Page One

A Request for Retraction

Tuesday May 27, 2003

The following letters were exchanged between Aran Kaufer and Planet Executive Editor Becky O’Malley: 

 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I am writing to object to the characterizations contained in your article “Doyle House Demolished For Kennedy Project,” of May 22.    

The pertinent facts about me are as follows: I was appointed to the Landmarks Preservation Commission prior to having any association with Panoramic Interests, LLC and well after the LPC had made any decisions related to the Darling Florists Project. Your article contains insinuations relating to my appointment by Councilmember Breland which you know to be patently false.  I demand that you formally retract your implication that my role with the LPC and my employment with Panoramic Interests are in any way related. 

The people of Berkeley deserve fair and balanced news.  It is obvious that the Berkeley Daily Planet cannot provide this service. 

Aran Kaufer 

 

• 

Dear Aran, 

Thank you for your letter.  It’s too late today to get in the Friday edition, but the Planet will be happy to run it on Tuesday. 

I notice there was one factual mistake in the caption of the picture in last Tuesday’s edition. I see that your name is misspelled, so we will correct that error on Tuesday. 

Your letter does not appear to say that any of the other information in the caption was factually incorrect as printed. Please inform the Planet as soon as possible if you can cite any  factual statement in the caption which you believe to be untrue and for which you request a retraction. Please also inform the Planet about what you believe the correct fact to be in such a case. 

Becky O’Malley 

 

• 

Dear Ms. O’Malley, 

If you insist upon hiding behind a disguise of objectivism with statements like “factually incorrect as printed,” that is your choice.  However, no legitimate newspaper would publish a statement like “Kaufer was recently appointed to the commission by City Councilmember Margaret Breland, who received significant campaign contributions from Kennedy and his business associates,” which obviously and willfully insinuates bribery, without a modicum of evidence. 

 It’s your hobby, print what you like. 

 Aran Kaufer