This question regards Fairly Legal, the TV show on USA network.
For the finale, something is bugging me.
The story starts with Kate mediating a case between two reporters who were fired from their network, and the network exec/lawyer. The stated reason - the two reporters were lesbian coworkers. The claim was it was because there was a case of one being nominally the other’s supervisor, the two women claimed it was bias against them for being lesbians, affecting the network’s image. Oh, and the two women had broken up.
So there’s a quick exchange, and one lady gets her job back, the other doesn’t want her job but wants her work product, which the exec mostly retrieves except for one story she was working on.
So Kate is on the trail to get the records and whatnot for the lady’s last story. And she pokes around in the company’s IT department and finds out they were scanning company accounts, which is why they found out about the sexual relationship. But the real cause of the whole kerfluffle was to bury the story about corruption, and the city government covering up some big money deal.
So here’s what bugged me. The story starts with Kate going off to find the information or whatever in order to make her client happy, but in digging into the story, she ends up dredging up enough secrets that show the current District Attorney (and her ex’s boss) is the culprit behind it. So she uses the material to … well, blackmail is probably strong, but pressure is certainly valid - pressure the DA into dropping out of the current election cycle, which means her ex- is now the only candidate. Thus ensuring victory.
Except, wasn’t the whole point to get info to give to the original client? That seems to have been magically brushed under the rug. Like halfway through the episode, they pulled a misdirection fast one, hoping we’d get so caught up in the shenanigans with Lauren and the billionaire we’d forget there was a redhead who didn’t have her story that she spent a year researching.
Anybody else notice this?
Is this thing on?