PRESS GROUP: HELPING HAND BRUISED

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP88-01315R000400290004-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 9, 2004
• Sequence Number: 4
• Publication Date: February 25, 1976
• Content Type: NSPR

Approved For Release 5IaU1Z,` G. !a84 *' 2dd($ 29064- 7 Y,i f 14e ,J
25 Fel~_ruur~r 1976 c-L-2J`c1 C.3 t~~\
.~'~+ t 2
The thor.r Controversy
-
- - - -. _ .
-
Washington Star Staff Writer
` The Reporters. Commit-
tee - for Freedom of the
Press was in the process of
launching a $2 million fund-
raising campaign. when a
,not-so-funny .thing hap-
pened on the.way -to finan-
cial security. CBS reporter:"Daniel
Schorr; possessor. of the
much-reported', ,.but- still
Z"secret'' congressional
intelligence report, -called
in with a proposal.
y:. Schorr was-looking for a
publisher to put the report
out, since- the House had
voted to ? keep it - a ' secret.
'That publisher, the reason-
"ing, went, would-..make
.money, and the profession
rather than any individu-
al newsman - ought to
2 share in it. 'Would the com-
rriittee, a private group run
1 by and. for reporters, scare
to share in the proceeds if
IT SEEMED a'-
reasona-ble idea to the members of
-,the group's executive com-
mittee, all working` Wash-
ington reporters, when they
? were, contacted after the
proposal was :received.
Schorr also was-given the
name of a lawyer he might
find helpful in his activities
involving the report.
The latter action seemed .
little more. than the main
business of'the committee,
helping reporters in trouble
'with the law because of
their pursuit of information
in their constitutionally
protected profession.
But it was more than,
business as usual, and, the I
distinction may have severe
implications for the report-
prs' group.
The controversy', that : THAT STATEMENT
arose following publication masked divisions on the,
.of.the House report.in.the ? committee over whether its
Village Voice" has made actions were appropriate,
Schorr the target of a con- and what should be done
gressional investigation; 11 now.-
'
s a difference of
"There
tee a changed institution opinidn. over 'whether we
with! serious `questions showed poor judgment,"
-being ? asked 'within' 'the.-- ' says Jack Nelson, executive
profession about its conduct ' committee ? member and
and its future.'. Los Angeles Times Wash-
Those who are running ington bureau chief. "I
the organization, however; don't think we did- I think
seem determined that it
will not be caught like this
AFTER DAYS of`ineet
ings and a "no-comment"
silence, the committee yes-
terday declared that the
publisher of the Voice, Clay
Felker,. did not- offer- any `.
money, nor would any be
accepted by the. committee
if he did. _ ' _ ; 1
i The-statement id.'the-`.;
committee agreedto accept.?
proceeds because the offer.,
met its conditions: That no
obligation to the donor, be
incurred and. that the donor
agree that his or her identi-
ty and the amount of the
gift be disclosed.
"At no-time did the com
mittee-have possession of
the Pike Committee report
or access to it,'and no one,
on the reporters committee
has ever known the identity
of Mr Schorr' source for
the document," read the
statement.
Although there- were, no
conditions attached to the
anticipated contribution,
and the only action of-the
committee 'was to put
Schorr in touch with a law-
. er, the committee said,
any offer of money would
be rejected to avoid any ap-
pearance of a quid-pro quo.
proper:" ..
'Another executive com-
mittee member, Lyle Den-
niston of The Washington
Star, says his feeling is that
"we made a serious mis-
take in taking part in the
process of getting the re-
port into print." -
Newhouse News Serv-
ice's Jack Landau, also a
member of the executive
committee, said that "most
people think that going fur-
ther than the purely defen
sive role is what caused the
problem."
"The lawyer was serving'
a dual-role and that's the
problem.-He was helping
Dan find a publisher and
giving some legal advice on
.liability-aiid- how the thing
should be done,"' Landau
said.. "The guy is familiar
with publishing, and it's the
normal thing to' do." The
lawyer was not identified.
THE COMMITTEE de-
clares flatly in its state-
ment that it had nothing to
do with the final arrange-
ments for publication.
The statement makes no
mention of any thought that
the ?cmmittee overstepped
its charter in becoming in-
volved in Schorr's project
when it did. There are indi
cations that concern for the
legal consequences, among
them possible loss of tax-
,exempt status, prompted its
Approved For Release 2005/01/12'blfsalAa-iIRDR8.$r345R800
status could doom the com-
mittee...
A desire not to add, to F
Schorr's troubles with the
government, as well as
concern for the committee's
future, has also played a
part: in shaping the com-
'-inittee's public comments.'
"It's a compromise` and I
don't call it anything else,"
,
says Denniston.'
The committee was
launched in 1970 by working
journalists. following a l
number of judicial orders i
'for reporters' testimony. It
.has never experienced
complete- .
financial' health.
Nelson says the budget has
worked up to about $0,000 a
year, but h: adds that the
:committee: "has very little
money now:" -
. THE $2 MILLION fund-
raising drive to establish an
endowment is headed by
Arthur Taylor, the presi-
dent of.' CBS, which has
promised to support
Schorr's protection of his
source, but which has also
suspended him from repor-
torial duties while he is
under government investi--
gatio.n. .
The fund raising has yet-;I
to start in earnest. "It's just
kind of dragged along,"
says Landau. We haven't.-
sent out the first. rnailet?E
yet."
Will the controversy and
criticism hurt the effort? I
Landau doesn't-think so- r
Others aren't so optimistic..`
00290004-6 -