Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The incident happened at the New Yorker, not CNN.
I’m guessing that CNN was contractually obliged to keep Toobin on, or they’d have to pay him a giant severance. Nothing happened while Toobin was on the job for CNN.
False. He was working for both companies at the time. cnn merely suspended him. He was back in a few months.
My point is that CNN likely couldn’t fire him since the incident didn’t happen at CNN. There was probably a very large breakage fee, if CNN tried to end the relationship absent committing a crime or malfeasance at CNN.
If you are a media personality working for a media company there's definitely a morality clause in your contract that would allow you to be fired for something that happened outside of the workplace if it reflects poorly on the company to keep you on.
1. There is no doubt but even if he did something really bad it is a toss up if litigated
2. What he did was a mistake. If he intended to expose himself that is one thing but it was a mistake -- no crime. Really doubt they could cut him without paying him They could keep him off air but pay him.
3. He was and is popular. That will always control these decisions.