Submissions to Ontario Press Council Hearing

7/29/2019 Submissions to Ontario Press Council Hearing

1/27

Submissions to

Ontario Press Council hearinginto

Toronto Star report:"Rob Ford in 'crack cocaine' video scandal(May 17 ,2013)

Septemb er 9, 2013Presented by:Michael Cooke, Editor-in-Chief, Toronto StarKevin Donovan, Investigations Editor, Toronto Star


2/27

Oa

ContentsToronto Star Statement to Ontario Press Council hearing' (Pg' 1-7)Appendix #1: Steps taken by Toronto star to get Mayor

Rob Ford'sside of the story on Thursday May 16 prior to publication of "crackcocaine" video storY. (Pg. 8-9)Appendix # 2: Steps taken by Star to get Mayor Ford's side of thestoiy regarding allegations of substance abuse. (Pg 10-11)Appendix # 3: A sampling of Toronto star emails to Mayor Rob Ford

oO

and staff. (Pg. 12-15). Appendix # 4: A sampling of Court statements on public interest andjournalism. (Pg. 16)Appendix #5: Toronto Star, Page 1 May 17,2013' (Pg'17)Appendix #6: Photo published in star of Mayor Rob Ford withntuiO"t victim Anthony Smith and others' (Pg' 18)Appendix # 7 Complaint to Ontario Press Council from DarylleOontey; Toronto Star response to Darylle Donley; Darylle Donleyresponse to OPC and Star (Pe.19-25)


3/27

Toronto Star Statement to Ontario Press CouncilLadies and gentlemen of the Ontario Press Council, members of the public, andfellow journalists:The Toronto Star is pleased to be given the opportunity to talk about the front pagestory of Friday, May l7 . The story described the attempts by people involved in thedrug trade to sell a video of Toronto Mayor Rob Ford smoking what appears to becrack cocaine. It detailed how two Toronto Star reporters, Kevin Donovan andRobyn Doolittle, were shown this video by a drug dealer and his associate, one ofwhom was involved in making the video. In the video, the mayor was heard to makedisparaging comments about minorities and homosexuals.The May 17 story springboarded off a year long investigation by Star reporters intoallegations that Mayor Ford had a substance abuse problem for which his own staffwas urging him - unsuccessfully - to seek treatment.The council has decided to hear a complaint from Ms Darylle Donley. Here is thecomplaint:I would be curious to know just how far a W or radio reporter or newspaper person,has to go before they are sanctioned and curtailed?The Ford brothers are being lied about, innuendos and allegations are being madeagainst them. The news should be concrete and proven truth.Two Somali drug dealers? If these are two real people wouLd they possibllt becapable of creative videography? Or does your office believe that no one would dosuch a thing?It appears that the days of obtaining reliable news from one's daily newspaper islong gone.I might as well purchase MW, Tattler or People, or some similar gossip paper toobtain my informa.tion. I could always watch TMZ, too; yet more stretchedinformation.I am curious to know what your criteria is regarding mistruths and allegations in theOntario newspnpers.Thank you for your anticipated replry.Darylle Donley


4/27

p.

The press council said in a letter to us that we at the Star are not to concerl ourselvesthis morning with whether the story is true or not. But I must tell you now - and withgreat emphasis - that the story is true. Every word of it.I ask for your indulgence here because I would like to read the first two paragraphsof the story in question."A cellphone video that appears to show Mayor Rob Ford smoking crack cocaine isbeing shopped around Toronto by a group of Somali men involved in the drug trade.Two Toronto Star reporters have viewed the video three times. It appears to showa white shirt, top buttons open, inhaling. Ford is incoherent, trading jibes within

impaired mayor by raising topics includingn Bosco high school football team Fordcoacnes. -The press council has asked the Star to provide an opening statement that addressesthe three following points:1' Did the Star article deal with a matter that is in the public interest ?2. were adequate efforts made to verify the alregations ?3' Was Mr. Ford given adequate notice of the allegations and a reasonableopportunity to respond, and did the newspaper include that response in its reporting?First, the public interest question.Two exp the leading investigative reporter in ourcountry, da's largest city ,n'okirrg what appears tobe crack omments about minorities andhomosex EE times. They see it with their owneyes and hear it with their own ears.


