Discuss the significance and impact of the Food Lion, Inc. v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. case.

What will be an ideal response?

Food Lion contains many lessons. First, Food Lion did not sue for libel to contest the accuracy of the broadcast. Instead, the grocery chain sued ABC for a variety of torts related to its newsgathering practices—fraud, trespass, and breach of loyalty. This deemphasized the First Amendment issues and instead refocused the issue on the methods ABC used to get into the stores. These newsgathering practices included the use of technologically advanced devices such as hidden cameras and microphones. This, along with other kinds of deception, angered jury members, as did the dynamic of corporate-owned ABC investigating a relatively modest business. Thus, another lesson is the deep-seated animosity that the public (i.e., jurors) harbor for the news media. Thus, the case illustrates the potential emotional nature of jury trials, and in turn how a judge (who reduced the damages dramatically) and an appellate court may view a case more objectively. In spite of the reversal on appeal, the impact of the rulings includes ABC and many other news media organizations reevaluating their investigative practices, particularly relating to the used of hidden cameras.