Local Media in Poland - Corrections

1. Newsrooms Stand Firm

Journalists dislike admitting mistakes. Regulations regarding corrections are perhaps the most frequently violated rule in Polish media. "Sending corrections is so ineffective that public relations specialists devise various ways to force newspapers to rectify errors" [1], says Katarzyna Kowalewska, a journalist for the industry monthly "Press." A clear division can be made among newsrooms between those that never admit to errors and those that can honestly acknowledge their mistakes. The vast majority of local press belongs to the former group. A common practice is to place corrections in the "Letters to the Editor" section or to publish them in places that most readers do not reach—such as cramming corrections among advertisements. In some newsrooms, the term "correction" is never used; it is replaced, for example, with the word "clarification" or the label "echo of publication."

Companies and institutions that advertise in the publication are more likely to see their corrections printed. "The fear of losing a valuable advertiser significantly speeds up the publication of their position," argues Katarzyna Kowalewska from "Press." However, most public relations specialists do not believe in the effectiveness of corrections. Moreover, their publication usually does not rectify the damage done. Therefore, PR professionals often surrender in the battle for corrections and try to achieve their goal through other methods, such as persuading the newsroom to write—not a correction—but another article on the same subject, this time using correct information. This approach has both pros and cons. The advantage is that the company’s name appears more frequently in print, and editorial material is generally much more credible than even the most reliable correction. The downside is the potential for informal ties to develop between the PR staff member and the journalist, or worse, to discourage the journalist from writing about the subject. A journalist pressured to write a flattering piece will typically avoid the topic afterward. For a company trying to set the record straight, this tactic can be a double-edged sword.

Some institutions take pride in the corrections they issue. One notable example is the special website created by the spokesperson for the Bydgoszcz City Hall. At http://www.bydgoszcz.pl/Samorz%B9d/Dementi - sprostowania, wyjaśnienia i polemiki/, the press officer publishes all corrections and disputes that he has directed to Bydgoszcz and national newsrooms throughout his career. Reading it may lead one to conclude that the spokesperson has made corrections a personal passion. The site contains both rebuttals to serious reports and comments on even the smallest mentions of the office in the media.

Jerzy Erdman, the author of a correction regarding the Chojnice website, also expressed pride in the publication of his correction. His correction can also be found online at http://erdman.chojnice.com/oryginal_i_kopia.htm, along with a commentary from the corrector.

2. Truth or Falsehood?

Every newsroom is obligated to publish a factual correction regarding any false or misleading information. However, contentious situations arise—was the information someone is correcting truly false?

Such a situation faced a journalist from "Słowo Polskie," a publication in Lower Silesia. In September 1998, while reporting on a protest by employees of the Specialist Health Care Facility in Sokołowsko against the dismissal of the facility’s director, he quoted the director, who spoke unfavorably about his newly appointed successor. On the day the article was published, the outraged ex-director called the newsroom, claiming he had never made such statements and demanded a correction. It was evident that he was attempting to correct a true report—the journalist from "Słowo Polskie" had a recording of the conversation, made by a colleague from "Gazeta Wrocławska." Only after the tape was played did the former director withdraw his demands. Without that recording, the newsroom would likely have published an inaccurate correction.

A similar dilemma arose during the trial of Jan Łuczak, a former advisor to the Deputy Minister of Communications. When suspicions of corruption arose regarding the tender for third-generation mobile telephony in 2000, the Lower Silesian media recalled a lawsuit filed against the minister’s advisor by Borowskie Granitowe Mines. As the president of the company, Łuczak allegedly caused significant losses by siphoning off funds to several firms he had set up. All newsrooms published a list of these subsidiary companies along with the positions Łuczak held in them. Łuczak sent correction requests to all of them. There were no technical objections to these requests. However, substantively, the requests were unfounded—information came from the Court Register of Companies. As a result, most newsrooms refused to publish corrections. Only one newsroom complied, having no extract from the register. The problem was that its readers might have the impression that the published information about Łuczak was false.

