A California woman has sued online dating service eHarmony for not offering to match up compatible gays and lesbians.
You might think that this lawsuit would be dismissed quickly. But in this case, a Reuters news story seems to goes out of its way to validate the complaint by explaining that eHarmony has “long rankled the gay community with its failure to offer a ‘men seeking men’ or ‘women seeking women’ option.
For those of you taking notes, this might be the kind of opinionated-generalization-reported-as-fact that causes some right-wingers to gripe about left-wing liberal bias in the media.
The Reuters story goes on to quote the woman’s lawyers — yes, plural lawyers — who hope to elevate their attack to class-action status. They want eHarmony to “change its policy” and pay damages to gays and lesbians who have been “denied access” because it does not specifically cater to them.
The lawsuit, said one attorney, “is about changing the landscape and making a statement out there that gay people, just like heterosexuals, have the right and desire to meet other people with whom they can fall in love."
Really. He said that. A right to meet other people with whom they can fall in love. The only thing missing is the Geico caveman giving his response. Uh… WHUT?
The Reuters story also doesn’t mention the literal plethora of online dating services that either include or are dedicated exclusively to gays and lesbians. Mentioning a few of these commercial sites by name would have seemed like an obvious way to give real-world context to the assertion that a company with religious foundations is knowingly breaking the law.
But Reuters did not do this. It may be bias. Or it may just be bad reporting. Either way, it’s a lesson for any high-profile company with critics on the fringe.
. . . . . . . . . .