5/27

The video was clear and distinct, not blurry or shaky, and the mayor's voice wasslurred but his face was clear. In our package we have provided you with a copy ofthe story, other reference material, and a full-frame photograph the Star ran alongsidethe May 17 story.This photo was taken outside of what the people of Toronto now understand to be anotorlous crackhouse. This bungalow was later a target of one of the search warrantsin the project Traveller raids that saw the arrests of numerous people and the seizureof drugs and guns.pictured with Mayor Ford in the photo are three men who were all alleged membersof the Dixon City Crew, a gang running drugs and guns gang in north Etobicoke. Themen are: Anthony Smith (who was murdered in a shooting earlier this year),Muhammad Khattak (injured in the same shooting), and Monir Kassim. Kassim wasarrested and charged with drug and gun offences in the Project Traveller raids andKhattak with drug offences.The issue of guns and drugs falls within the public interest. Toronto Police Chief BillBlair, at the project Traveller press conference, spoke of the disastrous effects guns,drugs and gangs have on our community. Blair said these activities "have adevastating impact on communities and on families and on those who are victims ofviolence and crime in our communities."That the Mayor of Toronto has any connection with people connected to these gunsand drugs gangs is something that is very much in the public interest and that is whythe Star explored this issue and continues to expiore the issue.Mr. Chairman, the Supreme Courl of Canada has some views on what is in the publicinterest.Here are two key paragraphs on what the judges said rn a 2009 decision ruling onwhat is responsible journalism:"To be of public interest, the subject matter must be shown to be one inviting publicattention, or about which the public has some substantial concern because it affectsthe welfare of citizens, or one to which considerable public notoriety or controversyhas attached."


6/27

IIn our respectful opinion, connections between drug dealers, gun dealers, a notoriouscrack house, and the chief magistrate of Canada's largest city fit the definition ofsomething that can and should be explored in the public interest.The story the Star produced, and other related stories, were investigative journalism,something the Star has committed a great deal of time and resources to.The leading English case on public interest and responsible journalism states thatthere is a compeiling public interest in investigative journaliim.The court, in Reynolds, wrote:"There is no need to elaborate on the importance of the role discharged by the mediain the expression and communication of information and comment on poiiticalmatters. It is through the mass media that most people today obtain their informationon political matters. Without freedom of expression by the media, freedom ofexpression would be a hollow concept. The interest of a democratic society inensuring a free press weighs heavily in the balance in deciding whether anycurtailment of this freedom bears a reasonable relationship to the plllpose of thecurlailment. In this regard it shold be kept in mind that oni of the contemporafunctio f the media is investigative journalism. This activity, as much as thetraditional activities of reporting and commenting is part of the vital role of theand the media generallv."

At the Star, we want to be a good and useful citizen and we do our best to practiceresponsible journalism in the public interest.There was no doubt in our minds back on the evening of Thursday, May tr6 and thereis no doubt now that the story of the video of the mayor of our city smoking whatappears to be crack cocaine and the photograph showing the mayor of our cityoutside a notorious crackhouse was an example of responsible and useful journalismand was in the public interest then and is in the public interest now. It meets allknown ethical and legal measures.It is a story that is still playing out. In the months since the May l7 story, the Star hasreported on a police investigation into activities of people around the mayor and theirattempts to obtain the crack video in question. The p.opt. of Toronto have yet tohear evidence in the Project Traveller court cases and lelated police activities. TheChief of Police, Bill Blair, refused an opportunity to clear the mayor at a press


7/27

IA.J,

conference called to explain the Project Traveller raids. There is clearly more tocome on this story and the Star and other media continue to report on these matters.The second point the press council has asked The Star to address is the question ofour efforts to verify the allegations.

#ilH:i;; ii'. i:T T,'j"L'ff

, l;:. :f : J ;[ J:Y""and CNN" That is fact. video to the Star, these men had contacted GawkerAs to the contents of ournalists viewed and heardthe video' They were questioned the men whoshowed the video to t out the circumstances inwhich the video was shot.Our story on May 17 was transparent. We told the reader what we knew and what wedid not know.

rs Donovan and Doolittleimpaired at a charity ball. Thatthe reporters had rrequent contact wirh peopt" Jff::::it: il:'"LH:Ajt#,illlii;,who had knowledge of some of the -uyor', activities.Mr' Chairman, the Star has a long and noble history of fine and unblemishedinvestigative reporting and this entire Mayor Ford series of stories was put togetherover many months with the utmost care for accuracy, ethics and legalities.

