-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Deception or Misunderstanding...
- Thread starter RockManAC
- Start date
> > You decide: Woman Sues Over Getting Candy and Not Cash.
> >
> > -A
> >
> Both.
>
> Good clean fun...not allowed in these sue-happy times.
>
> Should take the complaintant out back and kick her sorry
> ass. THEN she'd have something to sue about.
>
Frankly there are TWO losers--Cumulus Media who owns the station which pulled off this lie and the woman for filing this frivolous suit--SHE SHOULD PAY the $100,000!
> >
> > -A
> >
> Both.
>
> Good clean fun...not allowed in these sue-happy times.
>
> Should take the complaintant out back and kick her sorry
> ass. THEN she'd have something to sue about.
>
Frankly there are TWO losers--Cumulus Media who owns the station which pulled off this lie and the woman for filing this frivolous suit--SHE SHOULD PAY the $100,000!
> > > You decide: Woman Sues Over Getting Candy and Not Cash.
> > >
> > > -A
> > >
> > Both.
> >
> > Good clean fun...not allowed in these sue-happy times.
> >
> > Should take the complaintant out back and kick her sorry
> > ass. THEN she'd have something to sue about.
> >
> Frankly there are TWO losers--Cumulus Media who owns the
> station which pulled off this lie and the woman for filing
> this frivolous suit--SHE SHOULD PAY the $100,000!
>
She should've taken the $5,000. This is an old radio gag. No way she wins the lawsuit.
I will say, that DJ must suck, though, if people won't listen to him for 2 hours for free candy.
> > >
> > > -A
> > >
> > Both.
> >
> > Good clean fun...not allowed in these sue-happy times.
> >
> > Should take the complaintant out back and kick her sorry
> > ass. THEN she'd have something to sue about.
> >
> Frankly there are TWO losers--Cumulus Media who owns the
> station which pulled off this lie and the woman for filing
> this frivolous suit--SHE SHOULD PAY the $100,000!
>
She should've taken the $5,000. This is an old radio gag. No way she wins the lawsuit.
I will say, that DJ must suck, though, if people won't listen to him for 2 hours for free candy.
O
OldiesCat
Guest
Deception
you know, you'd almost have to hear how they did this deal to really come to any conclusion-- EVERYTHING is in the phrasing and language. It would help to know a lot more of the details of it. That the jock got fired is a hint.
That being said, I believe the woman probably has a case. This isn't new, that we really aren't allowed to "trick" listeners into thinking a prize one thing when it's not- that's just never been allowed. We've learned a lot about this after a couple of years of airing national contesting, but whether it's a national contest or a jock who's being cute, we really do have to be so careful. They're getting a lot of free pub out of it right now, but it won't be so funny if they have to pony up.
you know, you'd almost have to hear how they did this deal to really come to any conclusion-- EVERYTHING is in the phrasing and language. It would help to know a lot more of the details of it. That the jock got fired is a hint.
That being said, I believe the woman probably has a case. This isn't new, that we really aren't allowed to "trick" listeners into thinking a prize one thing when it's not- that's just never been allowed. We've learned a lot about this after a couple of years of airing national contesting, but whether it's a national contest or a jock who's being cute, we really do have to be so careful. They're getting a lot of free pub out of it right now, but it won't be so funny if they have to pony up.
Contest rules, contest rules, contest rules!
Always post 'em, always live by them. Favorite clause: "Prizes may be substituted for prizes of equal, lesser, or greater value."
Or "Contest rules may be changed at any time for any reason"
Might point out that on the DJ's blog on the station website he wrote "You'll be 100 Grand richer!" Leave out the "richer"
> You decide: Woman Sues Over Getting Candy and Not Cash.
>
> -A
>
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by whyhellothere on 06/24/05 02:09 PM.</FONT></P>
Always post 'em, always live by them. Favorite clause: "Prizes may be substituted for prizes of equal, lesser, or greater value."
Or "Contest rules may be changed at any time for any reason"
Might point out that on the DJ's blog on the station website he wrote "You'll be 100 Grand richer!" Leave out the "richer"
> You decide: Woman Sues Over Getting Candy and Not Cash.
>
> -A
>
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by whyhellothere on 06/24/05 02:09 PM.</FONT></P>
J
JohnnyMorganWXJX
Guest
Re: Deception
> you know, you'd almost have to hear how they did this deal
> to really come to any conclusion-- EVERYTHING is in the
> phrasing and language. It would help to know a lot more of
> the details of it. That the jock got fired is a hint.
