TV Station Falls For Pranksters; Sues Them For Fraud
from the oh...-so-you-want-your-dumbassery-to-be-part-of-the-public-record? dept
Playing pranks on local newscasters is a proud tradition that dates back to the days when people actually watched local newscasts for news. All it takes is willing pranksters, segment producers looking for filler, and staffers unwilling to perform even the most basic due diligence.
Enter Joe Pickett and Nick Prueher, most famous for buying up flea market VHS recordings and dubbing comedic commentary over the top of them. Their current catalog covers everything from retailer-produced sexual harassment videos to jazzercise to a variety of self-appointed experts opining on subject matter in which they clearly have no expertise.
Prueher and Pickett also developed a few alter egos and sent out press releases to a number of local TV stations, hoping to have them booked. WEAU in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, fell for one these press releases and invited strongmen "Chop & Steele" to perform on its morning show, "Hello Wisconsin." The two comedians showed up in full "Chop & Steele" garb and wowed newscasters by crushing baskets with their feet and breaking sticks with their bare hands.
WEAU wasn't the only victim of "Chop & Steele" and other Prueher/Pickett alter egos. But WEAU -- through its parent company, Gray Television -- is the only one to make a federal case out of it.
Gray Television filed a lawsuit against the pair, alleging fraud, conspiracy, and copyright infringement. Pickett and Prueher -- now represented by attorney Anderson Duff -- were first notified of the lawsuit by a New York Post article. At this point, the lawsuit is still waiting for a judge to take a look at it, but hopefully it will be tossed out shortly after this. Just in case it isn't, the duo have set up a crowdfunding campaign for legal fees. (h/t Daniel Nazer)
The lawsuit [PDF] from Gray Television is inadvertently hilarious. Considering its arguments about being "defrauded" by pranksters its staff would have sniffed out by performing a little pre-show fact-checking, it's pretty rich for Gray to make the following claims:
Gray Television owns television station WEAU in Eau Claire, Wisconsin.
For more than sixty years, WEAU has served as the trusted and respected news source in Western Wisconsin.
[...]
As part of its continuing commitment to bringing accurate information to its viewers and remaining an industry leader, in 1979 WEAU became the first television station in the market to have its own Doppler weather radar.
Trust and respect are earned. They can also be lost. When you don't vet your morning show guests, guess what happens. The fraud and conspiracy allegations in the lawsuit attempt to bridge the statutory gap that cruelly leaves butthurt unremedied. The complaint begins with Gray admitting the station did fuck-all to verify the claims made in Chop & Steele's press release.
The press release identified Joe Picket by the fake name “Joe ‘Chop’ Shopsin” and Nick Prueher by the fake name “Nicholas ‘Steele’ Stelling.” It stated that the duo would perform “a series of free live events in Black River Falls, LaCrosse, Eau Claire, and Winona the week of November 28, using their muscles to entertain and educate” on unity, inner strength, and ways to prevent bullying “through humor, courage and self-respect.” The press release further claimed that “Chop & Steele” were “fan favorites from season three of America’s Got Talent,” and were also featured on Steve Harvey, the Hallmark Channel’s Marie, and Disneyland’s 60th Anniversary Celebration.
The information in the press release was entirely false. Prueher and Pickett were not on a “Give Thanks 4 Strengths” tour. They did not have any events scheduled in Wisconsin or elsewhere. They had not appeared on America’s Got Talent, Steve Harvey, the Hallmark Chanel or in Disneyland.
Believing the information provided in the email and press release, a WEAU anchor enthusiastically responded the same day to “Jerry Chubb” stating that “Hello Wisconsin would LOVE to have Chop and Steele” on the program and asked for more details to prepare for their interview and demonstration.
Based on its own failures, WEAU was duped. Rather than accept this and move on, Gray Television is trying to portray it as fraud. The problem is, none of it really satisfies the statutory requirements for fraud. While the statements made in the press release were demonstrably false, the duo's appearance on the show didn't deprive the station of anything other than its production costs for that segment, if even that. If viewers watched the entire segment -- along with any advertising -- it's hard to believe the station lost anything.
On top of that, its assertions about the station's long-running trustworthiness make it clear the two comedians didn't intentionally exploit WEAU because it was inherently exploitable, as explained by The Legal Dictionary:
Reliance on a patently absurd false statement generally will not give rise to fraud; however, people who are especially gullible, superstitious, or ignorant or who are illiterate may recover damages for fraud if the defendant knew and took advantage of their condition.
A TV morning show with decades of asserted trustworthiness does not fit this description. Perhaps this is why Gray Television's complaint offers nothing more than boilerplate allegations of loss.
As a direct result of Defendants’ fraudulent conduct set forth herein, Gray Television has been damaged and is entitled to recover compensatory damages in an amount which shall be proved at trial.
