this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2025
953 points (99.5% liked)

Not The Onion

18625 readers
917 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In August 2025, two nearly identical lawsuits were filed: one against United (in San Francisco federal court) and one against Delta Air Lines (in Brooklyn federal court). They claim that each airline sold more than one million “window seats” on aircraft such as the Boeing 737, Boeing 757, and Airbus A321, many of which are next to blank fuselage walls rather than windows.

Passengers say they paid seat-selection fees (commonly $30 to $100+) expecting a view, sunlight, or the comfort of a genuine window seat — and say they would not have booked or paid extra had they known the seat lacked a window.

As reported by Reuters, United’s filing argues that it never promised a view when it used the label “window” for a seat. According to the airline, “window” refers only to the seat’s location next to the aircraft wall, not a guarantee of an exterior view.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dan1101@lemmy.world 361 points 1 day ago (3 children)

If the seat doesn't include a window then it needs to be called a wall seat. This is an open and shut case of false advertising.

[–] kambusha@sh.itjust.works 56 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Or at least put a monitor running Microsoft.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

At one point in my career, they moved us to a long white room with no windows. (The reason this particular room on this floor did not have windows was that on the wall, where the windows normally would have been were large external letters on the outside of the building spelling out the original name of the building. So of course you couldn’t have windows behind the externally mounted letters.) And their attempt at making it bearable was to put giant vinyl stickers of somewhat cartoonish window scenes along the big long outside white wall. I did not enjoy working in that space.

[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago

At least they tried

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 8 points 1 day ago

No, I already get nauseous traveling.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Yeah, lets stare at a blue screen for five hours because the screensaver coded in Electron crashed minutes after takeoff.

[–] khepri@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They'll try and argue that it's just the generic term that is most familiar to their customers, not a specific definition of what you will find if you take that seat. "Aisle" "middle" and "window" are just commonly-accepted shorthand for the first, second, and third seats in a row, not prescriptive definitions.

Source: I once worked for a Extended Warranty company and they do the exact same crap. The product they sold is a service contract, it has nothing whatsoever to do with actually extending your existing warranty. But they were allowed to keep calling it an "extended warranty" and use that term predominantly and market off it, because that is the term that is in common usage for the product they sell. All they had to do was add tiny text at the bottom of the site that said "A service contract is often referred to as an “extended car warranty,” but it is not a warranty." 🤣🤣🤣 At worst, the airlines will have to do something like that.