>
> That being said, I believe the woman probably has a case.
> This isn't new, that we really aren't allowed to "trick"
> listeners into thinking a prize one thing when it's not-
> that's just never been allowed. We've learned a lot about
> this after a couple of years of airing national contesting,
> but whether it's a national contest or a jock who's being
> cute, we really do have to be so careful. They're getting a
> lot of free pub out of it right now, but it won't be so
> funny if they have to pony up.
>
That's exactly right--and exactly what the attorneys and the court will do. Discovery will give the attorneys access to all the station and jock information regarding this contest. Remember, the article pretty much just has the woman's account--which is probably not "all the story", whether she lied at points, or left stuff out (clue to you lawyers (and journalists) to be: clients don't always tell you the whole truth). But I agree that the fact that the jock got fired is a clue to something, probably bad.
Here's a fact that I clung onto--she listened to the station for a total, according to her, of two hours (nonstop assumedly). How many stations, even before the age of national contests, would give away large amounts of money with just a two hour timeframe? Wouldn't they have an on-going contest, encouraging listeners to stayed tuned for LONGER amounts of time? The short amount of TSL pulls against a contest for money.
One more fact--they offered her $5,000 after she complained. That pulls towards a contest for money.
I know this--the log tapes will be released in discovery to the plaintiff. If the wording is just so--or worse, if the jock played around with it--Cumulus may be 100 grand poorer.
> you know, you'd almost have to hear how they did this deal
> to really come to any conclusion-- EVERYTHING is in the
> phrasing and language. It would help to know a lot more of
> the details of it. That the jock got fired is a hint.
>
> That being said, I believe the woman probably has a case.
> This isn't new, that we really aren't allowed to "trick"
> listeners into thinking a prize one thing when it's not-
> that's just never been allowed. We've learned a lot about
> this after a couple of years of airing national contesting,
> but whether it's a national contest or a jock who's being
> cute, we really do have to be so careful. They're getting a
> lot of free pub out of it right now, but it won't be so
> funny if they have to pony up.
>
That's exactly right--and exactly what the attorneys and the court will do. Discovery will give the attorneys access to all the station and jock information regarding this contest. Remember, the article pretty much just has the woman's account--which is probably not "all the story", whether she lied at points, or left stuff out (clue to you lawyers (and journalists) to be: clients don't always tell you the whole truth). But I agree that the fact that the jock got fired is a clue to something, probably bad.
Here's a fact that I clung onto--she listened to the station for a total, according to her, of two hours (nonstop assumedly). How many stations, even before the age of national contests, would give away large amounts of money with just a two hour timeframe? Wouldn't they have an on-going contest, encouraging listeners to stayed tuned for LONGER amounts of time? The short amount of TSL pulls against a contest for money.
One more fact--they offered her $5,000 after she complained. That pulls towards a contest for money.
I know this--the log tapes will be released in discovery to the plaintiff. If the wording is just so--or worse, if the jock played around with it--Cumulus may be 100 grand poorer.
> She should've taken the $5,000. This is an old radio gag.
> No way she wins the lawsuit.
I'd normally agree with you, but I remembered the story about a Hooters waitress who sued her boss and the restaurant after she thought she'd get a Toyota for winning a beer selling contest and instead won a Toy Yoda (TM Lucas Productions). She ended up settling for an unknown amount.
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/forum/forum_comments/3076/
Here's a picture of the waitress and her Toy Yoda (TM Lucas Productions).
http://www.sptimes.com/News/072801/State/Dream_car_is_a__toy_Y.shtml
> No way she wins the lawsuit.
I'd normally agree with you, but I remembered the story about a Hooters waitress who sued her boss and the restaurant after she thought she'd get a Toyota for winning a beer selling contest and instead won a Toy Yoda (TM Lucas Productions). She ended up settling for an unknown amount.
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/forum/forum_comments/3076/
Here's a picture of the waitress and her Toy Yoda (TM Lucas Productions).
http://www.sptimes.com/News/072801/State/Dream_car_is_a__toy_Y.shtml
O
OldiesCat
Guest
Deception
and (I believe) it was at night. If this was the jock on his own, good luck getting hired anywhere soon. If the PD and or GM were in on it, shame on them for being so careless.
