TV Asahi Corp. on June 16 reached a settlement with farmers in Saitama Prefecture who had sued over a 1999 news report on dioxin contamination. The farmers said the misleading report had seriously harmed their vegetable sales.

The settlement reached at the Tokyo High Court includes an apology from the Tokyo-based broadcast network for airing the disputed report, which it admitted contained inappropriate elements that misled viewers and caused major inconvenience to the farmers in Tokorozawa City. TV Asahi also paid the farmers a total of 10-million yen.

The settlement agreement did not include the farmers' demand that the broadcaster air the apology, but TV Asahi reported the news of the agreement on its "News Station" program later in the day, repeating its apology for having misled its viewers.

At issue was a Feb. 1, 1999, broadcast of its since-discontinued weeknight News Station news program. TV Asahi presented data from a private institute that said that up to 3.8 picograms of dioxin per gram had been detected in leafy vegetables produced in Tokorozawa. The anchor of the popular news program warned against the danger of dioxin contamination, referring to spinach in particular.

It was later determined that the private institute's data on the high concentration of dioxin had come from green-tea leaves, and that the broadcaster's report was not properly based on the precise findings of the institute. On Feb. 18, 1999, TV Asahi apologized during the same news program for harming the interests of farmers in Tokorozawa. But the farmers sued.

In May 2001, Saitama District Court rejected the suit, saying that although inappropriate expressions were used in the TV program, the main part of the report was true. The Tokyo High Court upheld the lower court ruling in February 2002.

But on further appeal in October 2003, the Supreme Court struck down the high court ruling and sent the case back to it. The top court said a decision on whether a TV news report damaged the social reputation of people it covered should be based on how the report was accepted by viewers. A comprehensive judgment needs to be made in consideration of the impression made by the entire program that featured the contentious news item, it said. It also ruled that there was not enough evidence to show that the principal facts presented by the TV Asahi report were true.

Despite the top court's rebuttal of TV Asahi's claim on the key issue, one of the justices handling the case issued a supplementary opinion to the ruling to note the significance of the broadcaster's report. That judge said the broadcaster's series of reports on dioxin contamination were in the public interest and would protect the farmers' interests in the long run.

At a news conference following the recent signing of the settlement, TV Asahi Corp. official Yasuharu Nakai said that the broadcaster opted for an amicable solution in line with the court recommendation after noting the praise for the dioxin reports in the supplementary opinion to the Supreme Court ruling.

"However, it is true that we have caused trouble to the plaintiffs and we must reflect on our conduct. Again, I would like to apologize and based on this reflection, strive for more accurate news reporting," he said.

When the Supreme Court ruling was first issued, TV Asahi issued a statement arguing that the decision threatened the people's right to know and freedom of the press. On this point, a defense attorney for TV Asahi told the news conference on June 16 that the top court decision, if interpreted objectively, implies that the impression viewers get from the overall content of a TV program is not always the decisive factor (in judging whether it has damaged any reputations) as some judicial journals suggested after the ruling.

"When it comes to the news-reporting method of issuing a warning to society by presenting data, we do not agree with the Supreme Court decision that all data must be fully verified. But, we have decided to focus on an amicable resolution at this point," the attorney said.

The farmers told a separate news conference that they accepted the proposed settlement because the apology was satisfactory and because TV Asahi promised to air the apology. They said they understood that airing the apology would establish that the news report was illegitimate and would symbolize an admission of responsibility. "We are getting 10 million yen in damages for our economic and mental suffering. Our suit was not aimed at obtaining any indemnity and so we are donating that money to promote local agriculture," they said.

Apparently embarrassed by the farmers' remarks, a TV Asahi spokesman later in the day said that the farmers' understanding of the settlement is at odds with that of the broadcaster. "We did apologize for causing a misunderstanding among viewers, but we never said that out news report itself was improper. In addition, we are paying the money as part of a settlement, not an indemnity," the spokesman said.