Tyra Banks Sues Netflix Over ‘America’s Next Top Model’ Documentary: First Amendment Analysis

On June 13, Tyra Banks, a model who created and hosted the reality TV show “America’s Next Top Model,” sued Netflix and the producers of “Reality Check: Inside America’s Next Top Model,” a docuseries focused on the modeling competition show’s legacy.

In the lawsuit, which alleges defamation and false light, among other claims, Banks says she sat for a 3 1/2-hour interview for the docuseries, but the final product, which aired in February, included just 16 minutes of that interview. The docuseries, she says, deliberately excluded portions of her interview to paint her in a negative light, including omitting moments where she “acknowledged what she would do differently, and spoke with specificity about decisions she regretted.”

“The producers used what could be stripped of context and reassembled to support a false and defamatory narrative unrelated to what she actually expressed,” the lawsuit says.

A key claim in the suit centers on the story of a Season 2 “America’s Next Top Model” contestant who says she was sexually assaulted on the show. During that season and in the years since, Banks said she understood the incident to be a regretted but consensual encounter. However, in the docuseries, the contestant told producers she was drunk and believed it was an assault.

According to Banks’ lawsuit, producers withheld that information from her and used "deliberate editorial manipulation” to lead docuseries viewers to believe that Banks had initially forgotten about the contestant and the alleged assault and that she “worked to cover it up.”

Banks’ lawsuit says that the docuseries’ portrayal of her damaged her reputation, specifically the “personal brand she has worked for decades to build and maintain throughout the world” and resulted in a flood of negative reviews for the ice cream business she owns in Australia.

Netflix and the docuseries producers have not yet commented on the lawsuit.

What is Tyra Banks alleging, and what does she have to prove to win her case?

Banks claims that Netflix and the docuseries producers defamed her by implication and painted her in a false light. Defamation and false light are categories of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment.

Defamation by implication

Banks is not claiming that the docuseries made particular false statements about her. Instead, her lawsuit alleges the producers edited the docuseries in a way that created a false impression of Banks through what they chose to include, omit and imply.

In other words, the docuseries does not directly claim that Banks knew about, covered up and then forgot about an alleged sexual assault on her show. But, Banks says, the docuseries was edited in a way that would make viewers believe this, even though she says it is not true.

To win her defamation claims, Banks must prove that:

• The docuseries, presented as a factual account, offers a false narrative about Banks.
• The docuseries producers and Netflix acted with actual malice, meaning they either knew they were creating a false implication or acted recklessly in failing to confirm the truthfulness of the portrayal.
• She suffered damages (usually financial) as a result of the narrative.