Food Lion, Inc V. Capital Cities: A Case Study

I am a news corresponded for CNN. I mainly focus on investigative journalism. My producer assigned me to do some research on one of the largest grocery store chains, Walmart. The deli, bakery, and meat area have been participating in some unsanitary food-handling practices. This is important because Walmart is such a large grocery store. Customers may get sick if they eat this contaminated food. As a journalist, I want to make sure that the consumers know the store is not handling the food in a safe manner. My goal is to get the story and share it on national television. The problem I am running into is finding a way to get the footage I need of the workers engaging in unsafe practice because I need to evidence to convince the public. I know …show more content…
The first case I studied was the case of Food Lion, Inc v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. Lynne Dale and Susan Barnett was two investigative reporters from ABC news. A television show called PrimeTime Live aired an episode on food handling in grocery stores. Food Lion was the grocery store under watch. The two reporters acquired jobs at the Food Lion grocery store in North and South Carolina. The reporters lied on their applications using false references, and lying about their education and job experience. PrimeTime Live aired the story showing how the store was engaging in unhealthy, dangerous, and illegal practices. The store sold out of date meat, re-dated old produce and re-sold it, and selling cheese that rats ate on. The reporters were undercover for two weeks and used cameras that were hidden to record the illegal and unsanitary practices that were taking place. In July 1995 The Food Lions company sued ABC in federal court …show more content…
American Broadcasting Companies Inc. ABC did a story on PrimeTime Live that focused on mistakes in laboratories that analyze pap smears for cancer. ABC workers went undercover as lab technicians. Robbie Gordon an ABC producer posed as a computer technicians and another worker posed as a business manager. They wore hidden cameras in their wigs. The story that aired covered rushed lab work, cancer diagnoses that had been missed. “The undercover journalists filmed portions of the lab that were open to the public and were escorted by the lab’s owners into a conference room. The court said the lab and its workers did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy, because the areas filmed were open to the journalists, and none of the discussions caught on tape were of a personal nature”( Consent and Its Limits, 2012

Show More

Related Documents: Food Lion, Inc V. Capital Cities: A Case Study

Tqm in Starwood Essay