But "damaged" how? If the segment was watched and the station didn't lose viewers after the fact, there's not much there to work with. The complaint makes no mention of other possible damages -- like decreased guest/ad bookings or even a vaguer "reputational damage." It appears to believe it should get paid because its lax fact-checking processes resulted in it being embarrassed.
Gray Television also alleges copyright infringement because the duo used clips of the morning show to promote their Found Footage Film Festival. This appears to have been thrown into the lawsuit just in case the judge has no sympathy for WEAU being a victim of its own carelessness. Again, the use of the clips -- even in promotional videos -- is likely fair use, as it's part of a much longer clip showing the range of the comedians' artistic endeavors.
Whichever angle you take, the lawsuit is ridiculous. Chances are the station would have been fine with use of the clips if it didn't make it look like the morning show was more interested in filling open segments than providing quality broadcasting. The copyright infringement allegation might be the strongest, but that doesn't mean it's the "rightest." It just means our copyright laws are so screwed up, pranksters can still be sued for using a brief clip of a morning show appearance on their own website or YouTube channel.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: chop & steele, joe pickett, nick prueher, pranks
Companies: gray television, weau
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
This is why you Google the strange looking wild mushroom BEFORE you eat it. Not after.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Flunky: Gee, boss, I agree it's embarrassing but it's nothing to make a federal case over.
President of Gray Television: Oh yes it is. It so very is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then again...
They do now!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WAIT! What about RICO? (Checks the lawsuit...)
It IS racketeering!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It was "like slamming tennis rackets against each other until they broke" -- that's breaking up rackets, not putting them together to make a new racket (for the RICO charge).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ignorance
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ignorance
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Somebody trusts the TV news anymore
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The fraud and conspiracy allegations in the lawsuit attempt to bridge the statutory gap that cruelly leaves butthurt unremedied.
Bridge it? Hell, they want to wipe away that gap entirely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: stderric on Aug 25th, 2017 @ 10:54am
This is like miltary policy and child-rearing rolled into one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: stderric on Aug 25th, 2017 @ 10:54am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Response to: stderric on Aug 25th, 2017 @ 10:54am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No one would ever do this to us, because we have doppler.
Despite other stations getting screwed, we're protected by our radar.
Our staffers don't need to do anything but look at a PR release, that gives us all the facts we'll report.
I would think many people should question anything this station reports, they accepted a PR release as gospel & ran with it. No background checking, no fact checking.
There is a world of pranksters out there, they were lucky these guys weren't actual bad actors. It sounds like the person who booked them could have been talked into locking an intern in the closet & forcing them to strip looking for stolen money (ala the fast food FBI phone scammers).
Sorry you got high on your own reputation, but a news organization that thinks they aren't a target because they are so important are due for a fall.
Wasting money on a lawsuit to scare off the next guys isn't gonna help, because it just makes you reach that next level of moronic behavior.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fraud?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fraud?
"WEAU became the first television station in the market to have its own Doppler weather radar"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fraud?
Easiest way to put a dollar amount on this theft would be to clock how long this appeared on the station, check WEAU's advertising rate card to determine the price of that airtime and assess damages accordingly.
And yes, make a federal case of this. Broadcast stations are a matter of federal jurisdiction as the signals do not respect state boundaries.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Fraud?
Sounds like they put as much brainpower into this lawsuit as they did vetting their "fraudulent" guests, which is just about zilch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Fraud?
No, the station still has their airtime. The station remained in full control of their transmitter and these guys never took it away from them. If what these guys did amounts to theft, then the station should have reported them to the police for prosecution. Did they? I didn't think so. Probably because no one there wanted to be arrested for filing a false police report.
On the other hand, if that counts as theft then I should now report you to the police for stealing my time to read your b.s..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Fraud?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
THX TD
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: THX TD
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A woman burns herself with coffee, wins millions in lawsuit. A cop shoots someone in ridiculous fashion and gets off. A woman who has birth control jelly sues after getting pregnant because she put the drug on her toast and ate it. Wait for the lawsuits to begin because dummies put sunscreen on their eyeballs to watch the eclipse.
You just can't fix stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The coffee lawsuit
That lady--who was 79 years old--received third-degree burns across her genitals and thighs which required extensive surgery and skin grafts; some of her skin literally fell off, the burns were so bad. Remember, this is the skin on her genitals--imagine how painful that might be. She was a passenger in a parked car when the accident happened due to an improperly fitted lid on the cup. And she'd actually asked McDonalds for just $20k to pay her medical bills, with no compensation for "pain and suffering" or anything else. McDonalds refused (they tried to offer her $800, which is ridiculous), and proceeded to hire a PR firm to push the "irresponsible twit burns herself with coffee and sues, like she didn't know it was supposed to be hot" narrative.
And the lady's award was partially reduced by the jury, who felt she was "20% responsible" for the accident but that McDonalds' policy of serving coffee at what it absolutely knew was an unsafe temperature was negligent and callous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]