Imus Settles with CBS - Back on the air soon...

[LENSCRAFTER]

...or so says Drudge.

**Exclusive** Radio host Don Imus has agreed to settle his contract with CBS for $20 million, and a non disparaging clause, legal sources claim. The move opens the possibility Imus will soon return to the airwaves -- on WABC in New York! [Top radio executive strongly dismisses Imus will be offered WABC slot] Developing...

[FD2BLK]

CNN was reporting it as well.
Somehow I'm really not that surprised.

[News Is Broken]

Wow, 20 million huh? I wish someone would fire me like that!

[2:30]

Sludge?

Try the AP:

August 14, 2007
Imus and CBS Reach Settlement of Threatened Suit
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Don Imus has reached a settlement with CBS over his multimillion-dollar contract after his being fired from his morning talk show and is in negotiations with WABC radio to resume his broadcasting career there, CBS and a person familiar with the negotiations said today.

Mr. Imus and CBS Radio “have mutually agreed to settle claims that each had against the other regarding the Imus radio program on CBS,” that network and Martin Garbus, a lawyer for Mr. Imus, said in a joint statement today.

The terms of the settlement will not be disclosed, according to the statement.

The settlement pre-empts a $120 million breach-of-contract lawsuit that Mr. Imus, 67, had threatened to file.

CBS and Mr. Garbus confirmed only that the settlement had been reached. The person familiar with the talks told The Associated Press that Mr. Imus was taking steps to make a comeback with WABC. That person, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the details had not been announced, also said that the settlement with CBS calls for a “nondisparaging” agreement that forbids the parties from speaking negatively about each other.

The activity comes four months after Mr. Imus created an uproar with his racist and sexist comments about the women’s basketball team at Rutgers University.

Just before his dismissal, Mr. Imus had signed a five-year, $40 million contract with CBS. Mr. Garbus, a well-known First Amendment lawyer, said in May that Mr. Imus planned to sue CBS for $120 million in unpaid salary and damages.

WABC’s general manager, Steve Borneman, did not immediately return a call requesting comment about any potential talks with Mr. Imus.

WABC is a talk-radio station that features radio personalities and shows such as Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.

The Rev. Al Sharpton, who led the move to fire Mr. Imus for his comments, did not immediately return a call for comment, he did say last month that he would not oppose a return to radio by Mr. Imus.

Mr. Garbus had said Imus would sue for the contract’s unpaid portion. He cited a contract clause in which CBS acknowledged that Mr. Imus’s services were “unique, extraordinary, irreverent, intellectual, topical, controversial.”

The clause said Mr. Imus’s programming was “desired by company” and was “consistent with company rules and policy,” according to Mr. Garbus.

[LENSCRAFTER]

Originally posted by 2:30:
Sludge?

Try the AP:

He had it first. HOURS before AP. That's why I sourced it.

[Clubbeat]

Well I figured it would be a matter of time before he was back on somebody's air.

As I said before, he should've never been fired in the first place. Suspended, made to apolgize, and do soemthing that helps bring us all together (as this incident and others like it continues to divide us) but not fired.

The First Amendment gives us the right to say whatever we want...within reason.

I wonder what will be his first topic of discussion once he's back behind the mic?

[The Thrill]

Man, that's a lot of Benjamins.

http://www.fotosearch.com/comp/corbis/DGT066/CB002059.jpg

Of course, Ben himself was a nappy-headed ho. (That's short for "homemade scientist.") ;)

[New York'rr]

Originally posted by LENSCRAFTER:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 2:30:
Sludge?

Try the AP:

He had it first. HOURS before AP. That's why I sourced it.</font>[/QUOTE]Really, Tooth Hurty. Your hatred of Matt Drudge has impaired your ability to distinguish fantasy from reality. "Sludge" made a name for himself when he get the scoop of the decade, that the President of the United States was treating his employees in the most reprehensible manner, making them kneel before him and perform fellatio on him. All your left wing news outlets that you seem to admire so much had already decided that the American people should be deprived of the truth and the facts, while Drudge did the courageous thing and told the story.

For that you call him Sludge. Perhaps it is the left-wing Democrat operatives in the mainstream Drive-By Media who are the real sludge.

[cinehead]

If you listen to Imus, you know he can be a jerk, but he's not hateful. He tried to make a joke and failed miserably. It was wrong and he apologized. It seemed to be one of the few sincere public apologies.

It will be interesting to see if some of his usual guests that failed to stand up for him (I'm looking at you Tim Russert) will come groveling back as soon as they have a book to sell.

[adam &amp; doctor drew]

and now he's being sued. (http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3479449&page=1)

I like the lawyer saying this is about her good name.

is that really a problem when 99.9% of America has no idea who you are?

[Max Schumacher]

Question for those in the broadcasting business who despise Imus: Would you file a friend of the court brief on his behalf? Is his speech not protected? And since his remarks were broadcast, should this not be libel rather than slander?

[NYC Street]

Answer to Max: It would be slander, not libel, because it was spoken, not written.

And it wasn't even arguably actionable as slander - I'll spare you the dissertation explaining why unless someone really wants it.

As to the brief: I don't think his remarks were "protected" or that there is any free speech aspect to the case, so, no, I wouldn't file a brief. But, though I think the guy is a jerk, I'd bet on a quick dismissal.

[ August 17, 2007, 06:18 AM: Message edited by: NYC Street ]