Gossip Columnist Acknowledges Page Six Payola

NY Post Columnist Acknowledges Freebies for

Coverage

By LARA SETRAKIAN

May 18, 2007

Richard Johnson, editor of Page Six and one of the most powerful gossip columnists in the media world, has admitted in today's New York Post to accepting a cash payment from New York restaurateur Nello Balan. Balan has been regularly mentioned in Page Six, the famed and widely read gossip page of the Post.

The Post reported that Jared Paul Stern, a former freelance writer for the newspaper, is threatening to sue the paper and sent a four-page litany of alleged ethical and legal violations by the gossip column. The Post reported that Stern's allegations by another Post staffer and self-proclaimed disgruntled employee, Ian Spiegelman, would be part of Stern's threatened lawsuit. A copy of the statement was obtained by ABC News' Law & Justice Unit. (Click HERE to read).

The document alleges that "accepting freebies, graft and other factors was not only condoned by the company, but encouraged as a way to decrease the newspaper's out-of-pocket expenses."

Friday's Page Six published those allegations, along with a point by point rebuttal in what observers call the longest Page Six article in history.

The one allegation Page Six admitted to was that of a $1,000 cash Christmas gift in 1997 from restaurateur Balan to Johnson. The Post's editor in chief admits the bribe was unethical.

"Richard Johnson made a grave mistake in accepting cash from Nello Balan," editor in chief Col Allan said Thursday, as quoted by the Post.

"[Johnson] was reprimanded, and policies were adopted that render such ethical lapses completely unacceptable."

Balan was featured in Page Six as recently as last week, when a May 12 item referred to him as a "restaurateur to the stars."

Neither Johnson nor Balan immediately returned calls for comment.

The allegations seem to have struck a nerve at the Post. Some of Johnson's normally chatty friends in the gossip circle declined to comment. But when Lloyd Grove, a former gossip columnist with the New York Daily News, was asked if he was surprised to hear about the cash transfer, he said, "It certainly doesn't look good."

Grove, who is currently a magazine writer, added: "In my experience, [this is ]pretty darn unique. Cash money pocketed for items -- that's just not done. It's hard to avoid getting the odd bottle of wine or the cheese basket, fruit basket. In New York everything is much looser, but not so loose that you could take money from people."

So how often do gossip columnists receive goodies and meals?

"It's a fairly frequent occurrence...it's just part of doing business," said Grove. "I don't feel ethically tainted because I've eaten something. Reporters all the time go to lunches and events. They often eat for free."

Stern himself was the subject of accusations that he tried to extort money from supermarket magnate Ron Burkle in exchange for favorable coverage. Federal law enforcement officials told ABC News last summer that they were looking into those allegations but they did not result in any criminal charges.

Spiegelman's statement seems to open a window onto the shadowy world of the gossip industry. In one of his claims, Speigelman suggests that favoritism factored into the newspaper's political coverage. News Corp., the parent company of the Post, is owned by conservative media mogul Rupert Murdoch.

The statement also alleges that "politicians such as Hillary Clinton and others in a position to grant Murdoch and News Corp. valuable concessions and favors were similarly [provided] in print&those who opposed him were punished by unflattering or detrimental coverage as a matter of course." From his statement it is unclear when the alleged favoritism took place. Friday's Page Six called that and other allegations "fantasy&smears and lies."

Spiegelman is most famous for reportedly trying to pick a fight with a then-46-year-old part-time publicist Doug Dechert last summer, apparently over a young woman, at a book party last year for author Toby Young. For that incident and for his general tough-guy public behavior and words, Spiegelman has been mercilessly mocked in postings on gossip Web sites like Gawker.com.

He seems all too willing to play along with his own bad press.

"The reporters at the Post are good people, they're good reporters,'' he told Howard Stern on Stern's radio show last summer. "The people who manage the Post are a bunch of scared little girls with no spines. If you're a VP at News Corp., you're a spineless little Julie." He reportedly sent a note filled with similar sentiments to Allan last year.

It is unclear when or whether Stern will file his lawsuit against the Post.

May 21, 2007

The Media Equation

Page Six Covers Itself, a Bit

Painfully

By DAVID CARR

If you were a member of the Bancroft family in the midst of deciding whether to sell Dow Jones & Company to Rupert Murdoch, reading Fridays New York Post might have made you choke on your bagel.

