|
|
| NBC fires Matt Lauer (1478511) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
| (1478511) | |
NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017 Sexual harassment allegations. |
|
|
| (1478513) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 08:30:14 2017, in response to NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017. I know. It's ridiculous. |
|
|
| (1478517) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by TransitChuckG on Wed Nov 29 08:49:50 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 08:30:14 2017. Fired |
|
|
| (1478520) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Wed Nov 29 08:58:31 2017, in response to NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017. No surprise. Been hearing rumors about him for a good time..... |
|
|
| (1478526) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 09:13:05 2017, in response to NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017. 20+ years in the anchor chair, gone just like that... *poof*Somewhere, Ann Curry is watching the Today Show, and cackling with glee this morning. |
|
|
| (1478527) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 09:15:15 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by bingbong on Wed Nov 29 08:58:31 2017. But you have to admit, it is a Witch Hunt if people are getting fired with no proof or no internal investigation with NBC. |
|
|
| (1478529) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 09:16:48 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 09:13:05 2017. Do you agree with this? Do you agree with people getting fired on hearsay without due process? |
|
|
| (1478530) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 09:28:28 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 09:16:48 2017. Do you agree with people getting fired on hearsay without due process?There is no due process for employment. It is at the whim of the employer. Having said that, a responsible employer is going to investigate before firing someone if they hear complaints of any kind about that person's conduct. Are the complaints credible? Are they independent? Same kind of process a media outlet should go through before publishing an allegation about a public figure. Did NBC go through such a process? They claim they did. I have no way of judging if they did or not, and I doubt you do. |
|
|
| (1478531) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 09:28:35 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 09:15:15 2017. NBC did a fairly thorough investigation, from what I understand. My impression is that the brass received a detailed complaint, called Lauer on the carpet about it, and he copped to it. Just my educated guess. |
|
|
| (1478533) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 09:35:52 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 09:28:28 2017. WHY, WHY, WHY must you do that for? I'm talking about your first sentence. Like you have to explain it to me like I wouldn't know better. When I say due process, I'm not talking standards in a court of law, I'm talking about NBC looking into it before they act on it.I was just watching the news and they said this was the first time that Matt ever had any type of incident or allegations against him in his 20-plus years with the company. It's purely a knee-jerk reaction to what's going on. |
|
|
| (1478534) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 09:36:42 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 09:28:35 2017. You could be 100% correct! But then again, NBC might have just panicked because of the car rent political circus around all of the sexual allegations and just decided to let him go |
|
|
| (1478536) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 09:39:20 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 09:35:52 2017. Again, I think the suits got a very detailed complaint, they looked into it, called Lauer on the carpet, and he probably copped.Major networks don't just shitcan top anchors on a one-and-done allegation, without a VERY complete going-through. That is FACT, not opinion. |
|
|
| (1478537) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 09:41:05 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 09:36:42 2017. I seriously doubt NBC just canned Lauer, sight unseen. That's not how news divisions in major networks function. |
|
|
| (1478538) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 09:43:51 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Nov 29 09:35:52 2017. When I say due process, I'm not talking standards in a court of law, I'm talking about NBC looking into it before they act on it.OK, I can't help it if you, a person with extensive experience in the application of law, would use "due process" incorrectly. NBC claims they investigated carefully. How could you possibly know whether or not they are telling the truth? |
|
|
| (1478540) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 09:47:34 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 09:41:05 2017. IAWTP. |
|
|
| (1478545) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Wed Nov 29 10:08:41 2017, in response to NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017. What is Ann Curry thinking now? |
|
|
| (1478546) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:17:36 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 09:13:05 2017. Even under McCarthy*, it wasn't quite so easy to get people fired; nor was the net cast so wide and so easily.*Which I recall contemporaneously. |
|
|
| (1478548) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:24:09 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 09:39:20 2017. There is such a thing as wrongful discharge. which can be adjudicated. You could be canned in many jobs for the revelation that a male employee had sex with men. Remember?But for anyone gleeful about this turn of events, consider this: Today it's "sexual impropriety," and tomorrow? and tomorrow? |
