How NBC changed "the facts" to block Dennis Kucinich from the Nevada debate

http://www.lasarletter.net/drupal/node/544

Jan 15 2008 - 8:39pm Politics Nevada's Supreme Court today upheld NBC's exclusion of presidential contender Dennis Kucinich from tonight's MSNBC Democrats' debate. But the TV network's own appeal to the court reveals that its managers changed the program's qualification rules—a move that threw Kucinich off the program.

An NBC Emergency Petition's "statement of facts" filed today admits that Kucinich may have qualified for the debate under the rules outlined by Democratic party consultant Jenny Backus. Those guidelines said that a candidate had to finish in at least fourth place in the New Hampshire primary or Iowa Caucus to participate in the January 15th debate.

and although I think NBC had a moral obligation to honor their original invitation, the fact that they reversed themselves did not in and of itself create a legal right for DK to participate in the debate.

An invitation and an acceptance thereof doesn't create a binding contractual obligation. Not even under DK's "promissory estoppel" theory.

Put another way: if a network extended an invitation to a public figure to appear on a show like Meet the Press or Face the Nation and that person accepted and then decided not to appear, do you honestly think that the network could get an order compelling that person to show up?

Or put one last way: if you get an invitation to a wedding or some other event and you accept and then at the last minute you decide you're too busy, or too tired or just don't want to go, could the host sue you to force you to come show up? Could he or she sue you for the cost of the food/drink that was bought in reliance on your acceptance?