Page Six ran an extraordinarily long item at around 680 words, its the gossip column equivalent of Remembrance of Things Past describing an affidavit from Ian Spiegelman, a former writer for Page Six who was fired three years ago.

Mr. Spiegelman alleged, among other things, that his old boss at Page Six, Richard Johnson, accepted money from a restaurateur after friendly coverage and enjoyed a $50,000 bachelor party in Mexico thrown for him by Joe Francis, who brought the world the Girls Gone Wild videos.

Mr. Spiegelman also alleged that Col Allan, The Posts pit-bull editor in chief, accepted some free hospitality at the local strip club Scores. (Whew: at The New York Times, our idea of living on the edge is a second trip to the afternoon coffee cart.)

The affidavit also renewed allegations that Post coverage has been manipulated to protect the business interests of its owner. An item on a Chinese diplomat was spiked, according to the affidavit, which further alleged that Page Six went easy on the Clintons after they had reached a truce with Mr. Murdoch.

Nobody likes waking up and seeing their name plastered all over Page Six, but for Mr. Murdoch, the much chattered-about item is remarkably ill-timed. He is in the midst of a public makeover from ruthless mogul to reverent steward of the news because he wants to buy The Wall Street Journal. So while theres fun to be had with the allegations of payoffs and lap dances, it should be pointed out that the papers alleged behavior raises serious implications for Mr. Murdochs plans to buy The Journal.

But theres plenty of time for that later.

Mr. Spiegelmans allegations surfaced because Jared Paul Stern, another former reporter for Page Six, is seeking a settlement with The Post, which had suspended him after it was alleged that he tried to blackmail the grocery magnate Ronald W. Burkle. (Federal prosecutors declined to charge Mr. Stern). As part of the settlement negotiations, Mr. Stern sent along Mr. Spiegelmans affidavit.

In some legal circles that would be known as setting the gun on the table. But then The Post reached across the table, grabbed the gun and promptly shot itself right between the eyes.

Under a herald of trumpets, Lies & Smears Aimed at Post, the newspaper then made some stunning admissions. The Post acknowledged that Mr. Johnson did accept money from a restaurant in 1997, $1,000 was used to pay for a big day of drinking by the staff.

The big party for Mr. Johnson held by a sex-entertainment entrepreneur was wanly defended by a spokesman, who said Mr. Johnson had paid for his own flight. The item also quoted Mr. Allan saying that, while he had gone to Scores, his behavior had been beyond reproach (which somehow defeats the point).

More important, the allegations that coverage in The Post was finessed to the advantage of the papers owner were not denied beyond a blanket characterization of the affidavit as a tissue of lies from a disgruntled ex-employee.

The Post had been in negotiations with Mr. Sterns lawyer, Larry Klayman, about the possibility of a settlement, and it became clear they were not going to meet Mr. Sterns terms, which included some kind of return for him to the paper. Mr. Allan, Gary L. Ginsberg, a high-ranking official at the News Corporation, and Howard J. Rubenstein, a longtime spokesman for the paper, decided that the affidavit would inevitably show up somewhere and decided to pull the trigger themselves.

There is some logic to The Posts decision.

The Post wanted to break their own story so their denial would not be relegated to the last paragraph of a story in some other newspaper where all they would get to say is, We didnt do it. Mr. Rubenstein said. They wanted to portray what they claim are false accusations well, mostly false and control the context in which they appeared.

Just as likely, Mr. Allan, a ferociously competitive journalist, could not stand to have such a grand scoop appear elsewhere, especially in The Daily News, which has giddily covered every step of the imbroglio thus far.

We thought it was appropriate to read the charges in their totality and reach the appropriate conclusions, Mr. Allan said.

But one of the conclusions might be that the attentions of Mr. Johnson, an important franchise for The Post, can be bought, or at least rented.

Well, if I were to hire only people that had never made a mistake, I would be working in an empty room, Mr. Allan said, pointed out that Mr. Johnson had been reprimanded, whatever that means.

