Bill Richards' Most Unusual Assignment

By: Rebecca Cook, Associated Press Writer (AP) The Seattle Times has gone to unusual lengths to give its readers unbiased coverage of its business dispute with the city's other daily, hiring a freelancer with a three-year contract and extraordinary power to get his stories into the paper.

The really unusual part of Bill Richards' contract is that if he and the Times ever disagree -- if, for example, the Times tries to kill one of his stories -- he can appeal to an outside mediator. So far, Richards has yet to appeal any decisions.

In the nine months since he was hired, Richards has written around 35 stories on the Times' dispute with the rival Seattle Post-Intelligencer, some of them sharply questioning Times executives' versions of events. Most have run on the front page or the front of the business section.

Times executives have criticized some of Richards' reporting, grumbling, for example, about his unflattering interpretation of their financial documents. But Richards said he has not heard any direct complaints or felt any pressure.

"It's pretty courageous," said Richards, 62, a reporter with more than 30 years' experience at The Washington Post, Newsday of Melville, N.Y., and The Wall Street Journal. "Most papers would have a hard time doing what the Times is doing."

If Times managers have second thoughts about giving an experienced reporter freedom to expose the paper's legal and financial woes on its own front page, they are not saying.

"I think we deserve some credit for it," Times Managing Editor David Boardman said of the arrangement. "The fact that the management and ownership were willing to take this extraordinary step speaks volumes about the kind of newspaper and the kind of ownership this is."

The Times and the P-I are fighting over their joint operating agreement, created in 1983 in the hopes of keeping two newspapers in Seattle. The Times handles advertising, circulation, and other business for both papers and receives 60% of the combined profits.

Now, the family-owned Times wants to end the agreement, arguing it is draining the paper's resources. The Hearst Corp., which owns the P-I, has sued to preserve the deal. On Thursday, a judge is scheduled to rule on the dispute.

Among other things, Richards has revealed the existence of a 1985 memo that showed Times executives plotting to kill the P-I, despite their public declarations to the contrary. Another story questioned whether the Times really was in dire financial straits; Richards reported that a different accounting method would have shown the paper to be profitable.

If a dispute arises, the mediator will be Jim Naughton, a former Philadelphia Inquirer executive editor and journalism educator. If Naughton sides with Richards, the Times must print the story or release him from his contract, while still covering three years of pay.

"What the Times is doing makes a lot of sense from an ethical standpoint," said Jeff Seglin, a business ethics columnist for The New York Times who teaches ethics at Emerson College. When a media organization reports on itself, he said, "it's impossible to not have a conflict. You're asking them to do something very difficult."

Editors at the P-I considered hiring an outside freelancer to cover the JOA story, but instead assigned two business reporters.

"We felt it would be a slap in the face to reporters we ask to do difficult things all the time," P-I Business Editor Don Smith said. "It's just another one of those assignments where you're asked to lay aside your personal feelings."

While he relishes his journalistic independence, Richards unabashedly hopes both the P-I and the Times survive this legal battle, unlikely as that may be.

"There are a lot of people whose voices wouldn't be heard if only one paper is published, even if it's a very good paper," Richards said. "I hate to see a newspaper shut down."