Thirdly, the press council has asked if the Star gave Mayor Ford adequate notice ofthe story and a reasonable opportunity to ,.rpon"d, and did we include that responsein our reporting?So that the press council can understand how Mayor Ford deals with questions fromhed a synopsis of our earlier attempts to getallegations of public impairment andMayor Ford does not respond to interview


8/27

6The Star has also attached a synopsis of our attempts to get comment from the Mayorand his staff the night before the crack video story was rublished. As the synopsisshows' the Star made numerous attempts to contact the Mayor, his chief of staff, hisbrother (a counciilor), and other peopre connected to the mayor.Reporters visited Mayor Ford's home and his brother's home. Reporters called theMayor and other officials in his office. we sent text messages. our synopsis showswe made at least 14 attempts to get comment.A security guard at the Mayor's home told the Star to leave. The Star, however, wasable to get comment from Mayor Ford's lawyer, Dennis Morris. Mr. Morris told theStar that the allegations were '-'false and defamuto.y". Mr. Morris also questionedhow by viewing a video the viewer could determine "wh t the person is actuallydoing or smoking."

The star also reached Mark Towhry the Mayor's chief of staff, and explained thestory to him and sought comment. Mr. Towhly hung up on the Star.The Star included these responses in the story.You may wonder why we did not go to Mayor Ford with questions about the videoearlier than that night.The fact is' we couldn't. During the month that we were attempting to get possessionof the crack video we had promised our source we would keep our knowledge of thevideo confidential until we were given the green light to report on it. The man wasscared, physically scared, of whai would happen to uottr him and the drug dealer whohad possession of the video.A qrrick word here about confidential sources. The media is often crrticized,, andcertainly has been in this case, for using such sources. The Supreme court of canadamade it very clear in the Grant v. The Toronto Star case f'ut;:; J confidentialsources can be an imporlant element of responsible journalism. We promised thissource that we would-not identify him. we promised him that if he showed us thetape we would not tell the mayor we had seen it. And so we didn,t. The sollrce{earg{ that telling the mayor we had seen it would compromise him. At the Star wedon't break promises made to sources. But on the day tle existence of the tape wasrevealed by Gawker we immediately went to our source and he released us from ourpromise.


9/27

1That is when we went to the Mayor and his staff to obtain comment. We did obtaincomment from the Mayor's lawyer and a no comment from the Mayor,s chief ofstaff.

To this day, the people of Toronto have yet to receive an explanation from MayorFord for the video. His one comment was:"As for a video, I can't comment on a video I have never seen or does not exist.,,one of the Star's subsequent stories detailed how the Mayor and members of his staffdiscussed, on May 7J, apotential location for the video. A video the mayor said didnot exist. The police are investigating this matter.One of our most important values at the Star is our transparency and accountability.We are pleased to answer in more detail any questions about our reporting on thatstory or any others.Thank you for considering our submission.


10/27

0o

Appendix #1

video storv

-The Gawker website published online at B:2Bpm on Thursday Muy 16 anaccount of how its editor, John cook, saw the^Muyo. Ford crack video theprevious week. Toronto Star editor Michaer cooke quickly assembred agroup of reporters and editors in the newsroom, incrudingk"vin Donovanand Robyn Doolittle, who had seen the video a month before and had beentrying to obtain the video ever since. During that phase, the Star hadpromised the source who was trying to seilTn. ,ria.o that it would not revealthe source's identity or the fact thai a video existed without permission ofthe source. The Star was released from that promise that evening. Inaddition, the Star learned that d'ay that the ,ou... had attempted to sell thevideo to not only the Star, but Gawker and CNN.

Foilowing is a summ ary of Toronto Star attempts to contact Mayor RobFord that evening to ask him about the video urra the attempts by individualsto sell the video. please note that Mayor Ford and his stafl for more than ayear at that time, had refused to respond to any verbal, emailed or handdelivered letters seeking comment on numerous other stories the Star waspreparing.Thursday evening:9:04 pm: Robyn Doolittle both called and sent a text message to Ford,s chiefof Staff Mark Towhey and presthem to comment on allegaiioncrack and that people *.i. trying to s 3O9:15- 10 pm: Kevin Donovan called Ford's city hail iine and his home lineseveral times. There was no answer. Messages left for Ford asked him tocomment on the Gawker story and also informed him that Stur reporters hadseen the video and requested comment on that. Donovan also called GeorgeChristopolous, press secretary. Christopolous did not respond to requests forcomment.


