If a news organization (say, CNN, the Associated Press, or the New York Times) advertises themselves as un-biased reporters of the news, and then releases stories with a political slant, can I sue them for false advertising?
You could sue them. But you wouldn’t win.
sigh
Please note that this is why I put succesfully in the title.
If you could find something relevant to sue them under, I think you would have another larger problem. A single biased article doesn’t prove bias. In fact, every single article could be biased, and they might not be biased as a whole. You might introduce articles A, B, and C as evidence that the news source is skewed left, and might even be able to prove to the court that they are skewed. But they only have to show articles D, E, and F are skewed right, and you lose.
Uh … hair trigger. To expand on that a bit.
IAAL but this is not legal advice and if you’re serious you should consult a competent attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
First, you’d have to take a look at the specific false advertising statute that you want to apply. Not having one in front of me, I would not be surprised if there are many that contain specific exemptions for news reporting activity.
Even if there isn’t, news reporting gets the highest kind of First Amerndment protection and the law is least willing to entertain an action that might be seen as restricting the news media’s right to say whatever it wants, especially when it comes to hard news and political issues. A speaker has the right to be as biased as he or she wants; that’s a major component of free speech.
Second, I’m pretty sure that your judgement that a particular news organisation is “biased” would be seen by most courts as an opinion rather than as a provable fact. False advertising laws generally cover only statements that can be characterised as claims of fact rather than opinion. “My deodorant is best!” is not the kind of claim you can bring a false advertising action for.
Third, I would think that most false advertising laws would require you to show harm. I don’t think you’re going to be able to demonstrate that you have been harmed in any tangible way by a news report that you judge to be biased.
Fourth, most false advertising laws require the “statement” in question to prompt the consumer to do something, like purchase a product or service. I doubt very much that “they prompted me to watch their channel” is going to fit the kind of action that is required for the consumer to take.
IANAL (either) but I do believe that you would have to prove that you took some action on the basis of their stories, that you wouldn’t have otherwise taken, with the result that you suffered financial or other damage, such as to your reputation.
I would say that your chances of winning are virtually non-existent. Over and above how you were hurt by their bias because you believed them when they said they were un-biased, you are discussing opinion. What you perceive as un-biased is probably markedly different than the person sitting next to you and definitely markedly different than the said news-gathering organization. And as long as no one is injured by the opinion, there is no action that can be taken against them and won.
If they attempted to incite riots, or inspire someone to commit a crime, that is something completely different, and they could be taken to court for that (and even that is hard to win) but not because they were claiming to be unbiased. Basically if there is no harm, everyone in the U.S. is entitled to an opinion (even on what is biased and unbiased).
Their news stories are not advertising. Their opionions are not true or false. Therefor, you cannot sue them for false advertising.
I believe that you are applying rules of slander or defamation to this potential suit.
Suing for false advertising is in some ways a bit more simple. I state I have two dozen peanuts in my chocolate bar, you get a conclusive sampling of my chocolate bars showing only one and one half dozen peanuts in each and I have falsely advertised. (points go to anyone who knows the fictional case to which I refer)
You need not have suffered a lack of peanuts personally. This kind of case is often brought by a state or US district attourney on behalf of citizens ad does not to my knowledge involve punitive damages but usually involves a change in the advertising or the content referred to in the advertising. Private citizens can and do lobby their state and feder DA’s to file these kinds of suits as it is a risky and protracted venture which will usually cots tons of money if you paid a lawyer yourself (or just took time off work to testify).
Victory in this suit is possibly but would depend on many factors. I think the primary factor would be where the case was heard. Local bias would play a huge role. If you ask a leftist if a program is unbiased and the show happens to lean to the left you might often get the opinion that the program is fair and balanced, same goes for the sane folks on the right (wink).
Seriously, I usually claim to be right in the middle politically but on some issues I’m far left and on others I’m far right. You would have to find the proper fulcrum in your evidence to sway the jury your way to win this case.
Frankly it would probably be less expensive to just have all the biased reporters who claim impartiality while editorializing the news shot in the head. I know it would be good for ratings if it was done during the broadcast, in which case you could probably get the network owners to pay for it themselves.
I just don’t see how you are being wronged by a news organization’s claim to be unbiased and then deciding that the story had a bias.
The press in America has pretty much free rein to report what it wants within some very hard to cross borders (libel for one).
I believe a more effective remedy is to not read or watch or listen to news from sources that you consider biased.
[Hijack?]
How about this as a basis for a lawsuit? If you can demonstrate a broad pattern of substantive factual reporting errors, that management was aware of but failed to take steps to rectify, then perhaps this could be argued in terms of product liability.
But you’d still have to prove damage. Maybe if they do some story hyping an island vacation paradise, you book a couple of tickets, and you and your SO fly right into the local revolution that the network didn’t mention, AND you get shot. Then MAYBE you have a case.[/Hijack?]
- Anyone can sue anyone else for anything in the US; thats the beauty of our system
- You would have to be able to show and prove a tort or wrong
- You would have to show that as a result of the tort or wrong, you were damaged
- You would also have to show that ht edefendant was predominantly responsible for the tort and acted negligently or with malice
If you allege that they have violated a civilstatute federal/state/local then you may be able to persuade the US atty State AG or local prosecuting atty to press the claim
Hope this helps!
tekgraf