And Nancy Grace is leaving HLN at the same time. Hmmmm …
Still stinging from Roger’s rebuff, I assume.
Were the other three Miss Americas alive at the time? :eek:
Given that the devoutly liberal CBC just had a major sexual assault scandal I do not think the political affiliation of the media organization has a lot to do with this sort of thing. You’ve got big swinging dicks with access to attractive women they can harass, and so, depressingly, that’s what they do.
I agree. She and other anchors at Fox News deserve wake up calls about what they’ve been wrong on, and the harm that the channel has caused, but no one deserves sexual harassment.
But the sad fact is that if women were only going to work at ethical workplaces that 100% did not allow sexual harassment, there would be pretty few places we could go.
Deserves to be sexually harassed, no.
Deserves to be dismissed as a poseur pretending to be a journalist, yes, if the evidence (i.e. employment at Faux Nooz) points in that direction. (Admittedly, another Faux Noozie who is equally guilty of impersonating a journalist is not in the best position to dish out that dismissal.)
Only one, actually.
Wow, you’ve managed to cram two huge falsehoods and one blatant strawman into a single sentence! To wit:
-
The claim that the CBC is “liberal” seems to be the mantra solely of partisan hardcore conservatives and it’s a claim that they’ve never been able to factually support. CBC Television (the news and documentary part) and CBC Radio provide thoughtful and analytical programming on the events of the day in much the same manner as PBS and NPR and they piss off counterfactual reality-denying conservatives for much the same reasons. It’s as specious a claim as the one about all media having a liberal bias, except for Fox News, of course.
-
Unless there’s been some new sexual assault scandal at the CBC that I’m not aware of, I presume you’re referring to the Jian Ghomeshi affair. This is the diametric opposite of what happened at Fox News. At Fox, Gretchen Carlson was harassed by the chief executive of the organization as well as one of her peers, and allegedly fired when she refused the chief executive’s advances. At the CBC, Ghomeshi was a loose-cannon radio personality who was promptly and summarily fired by management when they found out about his transgressions, as a matter of principle before those transgressions even became public knowledge. Trying to equate the two organizations is absurd: the CBC had a problem employee and they promptly dealt with it; Fox seems to be steeped in a culture of corruption from the top down.
Finally, no one has claimed that Fox News has this culture of corruption and harassment because they’re “conservative”. It’s not because they’re conservative, it’s because they’re unprincipled lying sleazebags. Fox News is like a crooked used car dealership that lies to its customers, cheats them at every turn, sells them junk and robs them blind. That probably wouldn’t be a good place to work, either. But they’d probably have blonde bimbos at the front to lure in the rubes.
How did that part about Douchy hurting her feelings become part of the Ailes story?
Okay, if I say it is unsurprising that a guy got bit by a dog, given his choices in how to act around them, would you not interpret that as me saying that it was his fault that was bit? If I say that it was unsurprising that this woman got robbed given how she flaunted her money around, would you not say I was saying it was at least partly her fault she got robbed?
I mean, what is does it mean to be at fault but to say “You should have done X, that way Y wouldn’t have happened”?
People who say the stuff about how women are dressed still will say that it was wrong that the woman was raped. No one has ever accused them of not thinking rape it wrong. The issue is about culpability.
I just don’t see the distinction you are trying to draw.
Well, no, the “diametric opposite” would be if a woman in Carlson’s position harassed a man in Ailes’s position.
Ghomeshi’s behavior was well known to, and accepted by, CBC management for quite some time prior to his dismissal. They went along with it because he made them money, and they fired him only when it became impossible to bottle the story up. Casting that as “a matter of principle” is hilariously apologetic. It was a matter of trying to contain the PR damage.
[QUOTE=wolfpup]
… no one has claimed that Fox News has this culture of corruption and harassment because they’re “conservative”.
[/QUOTE]
Of the first ten posts in this thread, three say something to the effect of “regardless of her politics…”
Come on, the reason everyone hates Fox News it’s a Trump-loving echo chamber where the “War on Christmas” actually exists and Barack Obama and his wife give each other “terrorist fist jabs.” They lie to advance that agenda; they don’t just randomly lie for fun.
The distinction I’m trying to draw is the vast, vast difference in the implied degree of culpability and the consequences that one is presumed to be culpable for, which makes Miller’s analogy not the same thing at all.
The idea of “she was just asking for it because of what she was wearing” has the reprehensible, extremely distasteful connotation of actually trying to blame the victim, with the implication that boys will be boys and they really can’t help themselves. I’m not saying anything even remotely like that. I’m mostly just sympathizing with Carlson, but added as a side note that it wasn’t really smart of her to go to work in a den of thieves where disreputable conduct was more likely than elsewhere. It’s not a question of “blame” or culpability, it’s just a fact about that environment. She had a real journalism job at CBS but moved to Fox, presumably for more money, even though it was damned obvious what Fox was, and damned obvious that women in front of the camera at Fox were decoration rather than journalists.