11/27

q,

9:30-10:30 pm: city Hall reporler paul Moloney and photographer TaraWalton drove to Mayor Ford's house in Etobicoke and knocked on door,seeking comment. There was no answer. Moloney rang the bell and knockedseveral times- Moloney wrote a note asking Mayor Ford to comment on theissue involving the crack video. Moloney put the note through the mail sloton Ford's door. A man appeared who seemed to be acting as security for theFord house. He told Moloney and Walton to ,,move along.,,Moloney andwalton then drove a short distance to councillor Doug Ford's house,knocked and received no answer. Moloney wrote a similar note and put it inthe mail box at the councillor's home. Moloney and Walton retumed toMayor Ford's house and again received no response.9:45 pm: Robyn Doolittle spoke to Dennis Morris, Mayor Ford's lawyer.Doolittle explained the story the Star was working on and said she wasseeking comment from Mayor Ford and if not, his lawyer. Morris said toDoolittle "how can you know what he is smoking.,, Doolittle noted thatGawker had, that evening, quoted Morris saying that the Gawker account ofthe video was "false and defamatory." Morlis confirmed to Doolittle he hadmade that comment.9:45-10 pm: Reporter Dave Rider reached Ford Chief of Staff Mark Towheyat his home. Rider explained the story the Star was working on and Towheyabruptly hung up on the Star repofter.10 pm: Kevin Donovan called lawyer Dennis Morris to go over hiscomments and ask, again, if Mayor Ford would comment. Morris said hewould speak on behalf of the mayor as his lawyer. Morris told Donovan thatby viewing a video "how can you indicate what the person is actually doingor smoking." Morris repeated his claim that the allegations against MayorFord were "false and defamatory.,,

The Star continued to try and get Mayor Ford to comment about the videothat evening, on Friday and on successive days. Mayor Ford and his staffhave ignored all attempts by the Star to interview them on the crack videomatter.


12/27

Appendix #2

Mayor Rob Ford historically does not talk to the Toronto Star. The paper,despite this, has continued to seek comment from the mayor and his staffprior to publication of any story. His lack of comment extends to manyissues of public interest for which the star has sought his response.Below is a short summary of significant attempts by the Star to obtaincomment from Mayor Ford for substance abuse issues:1. The Bier Markt incidentShorlly after a St. patrick's Day 2012 (saturday March 17) inwhich MayorFord was seen to be intoxicated at the downtown Bier Maikt, the Star beganseeking comment from the mayor. Thr Star had been told by Ford staffers,present and past, that they had been trying for some time to get the mayor toseek help for substance abuse but the o uyo. had rebuffed their efforts.Among the Star's attempts to get comment or an explanation from themayor:

e

odd behaviour. During April, reporter Robyn Doolittle contacted then Chiefof Staff Amir Remtulla and then policy advisor Mark Towhey via phone andin person seeking comment on the Bier Markt incident. Ford staffer BrooksBarnett was also contacted by Doolittle with a request for comment in lateMarch. None of these staffers provided comment.April 30,2012: Following the Star's many attempts, christopolous said hehad brought the matter to Mayor Ford urrd told the Star in writing: ,,theMayor will not grant an interview.,,


13/27

ii.

2.The Garrison Ball incidentShortly after the Saturday, February 23,2013 Garrison Ball event, a galaballthat celebrates the Canadian military andraises money for wounded soldiers,the Star heard that Mayor Ford had been asked to leave because he appearedimpaired, incoherent and was stumbling soon after he arrived.Among the Star's numerous attempts to seek comment from the Mayor andhis staff:Friday, March 22,2013: Kevin Donovan wrote a letter to Mayor Ford andsent it to the mayor, chief of staff Towhey and press officer Christopolous.The letter outlined the Star's understanding of what happened at theGarrison Ball. The letter also again raised the issue of the 2012 Bier Marktincident and told the mayor that staffers had informed the Star they had beentrying to get the mayor to seek help. Mayor Ford did not respond. Also onthat Friday, Robyn Doolittle asked Towhey by text messageif he wouldcomment on the Star story. Towhey responded:"No time today sorry. I'm underwater.',Doolittle informed chief of staff Towhey that the Star would gladly giveboth he and the mayor a few days if it meant a response would beforthcoming. on Monday, Doolittle againposed questions to Towhey andreminded him of the letter Donovan had sent outlining specific allegationsfor which the Star sought a response. Towhey responded only that: i,I am notqualified to comment on what wonderful things you may or may not beexpecting."


14/27

\Q.Appendix #3

March 22,2013Dear Mayor Ford,

ff#t1'ji:r;: with your beingabuse problem tha have a substanceToronto.

