Media Roundup: Testimony and Oaths

The second week of the Conrad Black trial is over, and the testimony about the suspicious non-compete agreements, along with a David Radler anecdote, appears in the stories posted overnight:

1. The Chicago Tribune report, under Rudolph Bush's byline, includes the Kipnis-payment-memo item right after recounting Kipnis' turned-down request to Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc. (CHNI.) Notes the differing dollar amounts in each. (The former was used in the indictment, as cheques were issued on it.)

2. A Canadian Press report, webbed by 940 News and written by Romina Maurino. Provides a detailed wrap-up of the testimony of both Mike Reed and Thomas Henson, and also sketches out the testimony of Bill Paxton, CEO of the Paxton Group, and Lloyd Case, COO of Forum Communications. Both testified that they did not request a non-compete agreement from Hollinger International when buying one (Forum) or several (Paxton) properties from Hollinger Int'l. An abridgement of this report, credited to Ms. Maurino, focuses solely on the testimony of Mr. Reed and Mr. Henson.

3. The Evening Echo of Cork has webbed the Associated Press story, written by Mike Robinson, which also focuses on the testimony of the two major witnesses. This report specifies that the split of the non-compete payment was requested for the second CHNI deal. It was also webbed by Ireland Online.

4. NBC5 of Chicago has also webbed the Associated Press report. So does ABC7.

5. WIS10 of Columbia, South Carolina has webbed the Reuters report, written by Andrew Stern, as has the New Zealand Herald. It relays Mr. Paxton's testimony that he made a habit of paying non-compete fees to media companies that were "family-owned and the former owners were remaining in the community and might pose a competitive threat." He testified, under direct examination, that Hollinger Int'l didn't meet those criteria.

6. BusinessWeek.com has the AP "Summary Box" that notes that Mr. Paxton is returning to the stand next Monday.

7. The Bloomberg report has been picked up by the New York Times. Contains the fact that Community Newspapers Holdings, Inc. bought papers with circulations of 20,000 or less.

8. David Litterick's Telegraph report has been picked up by the New York Sun.

9. The Financial Post has a write-up that contains a quip from Amy St. Eve: "'I would have been very disappointed if you hadn't objected,' St. Eve joked." The report was written by Peter Brieger.

10. The Guardian is still covering the trial, with Andrew Clark still on the beat. His first report focuses on the "comic relief" moment, when Mr. Henson described Mr. Radler's negotiation tactic during a CNHI solicitation to buy 30 small newspapers from Hollinger Int'l. His second report details the testimony of Lloyd Case, which includes Mr. Case's opinion, given on the stand, that no non-compete fee was appropriate for the Jamestown Sun purchase, as there was no way that any company, including Hollinger Int'l itself, could have posed a competitive threat in Jamestown. It also has details on Bill Paxton's testimony, so far.

11. Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail has another report, focusing exclusively on Mr. Case's testimony. He reports that Mr. Case did not ask for a non-compete agreement, but because it was tacked on with no increase in the purchase price, "'[w]e'd be silly not to take it"'.

12. The Toronto Star has a story on the entire trial so far, using a set-and-setting narrative, written by Jennifer Wells.

13. The Edmonton Journal has a report available only to subscribers.

14. From the Chicago Sun-Times, a wrapup that begins with a depiction of David Radler's "foul-mouthed, obnoxious act."


Also: a mention of the Conrad Black trial has made it into the Toronto Star's daily horoscope. It's in the introductory "Thought For The Day."

And finally, an old pro-comeuppance commentary from Ann Woolner has made it onto the Bangkok Post, as has an old Nation write-up by Naomi Klein onto Rabble.ca. On the pro-vindication side, Mark Steyn's latest entry in his trial blog notes that the prosecution's thoroughness, with regard to entering each version of a standard newspaper-property sale contract into the record, is moving towards mind-dulling repetitivenss. He also notes that charging Mr. Kipnis was essential to the prosecution's case against all four of them, and he includes a moment showing a certain prickliness in Mr. Case when cross-examined by Edward Genson.