Jeffrey Wigand Case Summary

Jeffrey Wigand was a primary source to CBS during a time where tobacco was on the rise. Wigand had valuable information for the public that could ultimately damage the tobacco industry and Brown & Williamson’s reputation. Wigand was interviewed for CBS’s “60 Minutes” and spoke out about the horrible toxins in tobacco and cigarettes and that nicotine is addictive. CBS decided not to show this interview that was taped, had they, I don’t believe any libel charges would come of it. From what I have learned about libel Wigand and the tobacco companies have no argument to determine they were put in a false light. Everything that Wigand stated on the show was factual and it would affect tobacco sales and what the consumers thought of the product, but in no way would it put the business in a false light. The dirty little secrets of the company would be released and they are true and would not help the companies make a libel claim. That being said, if the “60 Minutes” shows aired both sides would receive some backlash. Of course the tobacco industry would plummet because the public would be completely aware of the secrets that the industry had been hiding. CBS would danger their pending sale to Westinghouse if they were to air the segment. They would also risk losing CBS stockholders and could have …show more content…
Wigand had family and money to lose, but heroism to gain. CBS could have lost their deal with Westinghouse, but they could have gained respect from the public for unavailing the hidden facts about nicotine and the tobacco industry. Brown & Williamson risked losing all respect and sales if the segments were released and since they weren’t they were able to continue to produce a product that was addictive and toxic to consumers. All parties involved could be at fault for something, but because the segments were never aired it is impossible to tell what the outcome would have