Harvard Law Professor Sues New York Times for 'Clickbait Defamation' Over Jeffrey Epstein
Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig claimed the New York Times defamed him for clicks.
January 13, 2020 at 05:01 PM
4 minute read
Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig lawyered up Monday to sue the New York Times in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts over a article he claims defamed him for clicks.
Lessig claimed the newspaper used "clickbait" and incorrectly linked him with "perhaps the most horrific and widely publicized pedophile scandal in American history."
Vice president of communications for the Times, Danielle Rhoades Ha, stood by the report.
"When Professor Lessig contacted The Times to complain about the story, senior editors reviewed his complaint and were satisfied that the story accurately reflected his statements," Rhoades Ha said in an emailed statement. "We plan to defend against the claim vigorously."
The report ran Sept. 14, 2019, with a lede and headline that said Lessig was defending the acceptance of clandestine donations from convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein to educational institutions, including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Epstein, a disgraced West Palm Beach, Florida, financier, died by apparent suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial in a New York jail on sex trafficking charges.
"It is hard to defend soliciting donations from the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. But Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard Law professor, has been trying," the opening sentence read.
That was false, according to Lessig's lawsuit, which said the article had a radioactive effect, prompting "mass outrage" from universities, social media followers and sexual assault victims. The complaint claims "Lessig became associated with the notoriety surrounding the Epstein scandal, and the community that quietly or silently tolerated such monstrosity."
The lawsuit alleged the article was an example of clickbaiting, where a writer uses a shocking but misleading headline to draw in readers. The plaintiff argued that a few lines of text can do a lot of harm when published by a media outlet with about 150 million global readers.
"Defendants are fully aware that many, if not most, readers never read past the clickbait, and that their takeaway concerning the target of the headline is limited to what they read in the headline," the complaint said.
The Times report stemmed from an essay Lessig had written for the online platform Medium in which he had reasoned that institutions should avoid accepting money from scorned figures and criminals such as Epstein but that, if they did, the donor should be anonymous.
"I thank god that I've never been obligated to raise money for an institution like MIT," Lessig's essay read. "Because I know that in every moment of that existence, I would be forced to confront a gap between what I believe is right and what every institution does. And yet, as a person charged with fundraising, I would be pressed to adopt the ethics of the institution, not the ethics of myself."
Now, Lessig has published a new blog post in tandem with the lawsuit.
"My essay said—repeatedly—that such soliciting was a 'mistake,'" he wrote in Monday's post. "And more importantly, it was a mistake because of the kind of harm it would trigger in both victims and women generally."
He has retained Howard Cooper and Tara Dunn of Todd & Weld in Boston to handle the case.
|Read the full complaint:
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Everything From A to Z': University GCs Tested by Legal, Financial, Societal Challenges
6 minute read'A Horrible Reputation for Bad Verdicts': Plaintiffs Attorney Breaks Down $129M Wrongful-Death Verdict From Conservative Venue
How Uncertainty in College Athletics Compensation Could Drive Lawsuits in 2025
'Basic Arithmetic': Court Rules in Favor of LA Charter School Denied Funding by California Education Department
Trending Stories
- 1Appellate Division Greenlights State Bar's Leadership Diversity Initiatives
- 2SEC’s Latest Enforcement Actions Fuel Demand for Big Law
- 3Sterlington Brings On Former Office Leader From Ashurst
- 4DOJ Takes on Largest NFT Scheme That Points to Larger Trend
- 5Arnold & Porter Matches Market Year-End Bonus, Requires Billable Threshold for Special Bonuses
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250