Joseph Arthur Sues the L.A. Times Over Vaccine Characterization

Musician Joseph Arthur is suing the L.A. Times, saying an article the outlet wrote about his and his vaccine stance has left him “shunned and avoided.”

The singer-songwriter filed the lawsuit against the newspaper due to its use of the term “anti-vax” in a headline the L.A. Times wrote about a year ago, adding that he believes the term to be defamatory.

The artist has strongly spoken out against the COVID vaccine shot but says he has not opposed all types of vaccines.

Virginia attorney Steven S. Biss is representing Arthur in the suit. Biss has famously represented clients like Republican lawmaker Devon Nunes against the likes of CNN and the Washington Post.

The client and his lawyer are seeking $25 million in damages.

The August 19 L.A. Times headline read: “He was a celebrated singer-songwriter with famous fans. Then he started posting about the vaccine.” Clearly, the term “anti-vax” is not stated in the headline. Though, his suit alleges that it falsely implies Arthur is against all or other types of vaccines.

“Arthur’s prescient statements about the COVID-19 vaccines were 100% factually accurate,” the lawsuit says.

“The Article impugned Arthur’s professional integrity and exposed him to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy as someone who was against all vaccines. Publication caused him to be shunned and avoided. The Article severely injured Arthur in his occupation as a musician, leading directly to the cancellation of multiple gigs. In addition to the pain, emotional suffering, insult, embarrassment, humiliation, and injury to reputation, LA Times’ publication caused career damage, loss of future earnings, and impaired and diminished Arthur’s earning capacity.”

The suit also seems to imply that Arthur’s career has been irrevocably altered due to the L.A. Times piece, alone.

Wrote the Times last year: “Being the relentless voice of what he considers a disaffected minority has cost him. This year his longtime music manager dropped him as a client, followed by his booking agent. Arthur’s newly formed band quit en masse, and he says he lost a record deal that would have distributed a new double album to his fans…. His remaining fans beseech him to stop.”

Ahead of the L.A. Times piece, Arthur released a song called, “Stop the Shot.”

On Facebook, Arthur read a poem called “The Unfollow Threat,” about his critics he said he wished unfollowed him instead of threatening to. He said, “This is what the Nazis did with the Jews, when comparing them to vermin before rounding them up and taking them into camps. Then there’s isolation—that’s the other technician in the cult of indoctrination. How could they amp that up? Tell people they can’t leave their homes, they can’t socialize except through screens, deflate any warmth from the room of their dreams…”

There is little doubt, however, that the L.A. Times piece did amplify Arthur’s stance. To wit, a club Arthur was supposed to play wrote him that “We have been getting a lot of pushback, emails and such from both staff and customers after that article came out about vaccine and mask stuff…. It’s not what we want to do but it’s what we have to do. As a venue right now, we can’t do anything that would make staff or patrons feel unsafe, as so much of the game we are playing right now is about ‘peace of mind.’ I hope you understand.”

Arthur also had an album canceled that he was to record with R.E.M.’s Peter Buck. Though his lawsuit does not mention that nixed record.

The lawsuit also includes a DM excerpt between Arthur and the article’s author, Randall Roberts, who is no longer with the L.A. Times and is not named as a defendant. Roberts says Arthur should email the paper’s music editor, Craig Marks, who wrote the headline.

“I’m not an anti-vaxxer,” Arthur said to Roberts in the DM. “I’m anti- this experimental shot with no long-term tests that is harming many and completely ineffective against the spread of the virus. I’m anti-censorship and anti- the suppression of safe and effective treatments that could save lives. You have misrepresented me here. … You specifically asked me if I was anti-vax and I specifically answered that no I was not. No small detail in today’s environment. A piece like this requires nuance. Obviously, I knew it would lean in a negative light but I assumed there wouldn’t be outright lies printed. Especially in a headline. That comes up on a Google search.”

The suit further claims the L.A. Times endangered Arthur’s infant son by publishing a photo of the two of them. It read, “By prominently inserting a photograph in the Article of Arthur holding his newborn baby, LA Times intended and endorsed the false and defamatory implication, and implied that Arthur was endangering his child, his family, indeed all of society.”

There is also a link to a tweet included, in which Roberts says to a fellow tweeter, “Thanks, Robert. I’m still torn about whether this was a good idea or not.” This, the suit says, represents the writer’s lack of belief in the thrust of the piece. Though the exact context of the tweet is up for debate since what it was responding to has since been deleted.

Rene Lopez, a former 10-year member of Arthur’s band, expressed dismay at Arthur’s beliefs in the L.A. Times piece. Lopez is quoted as saying, “His rhetoric has been horribly dangerous for the past year. He keeps egging fans on not to wear masks and to just boost their nutrition. Some are lapping it up. It’s been frightening. Something changed in him about three years ago, he hasn’t been ok since. I saw the change happen right in the beginning because he started sending me videos of different dudes talking about conspiracy stuff. I’ve seen him go through so many phases. This phase is worrisome, of course.”

The suit is also asking for a jury trial.

(Photo by Al Pereira/Getty Images)