SHARON/PUBLIC INTEREST

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP88-01070R000301560005-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 6, 2010
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: January 25, 1985
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Approved For Release 2010/01/06: CIA-RDP88-01070R000301560005-0
RADIO TV REPORTS, INC.
4701 WILLARD AVENUE, CHEVY CHASE, MARYLAND 20815 [phone]
PROGRAM ABC News Special Report STATION WMAL Radio
ABC Network
DATE January 25, 1985 10:33 P.M. CITY Washington, D.C.
Sharon/Public Interest
PETER JENNINGS: General Sharon feels vindicated. Time
magazine says it won. And how did the public interest fare in
the Sharon libel case?
After prolonged deliberations, the jury in the Sharon
libel suit against Time magazine returned, you might say, a split
decision. The jury agreed that Time magazine acted negligently
and carelessly in its allegations abaout General Sharon's reputed
role in the massacre of Palestinian civilians. It agreed that
the Time story was false and that the General had been defamed,
his reputation damaged by the story.
Had General Sharon been a private citizen and not a
public figure, that would have been enough to prove that he had
been libeled. But the libel laws require a third critical test
for public figures: Did Time knowingly print the false report?
That is to say, was it printed maliciously and deliberately,
knowing it was wrong. On that point, the jury said no. And so
there was no libel, and General Sharon will not collect that
requested $50 million in damages.
Both sides are claiming to be satisfied with the
verdict. General Sharon is happy with the finding that the
article about him was false. He feels vindicated. Time magazine
says it is pleased with the verdict. The bottom line, say Time
officials, is that, quoting them, "We won." Time, although it
concedes it made what it called a minor mistake, still insists
the story was essentially correct.
And so we come to the larger question, the one of public
interest. Any reporter in broadcast or print journalism knows,
or ought to know, the amount of public distrust that exists about
OFFICES IN: WASHINGTON D.C. ? NEW YORK ? LOS ANGELES ? CHICAGO ? DETROIT ? AND OTHER PRINCIPAL CITIES
Materiaisuppiiec' Approved-For Release 2010/01/06: CIA-RDP88-01070R000301560005-0 yorexhibited.
 Approved For Release 2010/01/06: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000301560005-0
the way we report the news. Despite court findings in case
after case that no libel existed, a lot of people don't believe
we're telling the truth.
Time really ought to rethink its victory. When we are
wrong, we should say we are wrong and apologize. Freedom of the
press implies a responsibility at least to do that much.
Approved For Release 2010/01/06: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000301560005-0