Nexstar Media has asked a federal judge to dismiss a defamation case brought by Stanton Tang, the former news director of its Grand Rapids NBC affiliate.
In a 23-page motion filed on Wednesday, attorneys representing Nexstar said the defamation case brought by Tang in June makes numerous allegations that have little to do with the broadcaster, and more to do with the internal revolt over a memo circulated about the station’s Pride Month coverage and the ensuing media attention that followed.
Until last year, Tang was the news director at Nexstar’s Grand Rapids NBC affiliate, WOOD-TV (Channel 8). The memo in question was written and distributed by the station’s assistant news director, Amy Fox, at Tang’s urging.
The memo urged newsroom employees to be more discerning in which Pride Month stories the station would cover, noting that the station lacked the resources to cover every event and that too much coverage might rankle the station’s politically conservative viewership.
“We need to recognize that some stories related to LGBTQ issues are going to be controversial and polarizing in our community,” Fox wrote in the memo. “While you personally may not agree with a certain position, people are entitled to their opinions, and they are our viewers.”
The reaction within WOOD-TV’s newsroom was swift, with many employees saying they would not follow the memo’s directive. A copy of the memo leaked to the industry publication FTV Live, which published a story on it behind a paywall. The Desk separately obtained a copy of the memo and published excerpts from it, which drew significant attention from local and national news outlets.
Nexstar conducted a length internal investigation, during which numerous employees at WOOD-TV spoke with The Desk about their experiences working with Tang and Fox. The Desk published numerous stories based on those exchanges — including one that revealed Tang had discouraged reporters from voting, in possible violation of a Michigan state law — and broke the news of his firing. Fox was also dismissed, as were two employees suspected of communicating with the news media about the memo and its aftermath.
Last month, Tang and Fox filed separate defamation claims against Nexstar, accusing the company of maligning them in public. They said Nexstar was to blame for unflattering media coverage that portrayed the duo as anti-gay, and Tang went a step further by suggesting Nexstar did little to squash a report about alleged comments that some employees found to be racist.
On Wednesday, attorneys for Nexstar said they aren’t to blame for the media attention surrounding Tang and the aftermath of the memo, noting that he “does not claim that WOOD-TV published news stories describing him as anti-gay or a racist, accusing him of discriminating against gay individuals, or otherwise attributing unsavory characteristics to him.”
“Instead, Plaintiff’s Complaint attributes that to TheDesk.net,” attorneys for the broadcaster wrote, noting earlier in the brief that “TheDesk.net…is not owned or operated by Nexstar.” (The Desk and its parent company, Solano Media, are not named as defendants in the lawsuits brought by Tang and Fox.)
“It is clear from [Tang’s] complaint that all of the reputational damage he claims to have suffered arises from third-party statements that both specifically name him and describe him as anti-gay, not from statements made by Nexstar,” the broadcaster’s attorneys assert.
DOCUMENTS: Read the motions to dismiss in Fox v. Nexstar and Tang v. Nexstar [Pro Access]
Nexstar acknowledges that it made a few statements in response to the memo — including one that affirmed the broadcaster’s commitment to “diversity, equity and inclusion,” and which characterized the newsroom note as “not consistent with Nexstar’s values” — but said Tang can’t sue based on those statements because none of the company’s executives ever mentioned him by name, “nor do they convey or imply any negative characteristics about him.”
“They do not accuse him of committing a crime, an act of dishonesty, or immoral conduct,” Nexstar’s attorneys said. “None of these statements accuse plaintiff of being anti-gay, or of engaging in discrimination. A casual reader or member of the public reading these statements would see neither a reference to [Tang], nor anything attributing poor or unsavory qualities about him.”
Nexstar also said Tang can’t sue for defamation because nowhere in his complaint did he demonstrate that any of the “alleged statements are false.” To that end, attorneys for Nexstar said Tang failed to prove that the company doesn’t value diversity, equality and inclusiveness, or that it “expect[s] its local TV stations to cover the news of the day in an expansive and inclusive fashion,” among other things.
“Nexstar made no defamatory statements at all, and therefore [Tang] cannot properly allege a defamation claim,” the attorneys conclude.
Separately, Nexstar filed a similar motion in Fox’s defamation case, which contains many of the same allegations. Both are seeking compensatory and punitive damages from Nexstar.
Tang has since taken a job with a Christian-oriented radio station, where he works as a business development representative. Fox complains in her lawsuit that she has been unable to gain employment since the scandal last year.
