Has MSN News faced any controversies or lawsuits?
Executive summary
MSN’s news portal has been the center of repeated controversies in recent years—primarily over automated editorial choices, republished items with false or insensitive content, and user complaints of bias and moderation practices [1] [2] [3]. The reporting supplied shows widespread criticism and internal corrective actions by Microsoft, but does not provide clear evidence of a high-profile lawsuit filed specifically against MSN News in these sources; Microsoft as a parent company has a long history of litigation on other fronts [4] [2].
1. Automated headlines and bizarre editorial choices — the AI backlash
Major technology and news outlets documented examples where MSN’s automated aggregation system elevated false or grotesquely phrased items—such as a headline suggesting President Biden dozed during a moment of silence and an obituary that called an NBA player “useless”—sparking questions about algorithmic oversight and the limits of robot-driven curation [1] [2].
2. Reported staff cuts and “robot journalism” — accusations of replacing humans with AI
Investigative pieces and critics have alleged that Microsoft reduced human editorial oversight on MSN and shifted toward automated processes, with Futurism reporting that contract journalists were replaced by AI and that this contributed to the spread of bogus or sensational items syndicated on the site [5] [1].
3. Public response and platform fixes — Microsoft’s immediate remedies
Following the outcry over inappropriate AI-driven content, Microsoft disabled problematic features—most notably polls tied to sensitive stories—and said it was investigating causes and taking steps to prevent repeats, indicating at least partial acknowledgment and remediation by corporate PR and product teams [2].
4. User complaints and perceived bias — the consumer perspective
Crowdsourced reviews and consumer complaint sites capture a steady stream of users who allege political censorship, biased selection of stories, or poor moderation practices on MSN’s comments and community features; those reviews illustrate dissatisfaction but do not on their own constitute legal findings [3] [6].
5. Reliability and bias evaluations — third‑party ratings
Media-rating organizations place MSN toward the left-of-center on bias while giving it a “generally reliable” or analytical reliability score, suggesting that independent evaluators see quality and slant as mixed rather than wholly disqualifying [7].
6. Lawsuits — what the supplied reporting does and does not show
Among the reporting provided there is no direct, sourced example of a landmark lawsuit filed specifically against MSN News for its editorial practices or AI errors; the material instead documents reputational and operational controversies and notes that Microsoft—the parent company—has been defendant in numerous historic lawsuits unrelated to MSN’s editorial choices [4] [2]. If there are civil claims or class actions tied directly to MSN’s news aggregation decisions, those are not surfaced in the supplied sources.
7. Competing narratives and implicit incentives — why this matters
Advocates and critics diverge: technology reporters emphasize algorithmic failure modes and the downstream harm of automated amplification [1] [2], while defenders point to Microsoft’s corrective steps and the practical challenge of policing large-scale aggregation; underlying incentives—cost-cutting, scale, and search/default placement in browsers—help explain why Microsoft might favor automation even at reputational risk [5] [2].