The Insider
prev.
play.
mark.
next.

1:36:37
- Shall I send for coffee?
Sorry I'm late.
- [ Wallace ] No, we're fine.

1:36:40
- Are you sure?
- [ Bergman ] Yeah.

1:36:43
All right. I thought
we'd get together...

1:36:45
because there's
a legal concept...

1:36:47
that has been getting
some new attention recently.

1:36:50
Tortious interference.
1:36:52
If two people have an agreement,
like a confidentiality agreement,

1:36:56
and one of them breaks it because they
are induced to do so by a third party,

1:37:00
the third party can be sued
for damages for interfering.

1:37:03
Hence, tortious interference.
1:37:05
"lnterfering"?
That's what we do.

1:37:08
I think what we're trying to tell you
is that it happens all the time.

1:37:11
This is a news organization. People are
always telling us things they shouldn't.

1:37:15
We have to verify if it's true
and in the public interest.
And if it is, we air it.

1:37:19
And after we corroborate it.
That's why we've never lost
a lawsuit and run a classy show.

1:37:23
- Anything else?
- And 60 Minutes' verification
is exact and precise.

1:37:28
And I don't think it would hurt
to make sure you're right on this one.

1:37:32
[Hewitt]
Why? You think we have liability?

1:37:36
What's the CBS News position,
Eric?

1:37:38
There's a possibility.
It's rather remote.

1:37:40
But one we
have to check on, Mike.

1:37:43
I've retained outside counsel
to do exactly that...

1:37:45
on a segment, I might add,
that's already rife with problems.

1:37:50
What does that mean?
" Rife with--"

1:37:52
I'm told unusual promises
were made to Wigand.

1:37:55
No, only that we would hold his story
until it was safe for him.

1:37:58
And I'm told there are questions
as to our star witness' veracity.


prev.
next.