Mr. Allan also made clear that he was not about to sign off on any kind of arrangement that suggested he had endorsed kickbacks as a way of life at the newspaper or personally received favors, sexual or otherwise, allegations he flatly denies.

It may be entirely predictable that The Post would want to break the news first, but theres something paradoxical here as well. In an effort to blunt charges that newspaper coverage is slanted to defend Mr. Murdochs business interests, The Post used its signature column to do exactly that. The item was a weird act of journalistic jujitsu, even in the greasy, payback-rich environment of New York media gossip.

They say that there is no culture of vindictiveness or no culture of using the paper to business ends, said Mr. Spiegelman. But then again, that is exactly what they did on Friday.

Heres the part where the story walks back to Mr. Murdoch. Everything is a misdemeanor in the context of gossip world, but at a certain point, the conduct of Page Six begins to reflect on its newspaper host and its corporate owner.

It has been written here and elsewhere that Mr. Murdoch will eventually crack the Bancroft familys hold on Dow Jones. And if an owner were of a mind to use control of media to advance his own interests, that company would be a pretty nifty item to have in the tool belt.

Sure, when most people read the item on Friday, they probably just shrugged and said, Its The New York Post. Whaddaya expect? What would they say if it appeared in The Wall Street Journal?

NYTimes

May 23, 2010

Duchess of York Stung in Influence-Peddling

Video

By SARAH LYALL

LONDON Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York and the queens former daughter-in-law, has been in many mortifying positions in her many years in the public eye. But the latest one may have surpassed even the occasion in 1992 when a tabloid newspaper published photographs of her sunbathing topless while having her feet kissed by a Texas businessman (who was not her husband).

On Sunday, The News of the World, a tabloid, reported that the duchess had accepted $40,000 in cash and a promise of about $717,000 more from a rich businessman (really a reporter in disguise) in return for pledging to introduce him to Prince Andrew, her former husband and Queen Elizabeths second son.

If you want to meet him in your business, look after me and hell look after you, the paper quoted her as saying in reference to Andrew, the Duke of York. I can open any door you want.

In a statement, the duchess said: I very deeply regret the situation and the embarrassment caused. It is true that my financial situation is under stress. However, that is no excuse for a serious lapse in judgment and I am very sorry that this has happened. She did not say whether she planned to return the $40,000.

A statement from Buckingham Palace said, The Duke of York categorically denies any knowledge of any meeting or conversation between the Duchess of York and the News of the World journalist.

The News of the World, owned by Rupert Murdochs News Corporation, is best known for using elaborate undercover ruses, or huge payments to sources or both to expose sexual scandals involving public figures like sports stars and politicians.

In 2008, it covertly filmed Max Mosley, then president of the International Automobile Federation, being spanked during a session with several prostitutes wearing prison guard costumes. (It had to pay about $86,000 to Mr. Mosley when a judge found no merit in its claim that the session had n**i overtones.)

In 2006, the papers royal reporter was jailed for four months after being found guilty of hacking into the cellphone messages of people working for members of the royal family.

In the latest episode, The News of the World set up a complicated sting in which a reporter took the duchess to dinner at a London dining club, and then escorted her back to his apartment, where he placed $40,000 in $20 bills on a table in front of her.

A video accompanying the article shows the two negotiating terms. The reporter agrees to wire 500,000 into her British bank account, after which, Sarah promises, she will introduce him to Andrew, who serves as a quasi-official trade envoy for Britain.

Then you open up all the channels, whatever you need, whatever you want, she is shown saying, and then you meet Andrew and thats fine.

The video shows Sarah picking up and carrying off a computer case that purportedly contained the $40,000. But Sarah stresses that her ex-husband, whom she divorced in 1996 and with whom she has remained friends, cannot accept money because he is the prince of England.

He ever, ever, never, ever, ever he never does accept a penny for anything, she says. He does not and will not he is completely whiter than white.

Since her divorce, the duchess has written childrens books, worked as a spokeswoman for Weight Watchers and produced movies, among other things.

The News of the World quoted her as saying that she gets 15,000, or about $21,500, a year in her divorce settlement.

I have not got a bean to my name, she is quoted as saying. Im a taxpayer, a British taxpayer, and I left the royal family for freedom, and in freedom it means I am bereft. Im hopeless.