Note: U.K.'S High Court Not Magazine Friendly

Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management, April 1, 2003 by Michael Learmonth

Byline: MICHAEL LEARMONTH

Memo to tycoons from Russia and other nascent capitalist societies: a full-page ad in the New York Times is probably not the best way to convince the world you're not a gangster. A day in England's High Court, however, might do the trick.

Well, at least Boris Berezovsky got half of his image rehab strategy right. The Russian oil tycoon was the subject of a tough Forbes profile in 1996 titled, "The Godfather of the Kremlin?" In the piece, writer Paul Klebnikov tracked Berezovsky's rise during Russia's transition from a Soviet to a capitalist economy and linked the mogul to Chechen gangsters and the killing of Vladislav Listiev, a popular TV personality.

None too pleased with the profile, Berezovsky took his case to Britain's High Court where libel laws differ. Unlike in America - where magazines operate under the shelter of the First Amendment - the British courts offer little protection to journalists covering public figures. In libel cases, the burden of proof is placed on the accused (in this case, the magazine), not the accuser.

Forbes' lawyers argued that Russia or the U.S. would be a far more appropriate venue for the case (at the time of the suit Forbes circulated only 2,000 issues in the U.K.), but the House of Lords ruled that the case could proceed in England.

Trapped in the U.K. court system, Forbes had to prove what the Moscow police could not - that Berezovsky had indeed killed Listiev (even though the article made it plain that the murder "remained unsolved"). Last month, after six years of litigation, Forbes finally extricated itself from the costly morass with a statement in open court, saying it "accepts that there is no evidence that Mr. Berezovsky was responsible for the murder of Vladislav Listiev and that it was wrong to characterize Mr. Berezovsky as a mafia boss."

Berezovsky, unwilling to celebrate his vindication quietly, announced his innocence with full-page ads in the New York Times, the Financial Times, and London's Daily Mail. Unfortunately, this is where Berezovsky's media savvy ended. The ads did little to restore his rep, but rather introduced Berezovsky to the masses as "that Russian guy who says he's not a murderer." (Note to Boris: Big PR mistake.)

Still, the case has upped the ante on media grudge matches as other aggrieved public figures look to take a slap at American magazines in Britain's High Court. Next up: The New Yorker. Stung by a story that claimed Richard Perle would benefit financially from a war in Iraq, the chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board is reportedly going venue-shopping in the U.K.