It was the opposite in the sense that at CBC, management fired a pervert, and at Fox, management was the pervert.
My impression – which may not be fully accurate – is that CBC management was probably privy to the same rumors as the rest of the Toronto entertainment community about Ghomeshi’s peculiar private sexual proclivities, but didn’t see it as a reason for dismissal until they were presented with evidence that it had crossed the line into sexual assault. At which point Ghomeshi was promptly fired. I don’t know how one draws a distinction at arm’s length between principled actions and PR concerns, but the fact is that the CBC does have, among other things, a personal code of conduct, standards of ethics and conflicts of interest, and journalistic standards and practices that have earned it international recognition for broadcast excellence.
I don’t see anyone blaming the lying and corruption at Fox on “conservatism”. It’s not the culture of conservatism, it’s the culture of Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes.
If you want to see how sick those fucks are at Fox, watch this.
With due respect, no, your impression is not correct. Ghomeshi actively harassed female subordinates and co-workers at CBC, and the problem was reported to, and known about, by management. I’m not talking about the assaults that occurred outside CBC; there was a persistent, long term culture of harassment and assault AT CBC that management was informed about and chose not to do anything about.
This is pretty old news; Ghomeshi groping staffers, telling them he was going to “Hate fuck” them. The problem was so bad that women at universities were warned not to accept internships at CBC for fear Ghomeshi would assault them.
She included it in her legal complaint, as part of the environment she was forced to work in.
Eh, I’ll say it. Just because its Fox News. This applies to Fox News and places like Breitbart, or other conservative media places:
If you’re a woman and you work there, and you get harassed or otherwise demeaned due to your gender, its your own damn fault and I have no sympathy for you. Fox and its brethren creates so much harm and hate in the world on purpose, and without hiding it, sometimes even bragging about it, that no one can work there and not know about it. As a woman, you choose that life when you work there. You choose to be possibly propositioned by Ailes when you accept a job there. You choose to have your opinions mean less.
I want to protect innocent women from being harassed. I want to ensure that it doesn’t happen, and if it does, the aggressor is prosecuted. But there is no fucking way anyone working in the media does not know about Fox’s reputation by now. If you’re desperate and need the job to survive, then sorry, my rant doesn’t apply to you. But if you’re some name-less person selling your soul to raise your profile by exploiting hate through working at Fox News, then you deserve what you get for choosing that lifestyle.
This rant doesn’t apply to anywhere else. Yes, there exist worst working environments for women than a rich, media empire in a Western, first world country that pays you thousands to look good. I’m just ranting about Fox, I’ve no patience to look up a list of worst places and answer “So is harassment ok here?”
I want Carlson to succeed in her lawsuit, but I am 100% convinced she went into the lion’s den knowing what may happen. I want the lawsuit to harm Ailes and Fox, I couldn’t care less what happened to Carlson because she’s shown herself to be a morally bankrupt piece of trash willing to sell her whole gender for the promise of fame and fortune. She did this to herself. To me, this is less like saying a women’s clothes makes her a target of rape. This is more like if you choose a masochistic lifestyle and get hurt on one of your own hooks.
Women should be able to work anywhere and not be harassed. But women should not expect to not be harassed if they willingly work at Fox News.
Carlson played the role of a bimbo on Fox and Friends. She would describe what she discovered when she googled “Czar” and even “Ignoramus”. But as Jon Stewart pointed out, she was valedictorian of her high school, graduated with honors at Stanford and was a talented violinist. She knew what both of those words meant.
Acting like a bimbo on TV without making it clear that you are playing role strikes me as unhelpful. So cry me a river if Ducey was mean to her. Carson herself did far more damage to the cause of human dignity and I presume she was well compensated for her song and dance.
The crap she took from Jabba the Hutt is another matter. Nobody deserves that. I draw a bright line between inappropriate interpersonal condescension or general obnoxiousness and sexual abuse of power. All are bad. One is far worse.
Moving on, the legal document had an eyepopping sentence in it. [INDENT][INDENT]Ailes reassign Carlson to the 2 pm to 3 pm EST time slot, substantially reduced her compensation (even though, as a solo program host, her workload increased), and refused to provide her with anywhere near the level of network media support and promotion provided to other Fox News hosts who did not complain about harassment and rebuff his sexual advances. [/INDENT][/INDENT]
Emphasis added. You may want to read the italicized portion again. There’s the implication that others were rewarded for not rebuffing Ailes’ sexual advances.
I should not find it amusing when a former employee torches the bridge. But I do.
Is *that *why Steve Doocy’s air time has increased?
Well, the victim blaming begins already. Asshole.
I hope my daughters can avoid the likes of you.