Overlawyered’s Ted Frank argues that the Los Angeles Times’ series on “lawsuit urban legends” —which purports to examine “tall tales of outrageous jury awards”—is nothing short of an advocacy piece for the litigation lobby:
The Times mentions in particular the “Winnebago cruise control lawsuit” urban legend, and suggests the tort reform movement is based on false tales like that one. One problem with their theory: Google the Winnebago lawsuit, and you’ll find that the only people mentioning that entertaining (but false) story are… people pointing out that it is an urban legend. Jonathan Turley has done more to spread the story through his USA Today article insulting the tort-reform movement than anyone else. There are thousands of true tales of lawsuits on Overlawyered.com equally ludicrous, without the need to resort to the Winnebago story. It’s the litigation lobby that has made the most out of the Winnebago story, because by focusing on the occasional made-up tale, they can avoid addressing the real stories of abuse.
But you wouldn’t know it from the appallingly one-sided Los Angeles Times story.
Read the rest, and despair.
Or rather, ask yourself: how bad must our media have gotten if they’re willing to try to pawn off as investigative journalism the kind of puffery you’d expect to find in a press release from the Center for Justice & Democracy…?
****
update: Commenter Ron takes issue with Ted Frank’s assertion and quotes the Times article:
“A database search shows the Grazinski, Carson and Walton tales have been cited as true by a wide range of media outlets, including CNN; U.S. News & World Report; the American Spectator; the Oakland Tribune; the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram; the Deseret News of Salt Lake City; the Akron Beacon-Journal; the Greensboro, N.C., News & Record; and the Augusta, Ga., Chronicle.â€Â
I did my own quick Lexis search, and found, in addition to the references given above, the story was also reported as true in a 2003 column in the State Journal-Register in Illinois, a 2002 colmun in the Daily News, and the Ventura County Star (Cal.)
Ron says Ted Frank owes an apology. For my part, I took Frank to mean that the only people still mentioning the story since its debunking are those interested in keeping it alive as an urban legend in need of debunking.
Make your own call.
Litigation speaks truth to power! It protects the little people from the corporate cannibals who would devour them! And it is every journalist’s duty to try to change the world for the better! Truth be damned, we’re here to make a difference!
The “Hot coffee spilled on a Winnebago cruise control causes cruise control to malfunction lawsuit†is another particularly vile case for tort reform.
Obviously, Bush supporters have no problem basing their positions on fabrications, disinformation, and outright lies.
The rest of us have a huge problem with that, and this story is a great example of how corporate interests have used to media to frame the debate.
Remember, kids: “tort reform” is neo-con for “restricting victims rights.”
Yes, Captain Normal. It’s just all so “obvious.” Everything “neocons” do (what do neocons have to do with tort-reform, you ask? Beats the fuck out of me; it’s Don’s conspiracy) is “coded,” and only the special few who can see beneath the surface where the REAL TRUTH LIES and therefore DECODE THE NEOCON SPEAK stand between total government subjugation of the dopey, fat consurist sheeple.
Incidentally, Don, by “the rest of us,” I presume you’re talking about more than your 50 or so readers?
Actually “us†refers to Don and the mouse in his pocket with, amazingly enough, a mouse in its pocket.
Remember, kids: “tort reform†is neo-con for “restricting victims rights.â€Â
I see the short bus makes its stop here as well.
Two fine examples of lib-left-logic: a single false story (Winnebago) outweights dozens or hundreds of true stories; but forged documents that your story heavily relies upon are… what was the line, fake but accurate?
No, Don, “tort reform” is neo-con speech for “Let’s reform the tort system before it completely destroys our economy.”
Idiots who sue for coffee spillage and such (and that’s a TRUE story) give lawyers and the legal system a bad name.
But in lefty land that beats the “personal responsibility” cuss word.
God forbid we restrict anyone’s right to be a victim.
Remember, it is important that plaintiff’s lawyers like Peter Angelos find more host organisms…er…tortfeasors. He has an expensive baseball team to care for.
“Victims”?
You mean like the asshat who sued someone who complained about the service they got from his online store, along with the people who rain the mailing list they complained to?
Then sued the people who tried to raise money to defend the people he sued in the first suit?
Then threatened to sue anyone who called him an asshat for filing all these suits?
This guy has bragged that suing people is his hobby, and that while he just walks a few blocks to the Federal Courthouse, plops down $100 bucks and gets the court to hand-hold him through the suit, the people he sues have to hire lawyers in NYC and fly across country to defend themselves.
He’s one of your “victims”?
It’s always fun to throw bombs, but let’s be a little careful. Newbie research error number one is to limit your investigations to a quick Google search. As the article itself noted (and newbie research error number two is not carefully reading the article before you throw bombs at it):
“A database search shows the Grazinski, Carson and Walton tales have been cited as true by a wide range of media outlets, including CNN; U.S. News & World Report; the American Spectator; the Oakland Tribune; the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram; the Deseret News of Salt Lake City; the Akron Beacon-Journal; the Greensboro, N.C., News & Record; and the Augusta, Ga., Chronicle.”
I did my own quick Lexis search, and found, in addition to the references given above, the story was also reported as true in a 2003 column in the State Journal-Register in Illinois, a 2002 colmun in the Daily News, and the Ventura County Star (Cal.)
Ted Frank at Overlawyered owes a mea culpa and an apology, and you should probably note some sort of correction.
Remember, just because you didn’t find it on Google, doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
OK, Ron, you found the case mentioned in the MSM. All you’ve done is to prove that the MSM haven’t been checking their facts regarding tort-reform for awhile. And who, praytell, were these citations attributed to? Were they attributed to true tort-reform advocates or were they mentioned by the pro-litigation lobby in these stories? What’s the break down?
The point made by Ted Frank is that the pro-litigation lobby is setting up a strawman with the obvious intention of redirecting attention. I have no doubt that the Winnebago anecdote was touted by a tort-reformer or two, but is it really used as the silver bullet by pro-reformers that the LA dog trainer would have us believe? Find some facts that back up the assertions made in the LA cage liner and then Frank will owe an apology.