The "Gazeta Wrocławska" emerged unscathed from a similar altercation. The newspaper accused the secretary of the Municipal Office in Świdnica, Stanisław Kuc, based on witness statements, of operating within the Lower Silesian structures of the PZPR (Polish United Workers` Party). The secretary immediately demanded a correction, claiming it was untrue. It turned out that the witnesses cited by "Gazeta" could not prove their words. The correction did not appear only because one reader sent an original party document to the newsroom, which provided indisputable evidence—the signature of Stanisław Kuc.

Most corrections are highly contentious matters. Journalists rarely encounter clear-cut situations. Newsrooms generally feel strong enough or hope for a stroke of luck that they do not publish corrections.

3. Correcting Competitors

Corrections often serve as an opportunity for conflicts between competing newsrooms. Especially local media have a tendency to correct information conveyed by other titles. This occurs in Świdnica, for example, where the municipal "Kurier Świdnicki" frequently publishes responses and rebuttals from local officials regarding unflattering articles in the privately owned "Wiadomości Świdnickie." This leads to a comical situation where a reader sees a response to a publication they have not read. To understand its content, they must buy the competing title, doing exactly what the responding official would least prefer.

Competing media do not only correct information from their rivals but also occasionally request corrections from one another. And they can be effective in doing so. "Gazeta Olsztyńska" successfully secured a correction of false information published in "Gazeta Wyborcza." On September 10, 2001, Grzegorz Piechota from "GW," in an article regarding newspaper sales in Poland, wrote about "Gazeta Olsztyńska":

"Over two years, `Olsztyńska` gained color and resembled other newspapers in the Polskapresse group: short articles, many photos, and infographics. It organizes large plebiscites, such as for the summer capital of Warmia and Masuria. The largest sales increases were on Wednesdays and Thursdays, the days when local weeklies published by Edytor are included—there are as many as twelve. The rise in sales could also have been influenced by the establishment of the April edition titled `Dziennik Elbląski.` `Olsztyńska` edits it in cooperation with `Dziennik Bałtycki,` which had previously appeared in the area. Whether this was actually the case, we could not verify with the publisher. As we were informed in `Olsztyńska,` no one except President Tokarczyk can provide information to the press. Unfortunately, the president was ill." [2]

The correction from "Gazeta Olsztyńska" stated:

"It is untrue that the publisher of `Gazeta Olsztyńska` - Edytor sp. z o.o. - belongs to the Polskapresse publishing group. I inform you that Edytor sp. z o.o. is a private publisher that does not belong to any of the publishing groups operating in the Polish press market. It is untrue that the local weeklies belonging to Edytor sp. z o.o. are published on Wednesdays and Thursdays. Of the 13 weeklies published by the company, only two are released on the mentioned days." [3] It is worth noting that the "Edytor" publishing house belongs to Xavier Hirtreiter, founder of the Polskapresse group.

Correcting information provided by competitors generally serves the interests of the correcting publisher or broadcaster. However, sometimes the information does not directly pertain to them but challenges their political affiliations. Any dissent from employees who are required to sign such a correction can lead to serious consequences.

A journalist from public Radio Łódź SA sued the management of the station in the Labor Court, seeking to overturn a reprimand imposed on him. He received the reprimand, among other things, for changing the content of a statement from SLD leader Leszek Miller and reading it in altered form in radio news. The politician’s statement concerned material that had not aired on the radio but in "Gazeta Łódzka"—a local supplement of "Gazeta Wyborcza."

4. Cut, Bend

Although the Press Law does not allow newsrooms to shorten corrections, this rule is not respected. Newsrooms circumvent it by, as mentioned earlier, placing corrections in the "Letters to the Editor" section. And according to the wording in every editorial footer, the newsroom can shorten letters at will. Therefore, press officers often face a dilemma—when a boss demands a sharp, aggressive rebuttal, it is almost certain that the newsroom will not want to publish such a text. The more cunning resort to tricks. To ensure both sides are satisfied, they write what the management demands, but precede the text with a properly structured correction. However, it may happen that even this is not enough. Katarzyna Kowalewska: "Newspapers delay the printing of corrections. When they finally publish them, few, besides us, remember the content of the article."