|
|
| (1478549) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:25:35 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 09:43:51 2017. NBC claims they investigated carefully. How could you possibly know whether or not they are telling the truth?And you think that's due process? |
|
|
| (1478550) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 10:31:58 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:25:35 2017. Duh. I said:Did NBC go through such a process? They claim they did. I have no way of judging if they did or not, and I doubt you do. I don't claim NBC acted correctly, because I have no idea. I just challenge those who say NBC acted incorrectly to put up some evidence for their claim. |
|
|
| (1478551) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Wed Nov 29 10:32:24 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by bingbong on Wed Nov 29 08:58:31 2017. Really? LOL. You must be really plugged in. |
|
|
| (1478552) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 10:35:14 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:25:35 2017. As a general rule, employers are neither obligated nor required to provide due process in their investigations of employees. That's a requirement of the justice department and its components, e.g., courts. |
|
|
| (1478553) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:37:54 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 10:31:58 2017. Since NBC did something significantly deleterious to a well-known person, the burden should be on them to show what they did to substantiating the claim. |
|
|
| (1478554) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 10:37:55 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:24:09 2017. Yes, "wrongful discharge" can, and does, occur. However, I do have some experience with the network in question, and corporate media in general. Trust and believe, NBC ran Lauer's firing past a whole platoon of lawyers, before they signed off on it. Big networks don't blink without first consulting Legal. That said, all that is academic, if Lauer copped to his own alleged behavior, which I think he did, based on the rapidity of events. |
|
|
| (1478556) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:39:07 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 10:35:14 2017. Something may be legal, but is it ethical? And in the court of public opinion, is it unassailable? |
|
|
| (1478557) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Wed Nov 29 10:40:18 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 10:35:14 2017. ...... Due process will definitely be spelled out in a collective bargaining agreement if an employee is covered by such. On air personalities are not usually covered. Most professional athletes are. Hmmmmm |
|
|
| (1478558) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 10:40:20 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:39:07 2017. Given what Lauer did to Ann Curry, which was absolutely GRIMY, I can't muster up too much sympathy for him. |
|
|
| (1478559) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 10:42:31 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 10:35:14 2017. Lauer probably has an employment contract. The contract probably prohibits inappropriate conduct and makes it a cause for firing, but probably protects Lauer if he doesn't provide cause for being dismissed.NBC would be wise to have very good evidence of that inappropriate conduct, or else they could be subject to a huge law suit from Lauer. |
|
|
| (1478560) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 10:45:13 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:37:54 2017. I agree that the burden on them is to be able to substantiate their claim. Otherwise they are likely to be hit with a huge breach of contract suit by Lauer.But they don't have to make their proof, if they have it, public. That's their choice. |
|
|
| (1478561) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:48:09 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 10:45:13 2017. This is a very public firing so there is a legitimate, if not required, public interest in learning the most relevant circumstances.I mean, this is not a mailroom clerk having sex behind the copy machines. |
|
|
| (1478563) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 10:58:05 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:48:09 2017. NBC might have enough proof to fire him and defend itself against a breach of contract suit, but not necessarily enough proof to defend itself against a libel suit if it starts to publish details. If so, its lawyers would tell it to keep mum.Again, I have no clue if they are handling this correctly or not. I just challenge those who are sure they are handling it badly to come up with evidence. About a year ago my employer suddenly fired a mid-level executive in my organization. People were puzzled - he was generally considered a nice guy, and very honest. All they would ever say was that he had repeatedly violated the company code of conduct. |
|
|
| (1478565) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 11:14:41 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:48:09 2017. there is a legitimate, if not required, public interest in learning the most relevant circumstances.There might be an interest but there is no obligation on NBC's part to disclose it. |
|
|
| (1478566) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 11:15:06 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 10:39:07 2017. Irrelevant. |
|
|
| (1478567) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 11:15:50 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by R2ChinaTown on Wed Nov 29 10:40:18 2017. I doubt Lauer's contract is covered by a CBA. |
|
|
| (1478568) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Wed Nov 29 11:21:05 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 11:15:50 2017. Exactly what I said |
