Why doesn't someone sue the papers?

[Backtrack]

This is something I always ask myself.

With the Daily Star coming up with 180mph winds to batter the UK at Christmas and the Express blatantly misleading people, why doesn't someone just sue the absolute pants off them for scaremongering and false information, clearly, purposely misleading the public.

 

It really isn't fair. Anyone else feel the same?

[cheeky_monkey]

This is something I always ask myself.

With the Daily Star coming up with 180mph winds to batter the UK at Christmas and the Express blatantly misleading people, why doesn't someone just sue the absolute pants off them for scaremongering and false information, clearly, purposely misleading the public.

 

It really isn't fair. Anyone else feel the same?

go ahead there is a little job for you over the Xmas break...do let us know how you get on?

[Summer Sun]

This is something I always ask myself.

With the Daily Star coming up with 180mph winds to batter the UK at Christmas and the Express blatantly misleading people, why doesn't someone just sue the absolute pants off them for scaremongering and false information, clearly, purposely misleading the public.

 

It really isn't fair. Anyone else feel the same?

 

Have you ever made a complaint to the PCC?

Edited December 10, 2013 by Summer Sun

[Ravendane]

I was thinking something along those lines...those ridiculous headlines, in particular those of the Daily Excess are so highly irresponsible. They must have terrified many old people and those living in remote areas.  I know this  exaggerated headlines are just attention seeking ploys to sell more of their wretched rags but it does get through to people. For example,  I have been worrying that I haven't bought in enough very expensive hay for my mares to last the winter.  Instead, it is so mild, they are back out on grass and not costing me a penny.

[Coast]

This is something I always ask myself.

With the Daily Star coming up with 180mph winds to batter the UK at Christmas and the Express blatantly misleading people, why doesn't someone just sue the absolute pants off them for scaremongering and false information, clearly, purposely misleading the public.

 

It really isn't fair. Anyone else feel the same?

 

What sort of money do you think it might take to sue a national newspaper and do you believe that a humble member of the public is going to summon up a legal team to match theirs? If you really feel aggrieved at the crazy headlines you've got to take a path through the Press Complaints Commission, but good luck there as although the various OTT weather headlines may seem outrageous, they haven't actually paned out yet, true or false - so no good complaining about something that's headlined to happen in the future eh? (you'd also have to prove that the written words were deliberately misleading, very hard I imagine) 

 

I think you just have to treat all of these articles as a bit of a joke and stick to the knowledge and expertise within this forum to help you make your own mind up. I agree that vulnerable members of the public could be totally mislead - but who is going to start what would amount to a full time crusade against the press??? They use to say sex sells newspapers, but then so do potential Armageddon headlines - and the media aren't just there to inform (as much as we would like to think they are) they are businesses too.

[Essan]

If you sued a newspaper every time it published a false or misleading headline you'd need to be a multi-billionaire and we'd need to recruit extra lawyers from Bulgaria and built some new courts to help with the workload ......  :LOL:And the PCC can't do anything because the owners of the Star and Express do not subscribe to the system of self-regulation independently overseen by the PCC, meaning that "the publication does not ..... fall under the Commission’s jurisdiction and, as such, we are unable to take forward your concerns in this matter."

[johnholmes]

a shame we cannot sue some folk on the model discussion, so called thread, for total disregard of the guidleines posted each new thread.

[Mapantz]

I read some of the comments, the so called forecaster works for Coral. LOL

[Gael_Force]

You might have more success if you start one of these social media campaigns to get the papers and websites boycotted. The courts can do nothing - even if they could, the fine would be offset by test case publicity. The only way to hurt is to hit sales figures; advertising revenue would soon be hit by a collapsing readership.

[Pennine Ten Foot Drifts]

Yes let's be brutally honest..it all does boil down to hard cash in the end. Is money really the route of all evil LOL.. That could make an interesting one

 

And that's the really depressing thing underlying this type of thing - the papers are only as they are because they are commercial enterprises, and years of experience have taught them the best way to sell papers. These headlines are what sells papers, if that wasn't the case then they wouldn't print them. In a society where the best selling magazines are OK and Hello and the like, basically when it comes to the quality of the press we as a nation get what we deserve.........................

[Mokidugway]

Only 180 mph winds , nothing sensational then !!! :) .....

[wimblettben]

This really is rediculous and going beyond a joke now!

 

180mph winds, for here  . Sorry but if that really was the case we would all be evacuating now and told to leave the country.

 

Yes, people should have every right to sue them if they come out with this nonsense. And I thought the scaremomgering of 'widespread 80mph wind storm to batter britain' was bad .

[Snowyowl9]

The leveson inquiry should censor the 180mph winds...

