Sensationalism and Checkbook Journalism: A Closer Look at Jeffrey Rapkin and Lawrence Mower’s Story

Lawrence Mower’s recent article featuring Jeffrey Rapkin’s lawsuit against Heritage Property & Casualty Insurance Co. is a prime example of sensationalism masquerading as investigative journalism.

The story, which tugs at heartstrings with tales of tragedy and accusations of fraud, deserves a closer look—because when we peel back the layers, it becomes clear that this is less about facts and more about creating headlines.

The Art of Sensationalism

Mower paints a vivid picture: a devastated family battling an unfeeling insurance giant.

But what’s conspicuously missing from the story? Context.

For example, the article states that Heritage initially offered a lower payout than what the field adjuster estimated.

However, it conveniently glosses over the industry-standard process where desk adjusters—who have access to broader data and guidelines—review and finalize claims.

Field adjusters and desk adjusters often have differing opinions, which is standard practice, not evidence of malice or fraud.

Furthermore, Mower relies heavily on the claims of Rapkin and his attorney, Steven Bush, while dismissing the fact that Heritage eventually issued a check for $372,871.

If Heritage truly engaged in fraud, as alleged, why would they later issue a check exceeding the initial estimate?

The omission of this nuance is either careless or deliberate, but either way, it undermines the credibility of the story.

Convenient Villains

Jeffrey Rapkin, a lawyer himself, is portrayed as a victim of a callous system.

However, his refusal to cash Heritage’s check—an amount that could have resolved many of his grievances—raises questions.

Is this about seeking justice for himself and other homeowners, or is it about prolonging the battle to create the narrative of a class-action lawsuit?

While his personal tragedies are undoubtedly heartbreaking, using them to villainize an entire industry without concrete evidence is unfair and inflammatory.

The article also leans heavily on the testimony of disgruntled adjusters like Jordan Lee, who claim their reports were altered.

Yet, it fails to acknowledge that these allegations have been circulating for years without leading to criminal charges or definitive proof.

It’s easy to accuse, but proving wrongdoing is a different matter.

Why hasn’t the Florida Department of Financial Services or Attorney General’s Office brought charges if the evidence is as damning as portrayed?

The Role of Public Adjusters and Trial Lawyers

It’s worth noting that Mower and Rapkin conveniently avoid discussing how public adjusters and trial lawyers have contributed to Florida’s property insurance crisis.

Inflated claims, unnecessary lawsuits, and exaggerated damages have driven up premiums for every Floridian.

By focusing solely on the insurance industry’s alleged faults, this article ignores a significant part of the problem.

Rapkin’s attorney, Steven Bush, is a well-known figure in the litigation industry, which thrives on cases like this.

The push for a class-action lawsuit conveniently aligns with the interests of trial lawyers, who stand to gain millions from such cases.

Meanwhile, regular Floridians will continue to face rising insurance premiums and limited options.

Checkbook Journalism

Mower’s article reeks of bias and one-sided reporting. Instead of presenting a balanced view, he crafts a narrative that aligns perfectly with the trial lawyer playbook.

This isn’t investigative journalism—it’s checkbook journalism, where sensational stories are sold to the highest bidder, regardless of the long-term consequences for the public.

A Message to Mr. Mower and Mr. Rapkin

Floridians deserve better than sensationalism and half-truths. If there is evidence of systemic fraud, present it.

If there are legitimate grievances against insurers, let’s address them through proper channels—not through media circuses designed to vilify an entire industry while lining the pockets of trial lawyers.

And to Mr. Rapkin: Floridians are watching.

If your goal is truly to help other policyholders, show it by engaging constructively with the system, not by feeding into a cycle of lawsuits and accusations that only deepen the state’s insurance crisis.

Accountability matters on all sides, and that includes journalists and plaintiffs who are quick to point fingers without offering real solutions.