With Friends Like These…

ABC knew it could win but decided not to defend its own reporters or the public.

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


In February 1994, ABC’s newsmagazine “Day One” ran a tough, well-documented investigation revealing that tobacco companies deliberately add nicotine back into cigarettes after removing it during the manufacturing process–boosting profits by restoring a substance known to hook consumers. The story garnered two major journalism awards, as well as a $10 billion libel lawsuit from Philip Morris. The huge amount ensured headlines, despite the little-reported fact that Virginia, where the suit was filed, places a $350,000 limit on punitive damages.

ABC had told the truth and possessed the resources to battle the suit. Still, the network decided it would rather quit than fight–and, apparently, had planned this decision from day one. Alan Braverman, chief counsel for Capital Cities/ABC, hired his old law firm, Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, to pave the way for a settlement.

The lawyers handling ABC’s defense, led by Stephen Sachs and Roger Witten, had little libel experience. While Philip Morris aggressively pursued its case, deposing the ABC staffers who worked on the story and looking for possible holes in their investigation, Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering was passive. For example, when it was disclosed that the judge selected to try the case, Theodore J. Markow, had a brother who was a plant manager for Philip Morris, ABC’s legal team declined to request another judge.

Meanwhile, Philip Morris was relentlessly digging into the backgrounds of “Day One” reporters, in an effort to discredit them and discover the identity of “Deep Cough,” an anonymous tobacco industry source who had contributed to the story. The ABC legal team made only halfhearted efforts to defend reporters from Philip Morris’ harassment, sitting by while the judge issued an unprecedented order permitting Philip Morris to subpoena one month of the reporters’ phone, credit card, and airline records. By the time the law firm protested and convinced the judge to reverse his order, Philip Morris already had obtained seven years of American Express card records for the lead reporter. The ABC lawyers delayed telling the reporter the full extent of what had happened. (A lawyer involved in the case blamed the fiasco on American Express. When asked if the law firm had ever represented American Express, the lawyer said he didn’t know. It had–a possible conflict of interest.)

In order to determine their chances should the lawsuit go to court, ABC’s lawyers conducted two simultaneous mock trials in the heart of tobacco country. The trials were held after Philip Morris had done its discovery of ABC documents, but before ABC had done any. In effect, the trials matched Philip Morris’ best case with ABC’s worst. Nonetheless, in both mock trials the jury found in favor of ABC by majorities of 11 to 3. For ABC to have lost the libel case, a jury would have had to render a unanimous verdict against them. (Lawyers involved in the case refuse to comment.)

Despite such promising signs, ABC chose not to go to trial. From the beginning, say several ABC sources, back-channel negotiations were taking place between top executives at ABC and Philip Morris. The language for an ABC apology already was being crafted within the first weeks of the case. Also, according to several people who worked on the exposé, ABC’s defense team did not reconstruct how “Day One” reported and produced the story until months after Philip Morris initiated the lawsuit.

ABC’s lawyers did prepare a brief requesting summary dismissal in the event the lawsuit went to trial. Running some 50 pages long, the brief cited evidence that Philip Morris “precisely controls the strength and quantity of this physically separate, nicotine-containing tobacco extract that it adds to the tobacco sheet.” Despite the network’s pending settlement, some staffers requested this brief be filed with the court to substantiate ABC’s reporting. ABC refused. Instead, claiming they didn’t want to upset Philip Morris, they filed a one-page “summary” of the brief. The full brief was placed under seal at the request of Philip Morris, which argued the document revealed “proprietary secrets.” (In January, the full brief was leaked to the Legal Times.)

In August of 1995, a year and a half after the story ran, ABC settled the lawsuit by agreeing to pay $15 million in legal fees and by offering a public apology on a minor point in the documentary concerning nicotine added from “outside sources.” The tobacco industry was triumphant. “Apology accepted,” Philip Morris crowed in full-page ads in 700 publications nationwide.

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate