DRUG OFFICE HAD DEAL WITH NEWSPAPERS, TOO

WASHINGTON - The New York Times took quite a whack at the White House
drug-policy adviser and the television networks for cooperating on anti-drug
efforts, saying in its lead editorial Tuesday that such arrangements could
lead to "the possibility of censorship and state-sponsored propaganda."

But it turns out that the New York paper also has a cooperative relationship
with the drug-control office, and also received financial benefits in
exchange for activities in conjunction with the White House.

"I knew absolutely nothing about this," said Howell Raines, the paper's
editorial-page editor, yesterday. "If I had known, I would have mentioned it
in the editorial."

The New York Times has plenty of company. The drug office says it is
spending $11.3 million this year to advertise in 250 newspapers, including
The Washington Post. White House officials say that in three cases - two of
them involving The Times and The Post - newspapers were granted $200,000 in
financial credits that reduced the amount of public-service advertising they
are required to provide under the program.

The six major broadcast networks have drawn criticism for allowing the drug
office to review scripts and tapes of such popular shows as "ER" and
"Beverly Hills, 90210," with the government in some cases making suggestions
before the programs aired.

The arrangement with newspapers is different in one key respect: Both White
House officials and newspaper executives say the administration deals only
with advertising and does not examine news stories either before or after
they are published.

"There was no involvement by editorial employees of the Times and no advance
content reviews or vetting, which is the critical issue where the networks
are involved," Raines said.

Still, there are monetary incentives to play ball. Under a 1997 law, once
the drug office decides to advertise on a network or in a newspaper, the
media outlet is required to donate a comparable amount of air time or space
for public-service ads. In practice, say executives at Ogilvy, the drug
office's advertising agency, newspapers fulfill their requirement by
providing a 50 percent discount on the ads, which typically include two
full-page displays and 12 smaller ads in the course of a year.

In the case of The New York Times, the paper produced 30,000 booklets under
its Newspapers in Education program to guide New York-area teachers on
dealing with drug-abuse questions. In most cases, these teacher guides
included eight articles on drug use that had previously been published in
the paper.

The paper plans a second round of booklets to be distributed nationally.
Similar information was posted on a Times Web site dealing with education -
all of which entitled the paper to financial credits under the federal
program.

"We did meet with them and talk about the whole concept," a White House
official said. "We looked at the piece after it was written, simply for
accuracy."

Shona Seifert, an Ogilvy executive, said, "Programs and activities that
cascade anti-drug messages out to communities are welcomed and embraced."

Ogilvy executives say they are spending an additional $9 million on
anti-drug advertising in magazines, including Time, Newsweek, People,
Reader's Digest, Better Homes & Gardens and Family Circle. They also say
they have an arrangement with Internet provider America Online to carry
anti-drug messages.

After the controversy about cooperating with the networks erupted last week,
Barry McCaffrey, the White House drug-policy adviser, issued new guidelines
under which the government will no longer review individual programs until
after the episodes have been aired. ABC executives had said they were ending
their cooperation because the administration was requiring them to provide
the episodes in advance.