We would love to hear from you. Click on the ‘Contact Us’ link to the right and choose your favorite way to reach-out!

wscdsdc

media/speaking contact

Jamie Johnson

business contact

Victoria Peterson

Contact Us

855.ask.wink

Close [x]
pattern

Industry News

Categories

  • Industry Articles (21,155)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (35)
  • Moore on the Market (414)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (800)
  • Wink's Articles (353)
  • Wink's Inside Story (274)
  • Wink's Press Releases (123)
  • Blog Archives

  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • November 2008
  • September 2008
  • May 2008
  • February 2008
  • August 2006
  • ‘Dateline’ Back In The News — In A Lawsuit

    August 8, 2014 by Linda Koco

    Dateline,” the NBC television show that pilloried misleading annuity sales practices in 2008, is back in the headlines — but this time as a defendant in a defamation lawsuit, not as a purveyor of an exposé about annuity sales practices involving seniors. 

    A U.S. circuit court has handed down a ruling that could result in “Dateline” and NBC having to make original, unedited video involving annuities available to court proceedings.

    This is footage the producers obtained with hidden cameras and that was used later used in creating “Dateline’s” now-controversial segment on annuity sales practices.

    The court decision represents a break for Tyrone M. Clark and his company, Brokers’ Choice of America (BCA). A lower court had ruled against Clark and BCA when it requested access to (“discovery” of) the unedited footage for use in its lawsuit against NBC Universal (NBC) and “Dateline” employees. The annuity firm had sued the mega-media company for defamation stemming from its “Dateline” show on annuities.

    The case will be closely followed not only by the insurance industry but also by the news media.

    In the annuity industry, the case opens up old wounds. The “Dateline” segment depicted several instances of purported misrepresentation in annuity sales to seniors. Veteran annuity professionals complained that the broadcast focused only on problems and presented a distorted view of the annuity business, effectively tarnishing the image of the entire industry. Bitter feelings have festered ever since.

    As for the news media, the case peers into protections long afforded to news reporters’ work product and confidential sources. Normally, such material is protected from discovery in legal proceedings, with limited exceptions. The circuit court’s decision, involving an insurance firm’s request for access to certain non-aired news material, could expand those exceptions.

    The case

    It its suit, Clark and BCA had contended that “Tricks of the Trade,” a “Dateline” segment aired in April 2008, had used innuendo, very selective editing and commentary to present Clark’s statements out of context in order to create a false impression thereby defaming him.

    In the telecast, reporter Chris Hansen showed several vignettes purporting to demonstrate misrepresentation in annuity sales and the calculated use of scare tactics to sell inappropriate products to seniors. 

    Regarding BCA, Hansen introduced snippets of Clark taken from a two-day seminar he had given in October 2007. The seminar was for insurance brokers attending Annuity University at BCA’s property in Colorado.  

    The snippets were filmed via hidden cameras brought in by two producers who had obtained false insurance licenses from Alabama officials, according to the circuit court. The snippets depict Clark as teaching misleading sales tactics to agents, but quoting a “mere 112” of Clark’s own words.

    Clark and BCA sued in district court for defamation among other reasons. As part of the case, Clark and BCA sought access to the unedited footage and transcripts of the 2007 lectures — for use in substantiating their claims.

    NBC and “Dateline” objected to providing the materials on grounds of a newsperson’s privilege under Colorado’s Shield Law. The lower court dismissed the defamation claim, noting that BCA didn’t have sufficient facts to “plausibly establish that its aired statements were false.”

    However, Clark and BCA appealed to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Colorado. In July, the court reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the defamation claim and remanded the case “for further proceedings consistent with this judgment.”

    About the raw footage

    The 41-page circuit court decision covers several points of law raised in the Clark/BCA appeal. But it is the court’s discussion about access to the unedited footage that is raising eyebrows.

    BCA had contended that Clark’s seminars, when considered in their entirety, ”teach and encourage ethical conduct by presenting a balanced approach to saving and investing, and, while touting the advantages of annuities, emphasize that they are not right for everyone,”  wrote Judge Terrence O’Brien on behalf of the three-judge circuit panel.

    However, NBC did not make the actual footage from the October 2008 seminar available for viewing by judge or jury.

    “The object of discovery — the original footage — is the best and perhaps only evidence from which a fact-finder can determine whether ‘Dateline’s’ portrayal of the substance of what occurred at Annuity University cast Clark’s teachings in such a way as to leave a false impression of them,” O’Brien wrote.

    BCA does have a film of a March 2007 seminar that is similar to the October 2007 seminar. However, the court held that this earlier film will not do.

    “It is not the seminar witnessed by the ‘Dateline’ producers, nor is it the one on which the allegedly false statements in the program were based,” the justice wrote, adding that “BCA would be greatly prejudiced in its ability to prove the defamation claim without access to the unedited film.”

    The court said that while the tape of the March 2007 seminar may have been sufficient to support BCA’s complaint, “this does not mean it will be sufficient to carry the heavy burden of proof required at trial.”

    Regarding “Dateline’s” privileged news argument, the court provided detailed commentary. This includes review of the Colorado Supreme Court decision (Gordon v. Boyles) that presents three exceptions that can be used to “defeat” the general newspersons privilege rule, as well as discussion of First Amendment protections for newspersons who rely on confidential sources.

    The court found that BCA met all three exception requirements and that the case does not involve confidential sources or confidential information.  BCA is, it said, “only asking for a copy of the unedited film and it would seem to be the only entity with a colorable claim to confidentiality.”

    The court concluded that BCA’s factual allegations are sufficient to warrant discovery of the unedited film. “The Colorado statue is a shield, not a sword,” it said.

    Originally Posted at InsuranceNewsNet on August 6, 2014 by Linda Koco.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency