So basically the media can just run a story with no other intent except for to destroy the business? Let's say the business is operating with the guidelines of no one under the age of 18 is permitted. That being said I am just not sure what story they would run where a partial owners background would be brought to light. Example: I have seen news stories on convicted sex offenders working at daycare's, school bus drivers, play Santa Claus eat but have never seen a story about a convicted sex offender who owns a hardware store. Hoping you understand what I'm getting at as to why this would be something the media could or would run without detrimental intent. And is this intent legal?
I doubt a story would be published just to destroy a legitimate business. It is generally not the role of the press to destroy but rather it is the role of the press to inform.
If the business is one that has attracted a lot of negative public attention already, a story on the business and the partner could be considered newsworthy.
A sex offender's offense does not necessarily have to involve those under the age of 18. If the sex offense involved a young child or young children, however, the
location of the legitimate business (perhaps next to a school or near a residential area) could be a matter deserving press coverage. Or if the business brings into the area an unsavory clientele, this could be a matter of public concern.
But you really have not provided enough facts.
Has a news story been published already?
And what is your position in all of this? Are you thinking of dissolving the partnership to preserve your business? Are you thinking you could have a suit against your partner for attracting unwanted attention to the business? Are you thinking you could have a suit against the press for focusing on the sex offense of your partner?
