ГУЛаг Палестины

had been realized. It was juden-frei, free of Jews. In

the 50 years since, Jews have drifted in from other

parts of the old Soviet Union, about 7,000 now in

[Lviv]. For some Ukrainians, that's 7,000 too many.

Rabbi BLEICH: Yeah. Well, that's not a secret.

They're saying that they want the Jews out.

...

SAFER: The western Ukraine is fertile ground for

hatred. Independence only underlined its backward

ness: uneducated peasants, deeply superstitious, in

possession of this bizarre anomaly: nuclear weap

ons.... Western Ukraine also has a long, dark history

of blaming its poverty, its troubles, on others.

[Unidentified] Man # 2: (Through Translator) Kikes

have better chances here than even the original popu

lation.

SAFER: Than the Ukrainians.

Man # 2: (Through Translator) Yes.

...

SAFER: The church and government of Ukraine have

tried to ease people's fears, suggesting that things are

not as serious as they might appear; that Ukrainians,

despite the allegations, are not genetically anti-Semitic.

But to a Jew living here ... such statements are little

comfort....

Transcript, Joint Appendix at 92-96.

CONTENTS:

Title Page

I. Background

II. News Distortion

A. Evidentiary standard

B. Licensee's policy on distortion

C. Nature of particular evidence

1. Extrinsic evidence

(a) Outtakes of the interview with Rabbi Bleich

(b) The viewer letters

(c) The refusal to consult Professor Luciuk

2. Evidence of factual inaccuracies

D. Misrepresentation

III. Conclusion

1. Extrinsic evidence

We discuss first the Commission's analysis of the three

pieces of evidence it found were "extrinsic." The Commission

has the responsibility to determine the weight of such evi

dence. The reasons it gives for doing so, however, must be

reasonable and not unfounded.

CONTENTS:

Title Page

I. Background

II. News Distortion

A. Evidentiary standard

B. Licensee's policy on distortion

C. Nature of particular evidence

1. Extrinsic evidence

(a) Outtakes of the interview with Rabbi Bleich

(b) The viewer letters

(c) The refusal to consult Professor Luciuk

2. Evidence of factual inaccuracies

D. Misrepresentation

III. Conclusion

(a) Outtakes of the interview with Rabbi Bleich

The outtakes show that all of Rabbi Bleich's quoted com

ments were made in response to questions about radical

nationalists. Serafyn argued to the Commission that CBS

had misrepresented Bleich's views when it broadcast his

statements without making clear the context in which they

were spoken and without including the qualifications and

positive statements that accompanied them. The Commission

found that the outtakes could indeed "properly serve as

circumstantial evidence of intent," but went on to find that

they did not demonstrate an intent to distort the news

because:

Rabbi Bleich's latter, allegedly misleading comments im

mediately followed ... Safer's statement ... that only

"some Ukrainians" are anti-Semitic.... Indeed, that

the focus of the "60 Minutes" program was upon only a

certain sector of the Ukrainian population is evident from

at least three other express references by Safer to

"Ukrainian ultranationalist parties," "the Social National

ists," and other apparently isolated groups of Ukrainians.

Thus, rather than constitute a distortion, Rabbi Bleich's

negative comments about Ukrainians as utilized can

rightly be viewed as limited to only a segment of the

Ukrainian population.... Nor do we find intent to

distort because CBS did not include in its episode posi

tive statements about Ukraine made by Rabbi Bleich....

[T]he determination of what to include and exclude from

a given interview constitutes the legitimate "journalistic

judgment" of a broadcaster, a matter beyond the Com

mission's "proper area of concern."

WGPR, 10 FCC Rcd at 8147.

Serafyn argues upon appeal that the Commission erred in

failing to find the outtakes persuasive evidence of CBS's

intent to distort. The Commission was not unreasonable,

however, in finding that Safer's phrase "some Ukrainians"

and his other references to extremist groups effectively limit

ed the scope of Bleich's comments to "a segment of the

Ukrainian population." Id.

CONTENTS:

Title Page

I. Background

II. News Distortion

A. Evidentiary standard

B. Licensee's policy on distortion

C. Nature of particular evidence

1. Extrinsic evidence

(a) Outtakes of the interview with Rabbi Bleich

(b) The viewer letters

(c) The refusal to consult Professor Luciuk

2. Evidence of factual inaccuracies

D. Misrepresentation

III. Conclusion

(b) The viewer letters

The Commission held that the letters CBS received from

viewers were extrinsic evidence because they were "external

to the program." Id. at 8148. In the Commission's view,

however, the letters were not probative because the letter

writers were not

"insiders," that is, employees or members of manage

ment of CBS. Nor are they persons with direct personal