|
|
| (1478570) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Wed Nov 29 11:27:27 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by R2ChinaTown on Wed Nov 29 10:40:18 2017. ".... Due process will definitely be spelled out in a collective bargaining agreement if an employee is covered by such."That being said, aren't media employees covered by a collective barganing agreement? Aren't all TV/radio on air people members of AFTRA or SAG, dues paying union members entitled to a degree of representation or due process? Right or wrong, I haven't heard a peep about any union input or union anything concerning any allegation of anyone. The way it goes down these days it seems charges made, employee dismissed w/o a word from any union. Not even the show of some union pushback, publicly anyway. |
|
|
| (1478572) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Wed Nov 29 11:31:29 2017, in response to NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017. Ann Currie gets the last laugh. Rightfully so. |
|
|
| (1478573) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 11:34:59 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Wed Nov 29 11:27:27 2017. "Stars" probably have their own individual contract. |
|
|
| (1478574) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 11:38:59 2017, in response to NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017. Reports coming out now that several news outlets have been investigating for some time now Lauer's off-camera conduct. Allegedly, he sexually assaulted a female NBC staffer during the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014. |
|
|
| (1478575) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 11:43:01 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 11:38:59 2017. Of course, then it's weird that NBC says they first heard of the complaint this Monday.I suspect we'll slowly find out more. |
|
|
| (1478576) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 11:45:01 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens, posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 11:43:01 2017. Maybe that's when they officially heard, i.e., when complainant's attorney first contacted NBC? |
|
|
| (1478577) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Nov 29 12:10:51 2017, in response to NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017. NBC will have to pay him tens of millions of dollars for breaking his contract. This makes you wonder if new contracts going forward will put a sexual harassment clause in the contract allowing networks to terminate contracts for this reason. |
|
|
| (1478578) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 12:14:56 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Nov 29 12:10:51 2017. How do you know his current contract does not have a clause allowing termination for inappropriate conduct? |
|
|
| (1478579) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Nov 29 12:24:31 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Wed Nov 29 11:27:27 2017. All on-camera talent are members of SAG-AFTRA, while most contributing writers or reporters are generally represented either by the National Press Association, Writers Guild (EAST), or Dramatists Guild. That said, most talent contracts in use today by the major networks include clauses dealing with inappropriate sexual conduct. I'm pretty sure Lauer's agreement with NBC covered such behavior. |
|
|
| (1478580) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by chicagomotorman on Wed Nov 29 12:41:22 2017, in response to NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017.  I wonder if this guy had any scandals?
|
|
|
| (1478584) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 14:11:41 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens, posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 11:43:01 2017. I wish we could refine our language a bit. "Sexual assault" can mean anything from an unwanted hug or kiss, to intimate touching or attempts, to actual rape. |
|
|
| (1478586) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 14:18:30 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 14:11:41 2017. I have never ever noticed anyone refer to an unwanted hug or kiss as "sexual assault."PS. Don't quote me as claiming that Lauer has been accused of sexual assault. I haven't read anything of the sort. |
|
|
| (1478591) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 15:01:33 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens, posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 14:18:30 2017. That's exactly what Leeann Breedin accused Al Franken of.And Lauer has been explicitly accused of "inappropriate sexual contact with a subordinate," "sexual misconduct" and similar statement. Isn't that "anything of the sort"? If you say "they didn't use the word 'assault'" you're making my point of euphemistic and vague language. PS. Don't quote me as claiming that Lauer has been accused of sexual assault. I haven't read anything of the sort. Why do you make a disclaimer like that when multiple reliable sources are a few keystrokes away? And don't worry about me quoting you as a good source for claims. |
|
|
| (1478593) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Wed Nov 29 15:06:13 2017, in response to NBC fires Matt Lauer, posted by Dave on Wed Nov 29 07:24:33 2017. So when he ignored the 9/11 moment of silence to talk about boobs and butts, that wasn't the issue? |
|
|
| (1478594) | |
Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Nov 29 15:06:56 2017, in response to Re: NBC fires Matt Lauer - the plot thickens, posted by SLRT on Wed Nov 29 15:01:33 2017. I thought you were a lawyer. Are you unaware that "assault" has far stronger connotations than "contact" or "misconduct?" |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|