The events involved in that matter don't have anything to do with her time at CBS, don't create ANY liability for CBS.youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 9:07 amAs an attorney, would you want her on your staff if she is entangled in litigation, which may also encompass you business?Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 7:57 amUmm, what? Seriously, what is your point here?youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 7:53 am But Natty told us it was because Paramount laid off 800 people. Seems she me have a mole in places that help us understand stuff behind the curtain.
The article has nothing to do with her separation from CBS, right?
She'd have to publish something new at CBS based on a new set of information from a confidential source...and if CBS approved such publication they would then take on the issue of protection of confidential sources...but they would be making that call. Which they do all the time.
Can she be a productive reporter while involved in a legal protection of confidential sources? Happens all the time.
Her leaving CBS is most likely unrelated to protecting confidential sources. Lots of potential other reasons. Not all of them complimentary to her.