The Garrison Ballwe have interviewed five people who have told us tliat you arrived at the event in someistress' clearly either under the influence of some substance (alcohol is the one mostedical problem. We have further been toldt, and some of the military people inaggered and fell down the stairs,s near the coat check and thent, rambling, oddly excited manner.ly encouraged Councillor paul Ainslie to askchief of staff, Mark Towhey, to ask you to

tional information regarding this incident.the evcnt, at the event, or bothZ How diddriven)? Where were you prior to the eventA Substance abuse problem?

to people involved in City Hall about the


15/27

13.was also rebuffed; your substance abuse issues have affected your job negatively (cominglate to work or not coming at all on some days).Note: A final paragragh of this letter has been reclacted as it included questionsabout allegations the Star is continuing to investigate.Please contact Kevin Donovan, today, to discuss this. He can be reached at 416-312-3503or kdonovan @thestar . ca.

Kevin DonovanRobyn DoolittleToronto Star


16/27

I

i+

Appendix #3 (b)

thestar.com with the story.

Dear Mayor Ford,We are continuing to investigate allegations related to the video witnessed by twoToronto Star reporters' Today we publi.hed a story detailing a portion of DavidPrice's involvement.For Thursday's paper we are preparing a more detailed story which will state thaton the day we published the story of the video (Friday, May 17) it was Mayor RobFord who blurted out to aides the exact address where drug dealers involved withthe video could be found.To all of you who are receiving this letter, please be aware that we are askingthese questions in the public interest about a serious matter. We stronqly adviseyou to reach out to us to discuss this story. We want to hear your side Lf it. Mostimportantly, if there is anything you believe is not factual, or inything you wouldlike to add, please contact us by this v/ednesday at 3 pm.Here is what we believed transpired on Friday, May 1 7, the day the story of thevideo was published on the front page of the toronto stur,A meeting was called to discuss the video. We believe the following people werepresent. d price, Earl provost, and possiblycommun Christopo los and lsaac Ransom. We are tryingto reach rs througr emair or by terephone, arthough we donot have information at this time.During the meeting, when concern was raised about the existence of a video,Mayor Ford told staffers "not to worry" as he knows where the video is.To the surprise of some present, Mayor Ford then blurts out the Dixon Rd.address, including the two apartment units on the 17th floor, 1 701 and 1703.Following this, as we reported in the Tt:esday Star, David price contacted MarkTowhey (we do not know if by telephone or in person) and asked him"hypothetically" what he should do if a "rorr."i' had told him where to locate thevideo.


17/27

r6.We are continuing to explore what David Price and others may have done overthe next two weeks to try and obtain the video and to defuse the growing scandalwith denials over the existence of the video,Questions:1. How did you know the address and apartment units. ls it because youpurchased crack cocaine or another substance from people in those units?.2. Did you order David Price to go find the video?3. What were you planning to do if you secured the video?Please contact me at 41 6-312-3503 or at kdonovan @thestar.caKevin Donovanlnvestigative EditorToronto Star


18/27

lh,Appendix # 4A sampling of court statements on public interest and journalism

Supreme Court of Canada, (2009): Responsible Communication in thePublic InterestFreedom of expression and respect for vigorous debate on matters of publicinterest have long been seen as fundamental to canadian democracy.To be of public interest, the subject matter must be shown to be one invitingpublic attention, or about which the public, or a segment of the public, hassome substantial concern because it affects the welfare of citizens, or one towhich considerable public notoriety or controversy has attached. publicinterest is not confined to publications on government and political matters,nor is it necessary that the plaintiff be a "public figure.,,How is "public interest" in the subject matter established? First, and mostfundamentally, the public interest is not synonymous with what interests thepublic. The public's appetite for information on a given subject - say, theprivate lives of well-known people - is not on its own sufficient to render anessentially private matter public lor the purposes of defamation law. Anindividual's reasonable expectation of privacy must be respected in thisdetermination. Conversely, the fact that much of the public would be less thanriveted by a given subject matter does not remove the subject from the publicinterest. It is enough that some segment of the community would have agenuine interest in receiving information on the subject.

House of Lords, (1999): Reynoldso ... there is no need to elaborate on the importance of the role discharged by themedia in the expression and communication of information and comment on

political matters. It is through the mass media that most people today obtain theirinformation on political matters. Without freedom of expression by the media,freedom of expression would be a hollow concept. The interest of a democraticsociety in ensuring a free press weighs heavily in the balance in deciding whetherany curtailment of this freedom bears a reasonable relationship to the purpose ofthe curtailment. In this regard it should be kept in mind that one of thecontemporary functions of the media is investigative journalism. This activity, asmuch as the traditional activities of rcporting and commenting, is part of the vitalrole of the press and the media gencr-ally.


