I have a question about Sinclair CEO - is he breaking the law?

[rooboy]

As I understand American law, if you are the CEO of a public company there is a legal requirement to always act in a manner which maximizes the profitability of the corporation. By forcing affiliates to air this smear piece, isn't David Smith breaking the law? I would have thought that anyone who owned even one share in Sinclair could take out an injunction against him to prevent it's airing...

[Libby2]

1. I hope this doesn't hijack your thread

Who was it that got caught soliciting the prostitute?

[rooboy]

2. Smith. n/t

[Libby2]

3. Thank you n/t

[Nlighten1]

4. Remember when the Republicans were complaining about...

MM's movie 9/11 playing so close to the elections? There was something said that if it played after a certain month it could be considered a "campaign ad".

[Arancaytar]

5. If this law is applicable, you're right I guess

The company loses out from angering advertisers and investors, and predictably loses value as a direct result. Not to mention detrimental to the reputation of its customers. If I was a company advertising on Sinclair (and hadn't cancelled the contract by now) I would sue for libel and the damage to my reputation involved in the connection of my company to such a travesty.

But tell me who's in charge of the justice system in the US now. Kerry or the neocons?

[rooboy]

6. I'm certain it's the law...

I just wonder what would happen if Larry Flynt got his broker to purchase one share in the company and then sent his lawyers down to the court for an injunction. I think it would be pretty simple to do.

[Arancaytar]

7. Simple to do so, but hard to succeed.

He'd never win such a case. The courts can be bribed, and SincLiar has a LOT of capacity for dishing out bribes.