As a Matter of Fact

Freedom of the press is one of our most precious and fundamental rights. Publishers and editors have great latitude in reporting facts in their publications and in expressing opinions and comments in their editorials. However, there are recognized limits on freedom of the press. Among those are prohibitions against defamation and interference with certain other fundamental rights such as the right to a fair trial. There is also the doctrine of fair comment recognized in law and by all responsible journalists. Normally, fair reporting requires publication of articles and editorial/publisher messages that are constrained by such recognized limits. Articles, and editorials especially, should be directed to issues of importance to the readers and should not be motivated by the desire to demean a competitive publication.

No responsible editor or publisher will or should use its editorial page or publication to defame or attack a competitor. Normally, we would not respond to any unfair comment or irresponsible reporting by a competitor. However, a recent article and editor/publisher’s message in a competing chiropractic publication is so far over the edge as to require comment. In the February 24, 2003, issue of Dynamic Chiropractic (DC), there was a front page story on a postal audit that concerned Medical World Communications (MWC), the parent company of Chiropractic Products, which publishes 70 publications, almost all exclusively in the field of medical/health care. There was also an editor/publisher's message by Donald M. Petersen, Jr, attacking Chiropractic Products’ editorial content, its editor, and MWC’s commitment to the field of chiropractic.

The coverage of the postal audit was grossly inappropriate, especially since the postal audit has no impact or effect on the readers or advertisers of Chiropractic Products. Moreover, DC failed to point out that MWC had previously issued a press release with respect to the postal audit advising that most of the items being audited related to events that occurred before MWC acquired many of the publications at issue and that MWC is vigorously defending itself in the audit. Finally, the allegations made by Petersen concerning our editorial content and MWC’s commitment to the field of chiropractic are baseless and without merit. Our parent company and we are and will continue to be devoted to bringing chiropractors information about the practice and products of chiropractic in the most informative and creative ways by always adhering to the highest principles of integrity in reporting.

Apparently, our complaint about the tactic of DC to distort and attack as it did with its February 24, 2003, assault against MWC is not the first time that a victim of such an attack has complained. DC and its editor/publisher Petersen recently have been sued by Chiropractic Benefits Services (CBS) for allegedly defaming CBS by printing several allegedly false articles and circulating emails containing allegedly false and damaging statements about CBS. In that suit, CBS seeks compensatory damages of $5,000,000, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs. The CBS complaint alleges that DC falsely stated, among other things, that Kemper, the insurance carrier for CBS, is not renewing CBS’ professional liability insurance policies. If the allegations of CBS are true, then not only has DC injured CBS, but it has unfairly disserved its readers by spreading such misinformation.

We think that DC’s onslaught against MWC and this publication will backfire. You, as our astute and fair-minded readers, will understand that the true motivation of DC and its editor is to engage in unfair competition through misleading editorial comment and inappropriate content of articles. You, as we are, should be offended by such illegitimate journalism.

Tony Ramos, publisher and president
Bruce Loria, advertising director
Miwon Seo, editor