19/27

l'1011/lE r'*r;:

SWEET f'flT,.f'FEOME n;litr

WEATHER HIGH ]8 C I MOSTLY SUNNY 1 MAP 58 FRIDAY, MAY 17 2O]]

STAR EXCTUSIVEFORD INVIDEO'SCAI{DAICeilphone recolding rnade by meninvolved in Toronto drug trade -vieu'ed by a pair ofStar rellorters --appears to sholv incoherent mavorinhaling from a glass crack pipeNOBIN @IITTIE AND XEVIil DONOVAN

"Hm on youindicate whatf:.fi:iiidoing ortmdnqJib(s Urh m off-cmcro spcer u,ho 806& rh. Smokins?".lsly mp.tpd mqyor Ly r*mg ropts rnchdnR LhrJ -hder Jtstin Trudeau md fie Don tuso high shool toFD'slawYErf@ tbal tcrr Fort coilches

ln. photo prdidd by the so!(e beh'Fd ! video rhat purpotu to show Mayor Rob Ford smoking d.ck


20/27

l-\t.) [rL." I U+rr] I\}lrn re -Kcr


21/27

fiAppendix #7Darylle Complaint to Ontario press CouncilToronto Star response to Darylle Ooniey -Donley response to OpC/Stai

From :_Fra ncesca D fmailto :francescamex@hotma il. com]Sent: May-27 -I3 12:59 pMTo: [email protected]: Toronto Star and Globe and Mail

I would be curious to know just how far a TV or radio reporter or newspaper person, has to gobefore they are sanctioned and curtailed?The Ford brothers are being lied about, innuendos and allegations are being made againstthem. The news should be concrete and proven truth.Two somali drug dealers? lf these are two real people would they possibly be capable ofcreative videography? or does your office believe that no one would do such a thing?ws from one's daily newspaper is long gone.e, or some similar gossip paper to obtain myt more stretched information.newspapers. ding mistruths and allegations in the OntarioThank you for your anticipated reply.Darylle Donley201,1,280 Wellesley St. E.Toronto M4X 1,G74L6 970-0929


22/27

Qo.

Juty 19,2013Dear Ms. Donley:I am writing in response to your complaint to the ontario press councir regarding thetar's reporting on a video "rr"g"Jrv !r,"*i"g'M"ior'too Ford smoking crack cocaine.You have raised questions about the ethics of the star's reporting on these a'egations.These are serious,allegations reported responsibly intar's professionat staioaros, ,'r!it"no"rds set down e with theCanada,s taws regaroing the reo"rtirf

"r;i""r, ",r"sj ;;;cirano

ibre journarism are the core of the star's journaristicll its reporting. ln reporting on these serious-1t^.^ T".lsenior editors ,i,J r"gJ .;"u"nset r,avenes meet the standards of ru.[on.iOi" journalism in

The Star has been consisterreporting, seeking out the m information and fair in itscomment about all allother denials of the alclear to readers when.official is allegedly seenbout minorities andaround Toronto and New

As the Star,s editoinitial report;;H ders in a May 18 Page 1 column, the star,sreporting. 'lere rr culmination of months or inuuriig"tiuuporting on this story,,, Cooke ."ij-ffd#::.':; l;l?'5#;j;jiiT how and whv the star reported these serious