Such behavior by newsrooms can be justified. Especially when the author of the correction knows they have the right to demand one but has a vague or nonexistent understanding of the rules for constructing it. As a result, corrections may extend for several pages of typescript, even though the corrected material was merely a brief news item. Such lengthy documents can be sent by individuals who one would expect to have knowledge of Press Law—public relations officers. So what can a diligent newsroom do? Practice shows that attempts to negotiate with the correcting individual are not always effective. Referring to the provision of Article 32, paragraph 7, which clearly states that the correction text cannot be longer than twice the length of the corrected fragment of the press material, often proves futile. Thus, many newsrooms take it upon themselves to shorten corrections, thereby violating paragraph 6 of the aforementioned Article.

5. Refusal

Article 33 of the Press Law grants the editor-in-chief the ability to refuse to publish a correction. Several conditions must be met—the text must be irrelevant or not factually based, contain insults or criminal content, undermine court rulings, or fail to meet technical requirements. Editors-in-chief, not only in local media, attempt to bend these rules to their limits.

While most individuals requesting corrections meekly accept that the correction is baseless, readers who understand Press Law know that a decision, even if well-supported by a written justification, is not final. The refusal to publish a correction can be appealed to court. Increasingly often, individuals demanding corrections do not accept the newsroom`s arguments. The outcomes are similar to a case in May 2001 in Podlasie:

The Podlaskie Voivode, Krystyna Łukaszuk, sued two journalists from "Kurier Poranny" and the newspaper`s editor-in-chief. She accused them of violating personal rights in their publications and failing to publish corrections. She demanded an apology and the payment of 10,000 PLN to one of the social welfare homes in Białystok. The court ruled in favor of the voivode, stating that the refusal to publish corrections was unjustified. The newsroom appealed this ruling.

6. Overzealousness

Most newsrooms avoid publishing corrections like the plague, even when they are fully justified. However, there is a documented case of a completely different nature where a publisher decided to publish a correction and apology without even notifying the author. On April 14, announcements appeared on the front pages of "Rzeczpospolita" and "Życie Warszawy," stating: "Życie Press Sp. z o.o., former publisher of `Życie Warszawy,` hereby apologizes and expresses regret for publishing press articles, including: `Judge Got It Done` by Leszek Kraskowski, published in `Życie Warszawy` on January 6, 1995, in which it unjustifiably violated the personal rights of Ms. Danuta Piontek (...)." [4]

Dorota Binkiewicz, who describes this case, explains that an agreement was reached between the publisher and Judge Danuta Piontek. The company had the right to reach a settlement, but by mentioning the author`s name, it violated his personal rights. It turned out that Kraskowski—by then a journalist for "Rzeczpospolita"—lost the trial. And this was obviously untrue. The bankruptcy trustee of "Życie Press," Irena Buczyńska, claimed she did not need to inform the authors of the contentious articles about the settlement. However, the questioned law professor, Bogdan Michalski, who teaches press law at the University of Warsaw, believes otherwise: "A journalist`s name can only be included in such an announcement in two cases: if they are a party to the proceedings and reach a settlement, or if they consent to the publication of their name. The publisher was not authorized to act on behalf of journalist Kraskowski and had no right to evaluate the content of the article."

Kraskowski published a response in "Rzeczpospolita," explaining that he was not the one apologizing to Danuta Piontek. He sent the same text to the new "Życie Warszawy" newsroom. However, that newsroom did not consider it appropriate to publish this letter.

Similar cases only demonstrate that some publishers, especially when facing serious institutions, bury their heads in the sand and unexpectedly rush to apologize. The leader in this field is indeed "Życie Warszawy," and it is worth emphasizing that in most cases, the scapegoat is the journalist who authored the contentious material. "Życie Warszawy" has also apologized in a similar manner to former Minister Lesław Podkański for other articles by Leszek Kraskowski (which were awarded by the Association of Polish Journalists) and the management of "Polisa" for articles by another of its journalists, Piotr Wysocki.

*****

• [1] Katarzyna Kowalewska, "Nieproste prostowanie," "Press" no. 5/1999
• [2] Grzegorz Piechota, "Wbrew trendowi," "Gazeta Wyborcza," September 10, 2001
• [3] "Sprostowanie," "Gazeta Wyborcza," September 12, 2001
• [4] Dorota Binkiewicz, "Zdanie wtrącone," "Press" no. 5/1999

Read all articles in the series Local Media in Poland.