>
> Here's a fact that I clung onto--she listened to the station
> for a total, according to her, of two hours (nonstop
> assumedly). How many stations, even before the age of
> national contests, would give away large amounts of money
> with just a two hour timeframe? Wouldn't they have an
> on-going contest, encouraging listeners to stayed tuned for
> LONGER amounts of time? The short amount of TSL pulls
> against a contest for money.
>
> One more fact--they offered her $5,000 after she complained.
> That pulls towards a contest for money.
>
> I know this--the log tapes will be released in discovery to
> the plaintiff. If the wording is just so--or worse, if the
> jock played around with it--Cumulus may be 100 grand poorer.
>
and (I believe) it was at night. If this was the jock on his own, good luck getting hired anywhere soon. If the PD and or GM were in on it, shame on them for being so careless.
>
> Here's a fact that I clung onto--she listened to the station
> for a total, according to her, of two hours (nonstop
> assumedly). How many stations, even before the age of
> national contests, would give away large amounts of money
> with just a two hour timeframe? Wouldn't they have an
> on-going contest, encouraging listeners to stayed tuned for
> LONGER amounts of time? The short amount of TSL pulls
> against a contest for money.
>
> One more fact--they offered her $5,000 after she complained.
> That pulls towards a contest for money.
>
> I know this--the log tapes will be released in discovery to
> the plaintiff. If the wording is just so--or worse, if the
> jock played around with it--Cumulus may be 100 grand poorer.
>
O
OldiesCat
Guest
Deception is deception
Doesn't matter if it's an old radio gag- if it was purposely deceptive, she
wins/they lose. Really, and legally, pretty clear-cut.
> > She should've taken the $5,000. This is an old radio gag.
>
> > No way she wins the lawsuit.
>
>
> Here's a picture of the waitress and her Toy Yoda (TM Lucas
> Productions).
http://w> ww.sptimes.com/News/072801/State/Dream_car_is_a__toy_Y.shtml
>
Doesn't matter if it's an old radio gag- if it was purposely deceptive, she
wins/they lose. Really, and legally, pretty clear-cut.
> > She should've taken the $5,000. This is an old radio gag.
>
> > No way she wins the lawsuit.
>
>
> Here's a picture of the waitress and her Toy Yoda (TM Lucas
> Productions).
http://w> ww.sptimes.com/News/072801/State/Dream_car_is_a__toy_Y.shtml
>
R
RayDeeOh2004
Guest
I remembered the story
> about a Hooters waitress who sued her boss and the
> restaurant after she thought she'd get a Toyota for winning
> a beer selling contest and instead won a Toy Yoda (TM Lucas
> Productions).
> Here's a picture of the waitress and her Toy Yoda (TM Lucas
> Productions).
http://www.sptimes.com/News/072801/State/Dream_car_is_a__toy_Y.shtml
>
That's STILL funny.
> about a Hooters waitress who sued her boss and the
> restaurant after she thought she'd get a Toyota for winning
> a beer selling contest and instead won a Toy Yoda (TM Lucas
> Productions).
> Here's a picture of the waitress and her Toy Yoda (TM Lucas
> Productions).
http://www.sptimes.com/News/072801/State/Dream_car_is_a__toy_Y.shtml
>
That's STILL funny.
> Should take the complaintant out back and kick her sorry ass. THEN she'd have something to sue about.
Maybe. But she'll win without breaking a sweat. You'd think that by now people in the business had a clue about precedents.
From 2000:
"1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, we find Clear Channel Broadcasting Licenses,
Inc. ("Clear Channel"), licensee of Station KPRR(FM), El Paso, Texas, apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $4,000 for an apparent violation Section 73.1216 of the Commission's rules, which requires licensees, among other things, to fully and accurately disclose material terms of a contest. We find that Clear Channel conducted a contest, "So You Want to Win 10,000," without disclosing a material term of the contest, i.e., that the prize was 10,000 Italian lira, not $10,000.
Source: FCC NAL
<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
Maybe. But she'll win without breaking a sweat. You'd think that by now people in the business had a clue about precedents.
From 2000:
"1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, we find Clear Channel Broadcasting Licenses,
Inc. ("Clear Channel"), licensee of Station KPRR(FM), El Paso, Texas, apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $4,000 for an apparent violation Section 73.1216 of the Commission's rules, which requires licensees, among other things, to fully and accurately disclose material terms of a contest. We find that Clear Channel conducted a contest, "So You Want to Win 10,000," without disclosing a material term of the contest, i.e., that the prize was 10,000 Italian lira, not $10,000.
Source: FCC NAL
<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
- Status