23/27

01,ln March, following careful consideration of all the circumstances, the Star reported thatthe mayor had been asked to leave the annual Garrison Ball, held to raise money forWounded Warriors, because he appeared to be intoxicated. The story, written byDoolittle and Donovan, stated that at least eight people had approached Toronto cityCouncillor Paul Ainslie with concerns the mayor was impaired at the military ball.That story also made public allegations that had long been talked about at city hall, thatthose closest to Ford believe he has an alcohol problem. Five sources who have workedclosely with the mayor told the Star they were concerned for the mayor and believe hisjob is being affected.ln line with its responsibility to seek and tell the other side, the Star told readers that themayor denied the allegations. "lt's an outright lie; it's the Toronto Star going after meagain and again and again," the Star's story reported.Shortly after reporting these allegations about the Garrison Ball and the mayor's allegedalcohol problems, the Star was approached by two separate people who purported tohave information on Ford abusing crack cocatne.One of those sources, who described himself as "an organizer in the Somali community,"told the Star he had copies of a cell phone video, which, he said, showed the mayorsmoking crack. The man said he represented two men who had supplied crack cocaineto the mayor on several occasions, all in the Dixon Rd. area. As the Star told its readers,the Star was not able to verify those claims.A protracted discussion ensued between the man and reporters Doolitfle and Donovan.The man who had approached the Star said his two associates (one he said had beenpresent when the video was made and had done the filming) wanted "six figures" for thevideo. As well, he provided the Star with a photo of Ford with a man, the source saidwas recently slain outside a Toronto nightclub.As is now known, the man in the photo with Ford was Anthony smith, 21, who wasindeed gunned down outside a Toronto nightclub on March 28. As is also now known,the two other men in that photo, Muhammad Khattak (who was wounded in the sameshooting) and Monir Kassam were arrested and allegedly linked to a North Etobicokestreet gang targeted in recent police raids on gangs and drugs.ln the weeks after the source approached the Star, reporters and editors made extensiveattempts to convince these sources to let them see the video so that they might evaluateit themselves. Star Editor Michael Cooke was adamant that it was crucial thai ttre Star'sreporters see the video to determine if the sources were telling them the truth about themayor.The reporters, working with the newsroom's most senior editors, continued their duediligence, investigating further to learn more about these sources in order to evaluate thecredibility of their information. They also continued to seek out other sources to verifythese allegations.


24/27

alistic policies regarding paying forvideo. While the Star believes citizens ofthat it involves the mayor and allegedthe video. pay any money and did not obtain a copy of

Doolittle and Donovan did see the video however - three times.As the Star was continuing to investigate these allegations, the U.S. website Gawkerbroke the story that it had been approached by a mln selling a videotape of TorontoMayor Rob Ford smoking crack cocaine. Gawker editor Johi Cook reported that he thentravelled to Toronto and viewed the video.The Star determined then that it must report on its ongoing investigation and tell readersthat its reporters had seen the video and'what they hJd seen was in line with what theGawker editor had seen. Clearly, these allegationi were in the public interest and theStar had a responsibility to report what it thJn knew about the mayor and theseallegations.As the May 17 story told readers, the Star's reporters were shown the video on theevening of Friday, May 3, in the back of a car parked in an apartment complex at DixonRd. near Kipling Ave. in the north end of Etobicoke.The reporters were allowed to watch and listen to the video three times. After, bothreporters separately made written notes of what they saw and heard. Both repofters,prior to watching the video, studied numerous city-h'all-related videos of Ford and, theyseparately concluded the man in the video ruas Ford.

a chair, wearing a white shirt, top buttonsss crack pipe. Ford is incoherent, tradingthe clearly impaired mayor by raising topicsthe Don Bosco high school football teamFord coaches," the story states.The article also makes clear that "The Star had no way to verify the authenticity of thevideo." lt also tells readers that attempts to reach the mayor and members of his staff toget comment on this story were unsuccessful. All of this is the due diligence responsiblejournalism demands.

s, the Star has continued to investigate andublic interest. lt has continued to seek outs strong denials of the crack cocaine


25/27

e3As the Star reported, the day the Star published its report of the video, Ford called theStar,s report "ialse" and "ridiculous." When Ford made a public statement almost a weeklater, the Star reported accurately what he said. "There has been a serious accusationfrom the Toronto Star that I use crack cocaine. I do not use crack cocaine, nor am I anaddict of crack cocaine. As for a video, I cannot comment on a video that I have neverseen or does not exist."ln the days following, the Star continued its investigation. lt reported that sourcesrevealedio the Staithat in the days following publication of the Star's story, the mayortold senior aides not to worry about a video appearing to show him smoking crackcocaine because he knew where it was. The Star also reported that Toronto policeinterviewed the mayor's (now former) chief of staff, Mark Towhey, after Towhey calledthem to report he'd'heard of a possible link between the video and the death of a manphotographed with the mayor. As well, it reported that the picture of Ford with themurdelred man and two others, now arrestec - the photo the men with the video hadgiven the Star - was taken outside an Etobicoke house notorious for drug problems.Some of this reporting involved confidential sources. ln all cases, these sources werequestioned extensive"ly and known to the Star's senior editors, including Editor-in-Chiefnllcfraet Cooke and Mlnaging Editor Jane Davenport (and legal counsel) who hadextensive meetings with the reporters involved and did not publish anything unless theywere convinced of the reliability and believability of the sources. This is in line with thesm to assess the reliability of sources and thethat "it may be responsible to rely on confidentialances."ln summary, the star believes its reporting on the video alleging showing_ Toronto'smayor r*ot ing crack cocaine is a matter of public importance and in fulfilling themedia,s role of holding government and public officials to account, it had a responsibilityto report on these r"irlr allegations. And, while the Star indeed would have wanted toobtain the video viewed by rep.-orters Doolittle and Donovan for further verification, it atall times reported re.ponsibly in the public interest on its existence and its contents'As of this writing, the Star continues to investigate this ongoing story and continues todiligently attempt to obtain the video.Best RegardsKathy English, Public Editor, Toronto Starcc John Cruickshank, PublisherMichael Cooke, Editor-in-ChiefJane DavenPort, Managing EditorKevin Donovan, lnvestigations EditorRobyn Doolittle, RePorter


