the first one in time, and the trial judge tossed it. The judges doubted the validity of a “false light” claim, generally and in this case. If the justices uphold the appeals court, they will say that newspapers don’t have to worry about printing the truth. That will be good for the News-Journal, and better for Florida.

Pass federal shield law

Judge trying to bankrupt a former reporter.

A federal judge’s threat to bankrupt a former USA Today reporter is a wrongheaded attack on the free press and shows again why Congress needs to pass a federal shield law to protect reporters whose only “offense” is doing their jobs.

In 2001, anthrax attacks killed five people — including Robert Stevens, photo editor at The Sun tabloid in Boca Raton — and sickened 17 others. In 2002, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft said Steven Hatfill, a government infectious-diseases scientist, was “a person of interest” in the anthrax attacks.

Toni Locy, now a journalism professor, used named and unnamed sources for articles that tried to pin down why the government was interested in Dr. Hatfill and what other leads, if any, the FBI was pursuing. She reported that the government had little to go on, and that Mr. Ashcroft did not follow Justice Department guidelines in naming Dr. Hatfill a “person of interest.”

Dr. Hatfill protested his innocence, never was charged, and filed suit against the government. As part of that lawsuit, he wants to force Ms. Locy to reveal her sources. Because she no longer remembers which sources provided specific pieces of information, U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton ruled that she must list all her regular sources.

Until Ms. Locy complies, he ruled, she must pay fines beginning at $500 a day and quickly increasing to $5,000 a day. Further, she must pay out of her own pocket. An appeals court has stayed that ruling temporarily. It would be one thing if Ms. Locy had information about who committed the murders. The information sought — a list of people who might have leaked suspicions about Dr. Hatfill — has no national security value.

Allowing reporters to do their jobs, which in this case meant reporting that the FBI was at sea, does have national security value. If the press isn’t free to report on abuses and incompetence, abuses and incompetence will occur even more often than they do now. Most states have shield laws. Ms. Locy’s persecution shows why reporters also need federal protection.

Reproduced courtesy of the Palm Beach Post.
Back to top | Return to fsne.org