KIRO has elected not to participate in the Washington News Council's June 14, 2003 hearing on the complaints filed with it by the Washington Beef and Dairy Commissions. We choose this course for a variety of reasons:

DOWNER COWS INVESTIGATION Meat From Dying, Sick Or Diseased Cows Getting into Food Aired Oct. 31, 2002, 5 p.m. Volatile Reaction From Viewers, Feds, To Meat Investigation Aired Oct. 31, 2002, 11 p.m. Downer Cows' Treatment May Be Illegal Aired Nov. 1, 2002, 5 p.m. Downer Industry Thrives Despite Consumers' Concerns Aired Nov. 1, 2002, 11 p.m. New Revelations From Ex-State Ag Employee On Downer Cows Aired June 12, 2003, 5 p.m. State Agencies Help Fund Attack On Downer Cow Investigations Aired June 12, 2003, 11 p.m. Market For Downer Cow Beef Is Dying Aired June 13, 2003, 5 p.m.

KIRO's Reports are Accurate. KIRO has verified each of the facts set forth in its original broadcasts. [See links to stories, at right.] Beyond that, it has embarked on a mission to inspect each type of criticism offered by the Commissions. KIRO has requested from the Commissions a variety of information, including public records, interviews and other comment. At each stage the Commissions have failed and refused to timely provide this information. KIRO will take appropriate steps to secure this information as it completes its investigation and publishes additional information.
The First Amendment Protects a Free Press. The Constitution gives KIRO, and all other press, substantial protections to investigate and report newsworthy events. The humane treatment of animals, the competency of government inspectors, and the safety of our food supply are certainly matters of substantial public interest.
KIRO is not afraid to test the sufficiency of its reports before a fair and impartial tribunal. Courts are geared to provide that result. But they are governed by clear laws and procedural rules. A report cannot be the subject of a claim merely because someone thinks it "unfair," or it supposedly "implies" information not set forth in the report. The WNC does not apply the First Amendment or any common law in its decisions.
WNC is Partial. The WNC has failed in persuading any media entity to participate in any of its hearings. KIRO cannot speak for those who have refused to participate, but its own experience with the WNC induces no confidence in WNC's impartiality. Examples abound.
WNC proclaims that it encourages the parties to reach their own solutions to complaints. KIRO has tried to do that. It has communicated with the Commissions seeking a variety of information. As public agencies, the Commissions have a legal duty to provide public records. They have refused to participate in KIRO interviews. Far from encouraging an exchange of information, the WNC has prevented it. By imposing an artificial deadline for the parties to reach an accord, the WNC has allowed the Commissions to "run out the clock" by stonewalling KIRO's requests for more information before the hearing date. For example, although the Commissions have public records requested by KIRO weeks ago, they intend to delay production until at least June 26, 2003—almost two weeks after the hearing date.
WNC proclaims that it is interested in fairness and impartiality. The WNC's conduct, however, speaks louder than its words. Its website publicizes its proceedings concerning KIRO by linking inflammatory, and now admittedly hyperbolic, news articles on the KIRO reports. Would a court or impartial judge ever engage in such highly partial conduct?
WNC welcomes KIRO's responses, but admonishes it to limit any input to data obtained before the KIRO broadcasts were run. Does it so limit the Commissions? KIRO is asked to respond to post-broadcast claims—by some of the subjects of its broadcasts--that somehow important Mad Cow Disease research has been hampered by KIRO's broadcasts. Apparently, any subject is fair game if it criticizes the media.
WNC's Process is Geared Toward Media Criticism, Not Media Accuracy. The goal of the WNC is to subject the media to some type of flogging that our courts and our Constitution would never require. Whether a true and accurate report "implies" or "suggests" something else is not a question that any free press should have to answer. It is no more relevant to accuracy than were the hundreds of communications KIRO received from its viewers, praising the content of the broadcasts. If anyone has a vote, it should be the consumers of beef products, those who care about safe treatment of animals, and taxpayers who demand that government inspectors do their jobs.
The founder and Executive Director of the WNC made a living authoring a column that subjected the media to criticism, however unfair. The WNC operates in that image. Its members are neither elected nor subject to any limits of authority. KIRO chooses not to participate.