The Mayor v. the Magazine

For reasons that seem to be rooted in the public mood, muckraking is a cyclic form of journalism. If a society is troubled, it suspects that something is wrong with its system or its leaders; a free press responds by finding out what that something is. Hence the recent exposes of the Mafia, Senator Dodd, slaughterhouses, Abe Fortas, American automobiles, poverty funds misuse, hot dogs, drug companies, Pentagon spending, Senator Long, Medicare profiteering, Congressman Gallagher. And last week, the charge in Look magazine that Joseph L. Alioto, the dynamic and popular mayor of San Francisco, is involved with the Mafia.

A politician on the rise, Alioto made the nominating speech for Hubert Humphrey in Chicago and was one of the men in the running for the Democratic vice-presidential nomination. Yet, according to Look, he is "enmeshed in a web of alliances with at least six leaders of La Cosa Nostra." In that web, Alioto provided mobster friends with "bank loans, legal services, business counsel and opportunities, and the protective mantle of his respectability. In return, he has earned fees, profits, political support and campaign contributions."

Even before the magazine reached the newsstands, Alioto blasted the charges as "a pack of lies" and distributed a 69-page "Analysis of Each and Every allegation in the Look article," denying any wrongdoing.

The mayor mounted an offense as well as a defense. Represented by his own law firm, he filed what is potentially the most explosive libel suit against a magazine since 1963, when former Georgia Football Coach Wally Butts sued the Saturday Evening Post for a story saying that he conspired with Alabama Coach Paul ("Bear") Bryant to fix a Georgia-Alabama football game.* Alioto demanded $7,500,000 in actual damages and $5,000,000 in punitive damages, arguing that "the editorial management of Look met and agreed, in order to increase circulation, advertising revenues and profits, to adopt a reckless policy of sensationalism."

Easily Used. The freelancers who wrote the story, Richard Carlson, 28, a reporter for San Francisco's KGO-TV, and Lance Brisson, 26, former staff writer for the Los Angeles Times, were described in the suit as "relatively young and essentially inexperienced." This is Carlson's sixth major investigative scoop. One of his first resulted in a prison sentence for a San Francisco official involved in the embezzlement of federal funds. Says Carlson about Alioto: "A politician can be used so easily if he messes around with people like these."

San Francisco's two newspapers felt differently, putting up a strenuous defense of Alioto. The Chronicle rejected "this unfortunate piece of journalism as an imputation of guilt by association." The Examiner reprinted almost all of the mayor's lengthy denial and bannered an eight-column headline about an event of more than 50 years ago: ALIOTO'S UNCLE DEFIED MAFIA WAS SLAIN.

Both papers claim that they investigated the charges and found them unwarranted, so refutation or corroboration is likely to come only in the libel trial--if the case ever reaches a courtroom. Libel suits, and the threat of libel suits, are an embarrassed public official's reflex response to exposure. Yet few suits ever reach the trial stage, particularly in the light of recent Supreme Court decisions involving libel of public figures. To win, Alioto must prove malicious intent or utter carelessness in checking on the part of Look, Carlson and Brisson. Butts won his case because the Post made virtually no effort to check the story. Look, however, released a statement saying that many man-hours were spent checking and re-checking the piece. While some foresaw Alioto's political doom, others predicted his victory in court and a huge sympathy vote if he runs against Ronald Reagan for Governor in 1970. The only certainty in the affair, wrote Columnist Herb Caen, is that "Look's Annual All-American City Award will not go to San Francisco this year."

* Butts won a verdict of $3,060,000 which was later reduced in federal court to $460,000 and accepted by all parties.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.