Share This Page
NFL

NFL demands retraction from New York Times on concussion article

| Tuesday, March 29, 2016, 6:00 p.m.

NEW YORK — The NFL has demanded The New York Times retract a story that called the league's concussion research flawed and likened the NFL's handling of head trauma to the tobacco industry's response to the dangers of cigarettes.

In a letter from its law firm to the general counsels of the newspaper and obtained by the Associated Press on Tuesday, the league said it was defamed by the Times. The NFL added the story published last Thursday did not “present a shred of evidence to support its thesis that the NFL intentionally concealed concussion research data.”

The NFL also said it will “more broadly reserve all of the league's rights and remedies,” a veiled threat of legal action.

Times sports editor Jason Stallman said, “We see no reason to retract anything.”

“The NFL apparently objects to our reporting that the league had ties to the tobacco industry,” Stallman added. “But, as the article noted, a co-owner of the Giants, Preston R. Tisch, also partly owned a leading cigarette company, Lorillard, and was a board member of both the Tobacco Institute and the Council for Tobacco Research, two entities that played a central role in misusing science to hide the risks of cigarettes. Also, the NFL and the tobacco industry shared lobbyists, lawyers and consultants.”

In its letter, signed by league attorney Brad Karp, the NFL said not only that the story did not establish any meaningful ties to the tobacco industry, but also that the headline was false and incendiary, and that a graphic attached to the story was misleading.

An NFL search of 14 million documents from the tobacco litigation archives found “significant connections” between the Times and the tobacco industry, the letter said, calling those connections “far more concrete than the phantom connections contrived by the Times purporting to tie the NFL to the tobacco industry.”

The Times story — its lead item on the front page — revealed some concussions that occurred in the NFL were omitted from the league's studies, despite NFL claims to the contrary.

“The league has always maintained that the studies were based on a data set that included every concussion that was diagnosed by a team doctor,” Stallman said. “In fact, our reporting showed that more than 100 such concussions — including some sustained by star players — were not included in the data set, resulting in inaccurate findings.”

But the NFL's letter stresses the studies relied on data that were not a complete count of all concussions in the league was “repeatedly and expressly disclosed in the studies themselves.”

It also accuses the Times of implying to its readers that the newspaper uncovered “a secret and nefarious plot by the league to suppress relevant data and manipulate the test results in a manner learned through the league's ‘ties' to Big Tobacco ... ”

The NFL said the research the Times focused on forms no part of the current work by the league's head, neck and spine committee.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.