TU'S VALENTINE: Daily newspaper gives up pretense of objectivity

Over the past year, the Albany Times Union has covered the clergy abuse scandal through scores of articles. That is only right: Child abuse by anyone is a horror; when it is carried out by a priest, it is a breach of sacred trust that is especially terrible. How Church authorities handled the scandal is a proper subject for media attention.

But that attention must be fair and objective. The problem with the Times Union's articles is that they have become more and more biased. In previous editorials, we have warned readers to approach the TU's coverage with skepticism because it is so skewed. It is time to re-issue that warning.

At the heart of the bias is the newspaper's far too cozy relationship with John Aretakis, an attorney who has filed four lawsuits against the Albany Diocese. The suits do not seek damages for the abuse, which occurred 20 to 30 years ago; they seek payments for allegations of very ephemeral, if not imaginary, "damages," such as the Diocese's offering counseling to victims but in the wrong building.

For several months, whenever Mr. Aretakis has yelled, "Print what I say," the TU seems to have asked nothing more challenging than "What page do you want it on?" He is the apparent source for most of the newspaper's articles; it is his slant on the news that is presented without question. The coverage is so one-sided that the newspaper has only grudgingly, if at all, reported in-depth on the Diocese's side -- for example, on the thousands of people trained by the Diocese in the past few months to prevent abuse.

In its May 18 issue, the Times Union abandoned any final pretense of journalistic objectivity when it printed what amounted to the sainthood case for Mr. Aretakis. In the 1,500-word valentine, titled "Fighting the Catholic Church: Lawyer John Aretakis gives voice to those who claim they've been abused," the TU portrayed him as a superman who does it all: He runs in the New York City marathon...he fields calls from the media...he hobnobs with Saratoga's movers and shakers...he not only represents his clients but also offers them psychological counseling ("I became a therapist," the self-anointed psychologist declared).

What makes the article such an egregious example of bias are not only the roses the TU strews in the path of Mr. Aretakis but also how hard it strains to sift out anything negative about him:

1. There is no mention of Mr. Aretakis' own acknowledgement in court papers that he is being investigated for ethics violations. Imagine a profile of a physician that didn't mention malpractice charges pending against him. What is the TU trying to conceal and why?

2. While the article refers to "an early victory" when a judge voluntarily removed himself from three of the cases against the Diocese, it fails to report that so far Mr. Aretakis has lost every motion decided by a judge in these cases. Why didn't the TU mention those reversals?

3. We wonder why the TU didn't at least inquire into the propriety of Mr. Aretakis' court filings getting into the hands of the media before they reach the court itself, much less the diocesan attorneys and personnel who are expected to respond. A local TV reporter said last week that Mr. Aretakis has asked newspeople to sit on court documents until late in the day to deny the Diocese time to prepare an adequate response. Why didn't the TU ask their subject, "Are you trying to manipulate the trial through the media?"

Of course, skeptical readers know why the TU didn't mention ethics probes, list court losses or bring up media manipulation; those facts wouldn't flatter the source the newspaper relies on for its contents.

The current scandal that afflicts The New York Times involves a reporter who fabricated or plagiarized his articles and the editors who refused to recognize his frauds. Writing in the issue that contained the Aretakis puff piece, Harry Rosenfeld, editor-at-large of the Times Union, declared that The New York Times' inadequate explanation for its failures "does not serve its many readers."

We would use precisely the same language about the TU's shortcomings in covering the trials: The Times Union fails to serve its readers when it declines to be objective about the lawsuits and instead opts to be Mr. Aretakis' public relations tool.

(5/22/03) [[In-content Ad]]