Subway says it plans to sue CBC for $210 million

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/201 ... dings.html


Can't find the story on the CBC website.

This is interesting in several ways. CBC, a reputable public broadcaster, does a piece on fast-food chicken, does the DNA, and releases results. Its a bit of a tempest in a teapot, but Subway took out a full-page ad in the G&M last week to refute these claims, and now launches a lawsuit. I tend toward DNA evidence, and I think Subway is going to lose this battle in the court of public opinion.

So I guess I have to ask for a 6 inch sweet onion and soy teriyaki sub now.

They fucked up. DNA tests don't really apply to a percentage of DNA, and they used a lab not used to doing food science who would have known that. DNA tests won't show a proportion of one type of DNA over another, so saying the chicken at Subway is percentage X Soy and a percentage Y Chicken is outright wrong. If they hadn't used a wildlife research lab to run these tests, they would have been told not to use them in that story context.

They didn't fact check and follow proper guidelines, and they will pay for it.

I doubt they'll pay anything for it. If tabloids can get away with fabricating completely false stories about celebrities I don't see how this would be over the line And we still only have Subways claim it's not true ....no actual evidence of any kind that it's not true.

For a supposedly reputable news agency to start something like this without double and triple checking the veracity of their reporters initial findings is nothing more than sensationalism bordering on created fake news designed to fool the public into thinking they've got their interests at heart.

So, is it any wonder Subway is suing? This will blow over but, much like KFC's mutant chicken accusation, the brand will forever be tainted by this poorly investigated piece of journalism and like someone mentioned, it doesn't really matter if Subway wins in court because in the court of public opinion they'll forever be associated with the use of chicken made from soy products.


But, this story had better be 100% true or the CBC will forever have the distinction of being equated with those other bastions of hard hitting investigative journalism, like the National Inquirer.

Sure they will. Lost revenue from advertisers is going to hurt, lobbying pressure from the food service, chicken processors, and etc. will hurt them in Parliament, and Subway can always press claims under NAFTA for anti-competitive behavior if the claim is shown to be untrue and somehow favoring Canadian firms.

Subway has lots of options assuming that their chicken is really chicken. I imagine a bunch of people are right now independently testing it to see for themselves.

CBC is bound by the Broadcasting Act in ways that private entities are not.

They can do that because there's a law in the States that makes celebrities, like politicians public figures. I don't believe a corporation or company fits in that category which means they can sue for slander and libel.

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/example ... te-figures

Taste the shit
It's about as real as Timmies donuts!

Sure they will. Lost revenue from advertisers is going to hurt, lobbying pressure from the food service, chicken processors, and etc. will hurt them in Parliament, and Subway can always press claims under NAFTA for anti-competitive behavior if the claim is shown to be untrue and somehow favoring Canadian firms.

Subway has lots of options assuming that their chicken is really chicken. I imagine a bunch of people are right now independently testing it to see for themselves.
I'm going to go with the CBC. They keep their ducks pretty close in a row. Subway is fighting a losing battle here, bad choice of strategy.

CBC has been sued successfully in the past.

Ottawa MD makes legal history with huge libel award against CBC

Whatcott wins $30,000 defamation suit against CBC after report suggested he wants to �kill homosexuals