Hearst Reaches $50M Privacy Settlement with Magazine Subscribers

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

After almost three years of litigation, Hearst and a lead plaintiff have reached a $50 million settlement to resolve allegations that the media company sold consumer information and violated Michigan’s video privacy law.

Hearst Communications Inc. and lead plaintiff Josephine James Edwards recently reached a $50 million settlement to end a class action lawsuit which alleged that Hearst sold subscriber information related to its customers’ magazine subscription histories and personal reading habits.

Hearst publishes a large variety of magazines, including Country Living, Good Housekeeping, Redbook, and O, The Oprah Magazine.

The Hearst class action claimed that the media company’s actions violated Michigan’s Video Rental Privacy Act (VRPA), which protects consumers from having their personal information shared, specifically their habits in purchasing or renting media.

The class action was originally filed in 2015 in a New York federal court, and has since been subject to an unsuccessful dismissal bid by Hearst and numerous discovery disputes. The recently announced class action settlement will resolve the years of tumultuous litigation and benefit consumers who may have had their information compromised.

According to the preliminary settlement documents, the estimated 1.9 million eligible Class Members will receive around $155 each, if they submit the required, one-page claim form.

The Hearst privacy settlement stands to be the largest reached under Michigan’s VRPA, formally known as the Preservation of Personal Privacy Act.

“Given the exceptional relief secured on behalf of the Class, the Court should have no hesitation finding that the Settlement falls within the range of possible approval,” states Edwards in her motion for preliminary approval.

In her motion, Edwards references numerous other settlements under Michigan’s VRPA, arguing that the Hearst settlement should not be evaluated “in a vacuum, since it follows examples set by those that came before it.”

Edwards references the most recent VRPA settlement of $16.38 million which resolved allegations that Consumer Reports sold consumer subscription data. This settlement, which was announced in April, estimates that the 560,000 Class Members will receive around $180 per claim. Edwards also references an $8.2 million Reader’s Digest settlement and a $7.6 million settlement in a class action against American Media Inc. and Odyssey Magazine Publishing Group Inc.

The motion for preliminary approval also references settlements by Facebook and Netflix, who agreed to pay $9.5 million and $9 million respectively to resolve claims under the federal Video Privacy Protection Act. The Hearst settlement is not only supported by state specific outcomes, Edwards argues, but also by federal settlements.

“Looking beyond the VRPA to privacy cases more generally, the instant Settlement […] provides greater cash value to class members than privacy settlements reached in litigation over statutory claims that have been approved throughout the country,” the motion argues.

Edwards further argues that the Hearst class action settlement would allow a simple resolution to claims, avoiding the complex, expensive litigation that would be involved should the class action continue. Further litigation would likely involve additional discovery disputes as well as a contested Class certification.

“The Settlement […] permits a prompt resolution of this action on terms that are fair, reasonable and adequate to the Class,” Edwards argues, urging the court to approve the settlement. “This result will be accomplished years earlier than if the case proceeded to judgment through trial and/or appeals, and provides certainty, whereas litigation does not and could result in defeat for the Class on summary judgment, at trial or on appeal.”

Plaintiffs are represented by John Carey, David Milian and Frank Hedin of Carey Rodriguez Milian Gonya LLP; and Scott Bursor, Joseph Marchese and Philip Fraietta of Bursor & Fisher PA.

The Hearst Magazine Privacy Class Action Lawsuit is Edwards v. Hearst Communications Inc., Case No. 1:15­cv­-09279, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

UPDATE: January 2019, the Michigan Redbook, Elle magazine subscriber class action settlement is now open. Click here to file a claim.