26/27

-English, KathyFrom: Francesca D [[email protected]]Sent: Sunday, August 04,2013 10:14 PMTo: Don McCurdyCc: English, KathySubject: RE: Press Council complaintDear Don,Sorry but I have been away for a while; I hope I am not replying too late.I have reread the thoughtful response from K. English of the Toronto Star and if possible, would like tohave my complaint considered. I do not want it considered if I have to appear in Court or have alawyer, or if the Star may sue me. I am upset with the situation as is but do not want to add furtherstress to my life.Please let me know how many other people are filing a complaint.The aim of the Toronto Star since Mayor Rob Ford announced that he would be running for Mayor ofToronto seems to have been to denigrate and demean him at every turn and at any possibility. Iassumed that was the job of the CBC, but will not go into that.That the Toronto Star owns and runs NOW magazine allows them to publish articles against MayorFord that would not be acceptable in the daily paper, even bytheirstandards.Yes, I did read how religiously and thoroughly the Toronto Star studied the offer of the video, theextrememeasuresandstepstheytooktoconfirmtheirversionofthetruth. lftheyweresocertainabout the accuracy of this video they themselves should have provided the money for this allegedvideo before it 'disappeared'. That they, gleefully it seems to me, reported that Gawker(?) wasraising SZOO,O0O before releasing this video, smacked of an evil bent in someone's thought processes.The Toronto Star seems to have an agenda to destroy Mayor Rob Ford. lt would be interesting to knowthe reason for this, some time or other.It would be a pleasure to see the Toronto Star admit that Mayor Rob Ford walked into a nest of snakesonce he won the election. The left-leaning councillors will not give him a break and put up everyobstacle they can imagine to foil his achievements.That the Toronto Star seemed to praise David Miller and to a large extent George Smitherman, GlenMurray, etc. displays the bias of the Toronto Star. lt is definitely not Conservative, nor even middle ofthe road but caters to the left-Liberal slant that seems to have been destroying Toronto and Ontarioover the past few years.ln many respects I do enjoy the Toronto Star, although I do tend to ignore some of their columnists asthey tend to overly push the Star's left-wing agenda. The Toronto Star has produced some wonderfulwork against Ornge, the gas plants, etc. Some of this work is brilliant. Except when they use this samebrilliancetoconcoctaversionofthetruthagainstMayorRobFord. lwouldhopethattheirotherworkis totally honest, but it does raise questions, does it not?Obviously I do like Rob Ford, and accept that he is not perfect; but then which one of us is?The man is out to save money for the taxpaying citizens, corral the perks that the employees of the Cityof Toronto receive, includingthe councillors of allstripes. By nature lthink he is a decent and goodman who is not suave like his brother or Holyday. Possibly if he could 'play the game' the Toronto Starmight be more pleased with him. Rob Ford seems to call things as he sees them, without vetting hiswords. But I do believe that he is a man of honesty and is well-intentioned.I also believe that the Toronto Star should admit defeat and just back ofl if they do not want toacknowledge the good things he has done for our City of Toronto. There are many other problems that916120t3


27/27

Page2 of2K.hey could deal with.Thank you for following this complaint(Ms) Darylle DonleyFrom : [email protected]: Fri, 26 Jul2013 i_!:39:43 -0400Subject: Press Council complaintTo: francescamex@ hotmail.comCC: [email protected] Darylle,I understand the Toronto Star sent to you a response to the complaint you filed to the Ontario pressCouncil.Please let me know if you are satisfied with the Star's response or, if you are not satisfied, would likethe Press council to consider your compraint for a public hearing.I would appreciate your response by Tuesday July 30.Thank you for your consideration.Don McCurdyExecutive DirectorOntario Press Council

Documents

Submissions to Ontario Press Council Hearing