Olympic-size lawsuit

By: David Noack Olympic-size lawsuit
Snafu has The New York Times on a slippery slope


The New York Times has asked a federal judge to dismiss a defamation lawsuit filed by a former Utah state lawmaker over a photograph the paper published linking him to the scandal-plagued bid by Salt Lake City to be chosen as the site for the 2002 Olympic Winter Games.
In a case of mistaken identity, the Times thought it was publishing a photograph of Craig Peterson, a former Olympic-bid organizing committee financial officer who was cited in an ethics report on the circumstances surrounding Salt Lake City's attempt to win the right to host the sports event.
Instead, the Times ran a picture, provided by The Associated Press, of former Utah State Senate Majority Leader Craig Peterson, who was not connected with the Olympics or ethics probe. He now runs a lobbying and engineering-consulting business.
An AP spokeswoman says it would be "inappropriate" to comment on the litigation.
Roger Hoole, Peterson's lawyer, recently asked the U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City to dismiss an earlier motion made by the Times to toss the case out. The original lawsuit was filed in April.
The Times filed its dismissal motion in June, defending its action by using what is called the "wire-service defense." The paper argues that it's not responsible for the mistake that was made by the AP in providing the wrong photograph. The case is being heard before Judge Dale Kimball, who may rule next month on whether or not to dismiss Peterson's lawsuit.
"The problem with this lawsuit against the Times is that the Times was in no way responsible for this error. It was an entirely innocent conduit in the publication of the photograph," says the Times' legal filing.
The complaint against the Times does not contend "actual malice" on the part of the paper, but alleges the paper "acted negligently in publishing the false statements about Craig A. Peterson."
The photograph was published Feb. 10 of this year, along with an article headlined, "Excerpts: Questionable Relationships and Unexplained Payments," which was made up of verbatim extracts from a report issued the previous day by an internal ethics committee of the Salt Lake City Olympic Organizing Committee.
The unbylined story ran on Page C24 in the sports section with three accompanying photographs, including the one of Peterson. In the caption, it reads, "Craig Peterson, left, of the Salt Lake City committee, refused questioning." Peterson is pictured standing in the rotunda of the Utah State Capitol Building.
George Freeman, assistant general counsel for the Times, doesn't dispute the fact that the wrong photograph ran with the story, but says it was not the newspaper's fault. When the mistake was brought to their attention, he says, both the Times and AP made corrections.
"We don't have photographers in Salt Lake City. We don't have reporters in Salt Lake City, so the very purpose of the 'wire-service defense' is that we can rely on local folks out there through AP without having to check all the facts ourselves," says Freeman.
While there is no specific state or federal statute spelling out the "wire-service defense," it's been established over the years in case law.
In addition to the "wire-service defense," Freeman is also basing his case on the facts that there was no malice involved and that no allegations against Peterson were made.
"We are very optimistic that, under these facts, [the motion to dismiss] should be granted," says Freeman.
Hoole says Peterson had no connection to the scandal and wants his name cleared. While no monetary damages are mentioned in the legal documents, the issue can be raised if there is a trial. Hoole also says that the AP could be sued at a later date.
"He [Peterson] wants to correct this problem so that it can become apparent to as many people as possible," says Hoole. He says that while the "wire-service defense" sounds good, the "facts don't support" it.
"It doesn't make sense in this case because they were not just republishing a story from the AP. They took parts of information. They took two components and combined them in a way that defamed my client," says Hoole.
"My client, who consults nationwide, has been greatly injured by this thing. ? He wonders how many people out there, in his personal and professional life, ? saw the article and concluded ? what anyone would conclude the way it is presented ? that he's the Craig Peterson [involved], and it makes him sick," says Hoole.

(Editor & Publisher WebSite:http:www.mediainfo.com) [Caption]
(copyright: Editor & Publisher August 14, 1999) [Caption]