李谷一状告汤生午的官司,调解中主要的分歧,就是原告要求汤生午承认报道“完全失实”。照南阳地委宣传部的一位副部长说,如果汤生午承认了这点,赔的钱可以由公家负担,对汤生午还可继续使用。而汤生午则认为他的报道基本属实,因此拒绝了那位副部长的好意,选择了一个“更惨的”结果。这场官司的胜败关键,就在汤生午的报道是“基本属实”还是“完全失实”。从各种新闻报道中可以看到,汤生午的报道大概讲了四件事情,一是李谷一说韦唯得了艾滋病;二是李谷一扣发了韦唯的工资;三是李谷一扣住了韦唯的房子;四是李谷一在韦唯出国的问题上制造了障碍。而汤生午这些资料的来源,则来自韦唯的陈述。而报道写成以后,又两次经韦唯看 Li Guyi sued Tang Shengwu’s case that the main disagreement in the mediation was that the plaintiff had requested Tang Shengwu to admit his report of “complete dishonesty.” According to a deputy minister of the Nanyang prefectural propaganda department, if Tang Sanyu admitted this, the money lost can be borne by the public and can continue to be used for the soup. However, Tang Sanyuan assumed that his report was basically true, and therefore rejected the deputy minister’s good intentions and chose a “miserable” result. The key to the victory or defeat of this lawsuit is whether the coverage of Tang’s lunch was “basically true” or “totally untrue.” We can see from various news reports that there are about four things reported by Tang Shengwu in the afternoon. First, Li Guyi said Wei Wei got AIDS. Second, Li Guyi withdrew Wei Wei’s salary. Third, Li Guyi bucked Wei Wei’s house. Fourth, Li Guyi Obstacles were created on the departure of Wei Wei. The source of these data, however, comes from Wei Wei’s statement. After the report was written, it was read twice by Wei Wei