3 ms·

This reminds me of something I’ve been mulling over for a while. Should it be illegal for a media outlet to publish the untested claims of a lawsuit? I’ve see

by zionic 5y ago

This reminds me of something I’ve been mulling over for a while. Should it be illegal for a media outlet to publish the untested claims of a lawsuit? I’ve seen this behavior all too often. “XYZ happened, person A did this, claims new suit”. You can sue over just about anything, and make whatever absurd claims you want. People see these headlines and believe as if they have been settled in court when this is almost never the case at print time.

ascagnel_ 5y ago
I think it's fine to report on the claims in a lawsuit once an initial hearing has taken place. If a judge reviews the claims and believes them to be reliable enough for the case to proceed, then it's enough to report as long as it's made clear that the claims are from a lawsuit that hasn't been fully tested in court.
- rhino369 5y ago
  The standard for surviving a motion to dismiss is really low in Federal Court. The court mostly assumes the factual allegations are true and then decides whether a claim could be made based on the law. So it's mostly a tool to weed out legally deficient law suits, but not factually wrong law suits. The judge won't consider the actual evidence until the case progresses pretty far--the summary judgement stage. But even then, the judge only grants summary judgement if there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact.
sva_ 5y ago
I think news media outlets usually have to throw an "allegedly" in there somewhere. This is a direct link to the lawsuit though. The title was chosen by a user, presumably a private individual.
- pixelgeek 5y ago
  Or "claims are untested in court" is a common disclaimer in Canada
mherdeg 5y ago
My one firmly held view about reporting on lawsuits is that it should be stigmatized to publish an article that doesn't also publish the docket number. It's just cruel and shortsighted for the reporter to have the complaint right in front of them and not (1) publish the docket number and venue so readers can look up the current state of the case themselves; maybe also (2) publish the PDF.
- colejohnson66 5y ago
  TechDirt is pretty good in this regard: they provide the PDFs which have the docket numbers on them.
dpe82 5y ago
I think making that sort of thing illegal raises a lot of thorny free speech and press freedom issues; a related and perhaps more approachable question might be: should it be considered journalistically unethical to produce such a headline?
- BizarroLand 5y ago
  It would be far more ethical to produce both suit and opposition. "Person A alleges Company B did X, causing them to suffer damages. Company B states that X was actually Y and that they are not responsible for the damages Person A suffered. The courts will decide."
  - mind-blight 5y ago
    That is essentially what sueing is. Class action lawsuit filed seems very clear and concise to me. I expect to find those exact details in the article given the title
    - BizarroLand 5y ago
      Yes, but that is what I think the press should support, rather than amplifying the most outrage producing view of the situation (of the type where the headline reads: "Company B's faulty widgets lead to Person A's excruciating death!" subtitle: "Screamed for hours the whole time he was dying. Family sues for millions" and then you later find out that Person A bought a bank vault full of widgets and swan dived into them like Scrooge McDuck). Neutral news, or at least somewhat equally amplified and balanced views that don't have to be arbitrarily oppositional in nature.
IncRnd 5y ago
Lawsuits are public records at the time they are filed, which in general is one of the foundational principles of the US. This is done for a good reason, so that judges and prosecutors can be held accountable.
seoulmetro 5y ago
Media Outlets can lie about anything, that includes already objectively justified data that came out of a direct legal proceeding. I've seen this done a lot and it's done in such a way where they have blatantly lied and stated "X did Y" but actually the case stated and proved that "X never did Y". How to correct that Media Outlet? Waste $$$ and time to get them to change their fake news. It doesn't work.

by zionic 5y ago

ascagnel_ 5y ago

I think it's fine to report on the claims in a lawsuit once an initial hearing has taken place. If a judge reviews the claims and believes them to be reliable enough for the case to proceed, then it's enough to report as long as it's made clear that the claims are from a lawsuit that hasn't been fully tested in court.

rhino369 5y ago
The standard for surviving a motion to dismiss is really low in Federal Court. The court mostly assumes the factual allegations are true and then decides whether a claim could be made based on the law. So it's mostly a tool to weed out legally deficient law suits, but not factually wrong law suits. The judge won't consider the actual evidence until the case progresses pretty far--the summary judgement stage. But even then, the judge only grants summary judgement if there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact.

sva_ 5y ago

I think news media outlets usually have to throw an "allegedly" in there somewhere. This is a direct link to the lawsuit though. The title was chosen by a user, presumably a private individual.

pixelgeek 5y ago
Or "claims are untested in court" is a common disclaimer in Canada

mherdeg 5y ago

My one firmly held view about reporting on lawsuits is that it should be stigmatized to publish an article that doesn't also publish the docket number. It's just cruel and shortsighted for the reporter to have the complaint right in front of them and not (1) publish the docket number and venue so readers can look up the current state of the case themselves; maybe also (2) publish the PDF.

colejohnson66 5y ago
TechDirt is pretty good in this regard: they provide the PDFs which have the docket numbers on them.

dpe82 5y ago

I think making that sort of thing illegal raises a lot of thorny free speech and press freedom issues; a related and perhaps more approachable question might be: should it be considered journalistically unethical to produce such a headline?

BizarroLand 5y ago
It would be far more ethical to produce both suit and opposition. "Person A alleges Company B did X, causing them to suffer damages. Company B states that X was actually Y and that they are not responsible for the damages Person A suffered. The courts will decide."
- mind-blight 5y ago
  That is essentially what sueing is. Class action lawsuit filed seems very clear and concise to me. I expect to find those exact details in the article given the title
  - BizarroLand 5y ago
    Yes, but that is what I think the press should support, rather than amplifying the most outrage producing view of the situation (of the type where the headline reads: "Company B's faulty widgets lead to Person A's excruciating death!" subtitle: "Screamed for hours the whole time he was dying. Family sues for millions" and then you later find out that Person A bought a bank vault full of widgets and swan dived into them like Scrooge McDuck). Neutral news, or at least somewhat equally amplified and balanced views that don't have to be arbitrarily oppositional in nature.

IncRnd 5y ago

Lawsuits are public records at the time they are filed, which in general is one of the foundational principles of the US. This is done for a good reason, so that judges and prosecutors can be held accountable.

seoulmetro 5y ago

Media Outlets can lie about anything, that includes already objectively justified data that came out of a direct legal proceeding. I've seen this done a lot and it's done in such a way where they have blatantly lied and stated "X did Y" but actually the case stated and proved that "X never did Y". How to correct that Media Outlet? Waste $$$ and time to get them to change their fake news. It doesn't work.