[Paul Ashford]

The PR Girl quoted in the Star today, was joking about it to her twitter followers earlier before she wisely deleted the tweet.

[Mokidugway]

I wonder what next express weather headline will be,500mph winds and minus 70 c with scattered showers !...

[March Blizzard]

I wonder what next express weather headline will be,500mph winds and minus 70 c with scattered showers !...

That would be a bad day on Pluto!

[Crepuscular Ray]

I read some of the comments, the so called forecaster works for Coral. LOL

In which case, if it could be proved that they're doing it to drum up custom, it would be a case for the gambling regulator to look into, surely?

[MrSunshine]

just laughed my head off when I read a Tweet in response to a Daily Express Tweet about this Winter being the worst in living memory, I've pasted both Tweets below enjoy!

 

Daily_Express â€@Daily_Express9h

SHOCK CHRISTMAS WEATHER WARNING: Worst winter storm in HISTORY to hit Britain within weeks: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/448115/Christmas-weather-forecast-Winter-storms-warning-as-snow-gales-and-floods-threaten-UK â€¦

 

Sunday Sport â€@thesundaysport4h

@Daily_Express Even we wouldn't dare print bo**ocks like that

Edited December 12, 2013 by DaveMac82

[Jax]

just laughed my head off when I read a Tweet in response to a Daily Express Tweet about this Winter being the worst in living memory, I've pasted both Tweets below enjoy!

 

Daily_Express â€@Daily_Express9h

SHOCK CHRISTMAS WEATHER WARNING: Worst winter storm in HISTORY to hit Britain within weeks: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/448115/Christmas-weather-forecast-Winter-storms-warning-as-snow-gales-and-floods-threaten-UK â€¦

 

Sunday Sport â€@thesundaysport4h

@Daily_Express Even we wouldn't dare print bo**ocks like that

double decker bus found taking a bus route (sadly was out of service at the time)

[Mark Neal.]

I like that reply from the sport.. Haha

[swebby]

Not sure it would be possible to take the papers to task on this if the story has been accurately sourced from a meteorological organisation? 

The meteorological organisation that is source may however be open to trade description issues if it could be shown that the forecast is an utter fabrication but again that would be exceptionally difficult to prove. 

A carefully worded forecast that borders on the sensational can then be selectively quoted to provide a ridiculous headline but in this process nothing has actually occurred that would be regarded as breaking the law.

Edited December 13, 2013 by swebby

[Jax]

Not sure it would be possible to take the papers to task on this if the story has been accurately sourced from a meteorological organisation? 

The meteorological organisation that is source may however be open to trade description issues if it could be shown that the forecast is an utter fabrication but again that would be exceptionally difficult to prove. 

A carefully worded forecast that borders on the sensational can then be selectively quoted to provide a ridiculous headline but in this process nothing has actually occurred that would be regarded as breaking the law.

Well the forecast should IMHO be printed word for word so people can see the truth in it, rather than key words cherry picked to cause sensation.

 

Also laying the blame at the forecasters door, just reminded me of the geology chaps in Italy that did not "forecast" that earthquake and were jailed for saying all will be well.  Hell of a burden to carry, if that was done here our very own Mr Fish would have been doing porridge.  And all for a single sentence in a forecast.

Edited December 13, 2013 by Jax

[swebby]

Well the forecast should IMHO be printed word for word so people can see the truth in it, rather than key words cherry picked to cause sensation.

 

Also laying the blame at the forecasters door, just reminded me of the geology chaps in Italy that did not "forecast" that earthquake and were jailed for saying all will be well.  Hell of a burden to carry, if that was done here our very own Mr Fish would have been doing porridge.  And all for a single sentence in a forecast.

 

When writing my post the Italian geologists actually crossed my mind. 

 

They are a very good example of why a weather forecast, produced by either an individual or a commercial or governmental organisation must not be challenged in a court of law (no matter how laughable it is) providing the following can be shown:- 

1) That the forecast was produced using a scientific method.

2) If it was not produced using scientific method then there is a clear statement that it is a piece of speculation.

3) The forecast is produced in good faith, i.e not an intentional bunch of lies, designed to actively mislead.

 

What that scientific method is, be it classical meteorology or non classical is neither here nor there.  If a method can be shown that allows the results to be tested/challenged by observation then it is valid, be it the use of satellite observations or seaweed observations. 

 

What is required is a better level of scientific literacy in the general population so when utter codswallop is put into print it is treated in the manner it deserves.  Unfortunately, if the headline reads Weather type X to batter UK then joe blogs is likely to look further (eg buy the paper) because it may actually be true.  Unfortunately the ethics of our popular press leave a lot to be desired.