State Farm Denies Journalist Insurance Due to Real News Coverage
January 24, 2013 by POPEYE
Filed under Featured Stories, Politics
(RT) Investigative journalist Lee Van Der Voo says she was denied property insurance coverage from State Farm because her news coverage was too “controversial.”
I can relate to her plight. After having the same home owner’s insurance company for 28 years, with NO claims, always paying my premiums on time and never having filed bankruptcy, my insurer, Shelter Insurance dropped me like a bad habit, using the excuse that my roof was in poor shape???
I think it was because my blog has been declared VERBOTTEN by certain elements that have hijacked our government.
New form of censorship and trashing of the 1st Amendment. Where are journalist defence org’s?
Sooooo . . . without being familiar with this particular journalist’s work I have to presume that the actuaries have determined with reasonable and mathematically verifiable accuracy that Ms. Van der Loo’s property is going to have an "incident" in the very near future? So if the State Farm company has verifiable proof of a threat are they not legally/morally obligated to inform Ms. Van der Loo of the nature/source of that mathematically verifiable threat and if they fail to fully inform future victim is there not implied liability on their behalf? Finding fault with the journalists’ exercise of legally protected speech does not constitute fully informing imho.
Cherry picking is legally protected free enterprise but often very destructive to those around it. So when cherry picking has bad effect on other legally protected actions (like free speech) is it better to limit the cherry picking or allow the destruction to continue? IOW, continueing to legally support profiteering at expense of non dollar values we hold dear and often do end up producing extreme value over long term? Yeah I know it reeks of socialism but putting a leash on it might be sensible.