Re: Final Thoughts on Bachelor 11
Although it's sporty fun to play a law school "issue spotting" game, in the real world, there is zero chance of litigation against a show participant on these facts.
So, personally, I draw a big distinction between (a) actions driven by legal considerations (I think Brad and Jason's words and actions are very much colored by legal considerations), and (b) actual real world risk of lawsuits filed against show participants.
Producers and networks write strong reps/warranties and promises not to date, confidentiality, etc. into those contracts because they want their expectations set in black and white on those concepts. Day to day, as filming, PR stage, and post-airing stages unfold, the agreement represents a shared understanding of what's expected, with legal RISK attached to it.
The real litigation relevant point about those agreements to me is that they make it impossible for any participant to ever sue the producers or network for airing shows that do not reflect what "really" happened. Splicing, dicing, jokes aired as "real" -- all the things they do to make it as entertaining as possible. It is supposed to be entertainment, not a documentary after all. In any event, protecting the network from liability is a principal reason why "reality" show agreements are written the way they are. To distinguish them from agreements involving some promise to portray a true or non-humiliating version of events. Absent the most egregious set of facts (i.e., blatant public disclosure of the ending), I cannot IMAGINE the network/producer suing Brad or Kate the Blogging Bachelorette or any show participant.
Talk about a way to kill the franchise -- who would EVER apply to be the bacherlor/ette after a lawsuit against a prior contestant? What are the DAMAGES for heaven's sakes? (A required pleading element).
That said, anyone who signed the agreement with assets to fret about would do well not to "tug on superman's cape" by publishing or admitting to blatant violations of reps/warranties/conduct prohibitions. And I think we've seen plenty of that on this board and elsewhere.