|
Post by hcpride on Dec 17, 2017 6:16:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Dec 17, 2017 12:24:42 GMT -5
Not a fan of Harball, but seems like a very, very minor "infraction."
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Dec 17, 2017 12:36:53 GMT -5
OK,"inappropriate" and "poor taste." I'm guessing if Chris could hitch a ride on the "way back" machine knowing the Franken, CK, Moore, Conyers, etc., etc. scenarios he would have been a little more judicious in his comments.
Women have probably just quietly put up with a lot of stuff in the past that they won't stand for now. That's a good thing.
I do think that there should be some real distinctions made between rape, molestation, pedophilia and misperceived intentions and tasteless jokes.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Dec 17, 2017 12:37:29 GMT -5
If everyone who has ever told a joke later thought to be "inappropriate" were to be fired there might be very few people employed in this country today. This incident had been investigated and resolved. Now it is brought to light again. This is very sad.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Dec 17, 2017 15:32:27 GMT -5
The only thing odd about this - meaning beyond a simple formal reprimand to a male employee making crude jokes and comments about a female co-worker - is the payment made (by either NBC or Matthews) to the woman. And the fact it was ‘separation compensation’.
‘MSNBC host Chris Matthews was accused of inappropriate jokes and comments about a female employee in 1999 and the woman was paid separation compensation, a spokesperson for the cable network confirmed Saturday.’
“The Daily Caller reported that the payment was in the amount of $40,000.” ...”The Caller reported that a spokesperson for the network said the payment was significantly less than $40,000”
No doubt this should not be confused with the horrid sexual assault stuff now being reported about various pols, Hollywood, and business folks.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Dec 17, 2017 16:12:44 GMT -5
The only thing odd about this - meaning beyond a simple formal reprimand to a male employee making crude jokes and comments about a female co-worker - is the payment made (by either NBC or Matthews) to the woman. And the fact it was ‘separation compensation’. ‘MSNBC host Chris Matthews was accused of inappropriate jokes and comments about a female employee in 1999 and the woman was paid separation compensation, a spokesperson for the cable network confirmed Saturday.’ “The Daily Caller reported that the payment was in the amount of $40,000.” ...”The Caller reported that a spokesperson for the network said the payment was significantly less than $40,000” No doubt this should not be confused with the horrid sexual assault stuff now being reported about various pols, Hollywood, and business folks. It should not be...but I'll bet it is.
|
|
|
Post by hc6774 on Dec 18, 2017 7:52:05 GMT -5
The only thing odd about this - meaning beyond a simple formal reprimand to a male employee making crude jokes and comments about a female co-worker - is the payment made (by either NBC or Matthews) to the woman. And the fact it was ‘separation compensation’. ‘MSNBC host Chris Matthews was accused of inappropriate jokes and comments about a female employee in 1999 and the woman was paid separation compensation, a spokesperson for the cable network confirmed Saturday.’ “The Daily Caller reported that the payment was in the amount of $40,000.” ...”The Caller reported that a spokesperson for the network said the payment was significantly less than $40,000” No doubt this should not be confused with the horrid sexual assault stuff now being reported about various pols, Hollywood, and business folks. Apparently the settlement was confidential. The amount suggests that nobody wanted to go to court; NBC's statement suggests that the larger piece of the settlement came out of Chris' pocket. Chris reprised the Hill vs Thomas hearings on his show last week; one of his points seemed to be that this was a tacit acknowledgment that such conduct would was tolerated in the work place. The hearings were 6 or 8 years before this incident.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Dec 18, 2017 8:28:17 GMT -5
At some point, somebody is going to have to come up with a way of deciding what the penalties ought to be for these type of matters. I was thinking about creating something along the lines of the Sentencing Guidelines used in federal court. You start with the base offense (verbal, physical, one time or multiple) and then consider factors such as relationship of parties (coworkers? supervisory roles?) length of time passed, age at the time of the incident, whether it was a first offense. Once you factor all of this in, you can have a range of punishment from verbal reprimand to termination based upon where the facts lead you.
There has to be a difference between someone who tells a dirty joke or asks a subordinate one time on a date and somebody who acts like Harvey Weinstein. HR people and others ought to come up with some sort of best practices thing as a guideline for employers.
The bottom line, however, is that this spate of complaint, as uncomfortable as it may be, will ultimately force people to be better behaved.
|
|
|
Post by hc6774 on Dec 18, 2017 9:07:40 GMT -5
At some point, somebody is going to have to come up with a way of deciding what the penalties ought to be for these type of matters. I was thinking about creating something along the lines of the Sentencing Guidelines used in federal court. You start with the base offense (verbal, physical, one time or multiple) and then consider factors such as relationship of parties (coworkers? supervisory roles?) length of time passed, age at the time of the incident, whether it was a first offense. Once you factor all of this in, you can have a range of punishment from verbal reprimand to termination based upon where the facts lead you. There has to be a difference between someone who tells a dirty joke or asks a subordinate one time on a date and somebody who acts like Harvey Weinstein. HR people and others ought to come up with some sort of best practices thing as a guideline for employers. The bottom line, however, is that this spate of complaint, as uncomfortable as it may be, will ultimately force people to be better behaved. Law is probably the only way to go with women lawmakers being the key influencers; cultural norms for boorish/shameful behaviors in this culturally diverse society won't work. I remember the battles in the 80's/90's of getting some young women employees to abide by the corporate dress codes set by women managers & execs.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Dec 18, 2017 11:09:18 GMT -5
Have we now decided that an accusation makes a person guilty...before there is anything like a hearing or a determination of (actual) guilt? It is sad to see the Constitution set aside so easily. If you are accused...you are fired. It is a good idea to empower true victims, but doesn't this current rush to judgement also empower those who make false accusations for a variety of reasons (and money is only one of the reasons)? Anyone remember Duke lax???
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Dec 18, 2017 11:09:26 GMT -5
This might also suggest that the $40K was the total package of which much/most of it was the usual severance pay and a "sweetener" for the inappropriate conduct by Chris.
Anyone who suggests this issue is a partisan left/right DEM/GOP issue has an ax to grind and ignoring the facts.
|
|
|
Post by Dean Wormer on Dec 18, 2017 11:56:39 GMT -5
Stick to the topic genlemen. I deleted a bunch partisan irrelevant posts from both sides.
The specific situation with respect to Chris Matthews and what he did or may have done is sufficent backdrop to have a civilized discussion without it degenerating into anything about one's political beliefs.
I do think discussion of how far back do you go and what transgressions deserve additional "punishment" than was recieved is worthwhile. The back & forth about how one network spins it one way, one group committed more offenses than another or is more hypocritical than the other is juvenile and wastes eveyody's time - most importantly mine becasue as moderator, I can't ignore it.
Talk about the issue or the thread will be locked, possibly deleted and all future threads with any political implications deleted.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Dec 18, 2017 12:06:33 GMT -5
I'm sure if there are/were any additional instances of this sort of behavior on the part of Chris they will emerge in the media.
|
|
|
Post by lou on Dec 18, 2017 12:16:40 GMT -5
I expect we'll hear more today at 7 unless he agreed a long time ago to not discussing. IMO it's politics, so thread should be deleted
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Jan 2, 2018 5:16:27 GMT -5
ICYMI . . . from The Daily Caller the other day . . . not very flattering . . .
Sources: Chris Matthews Runs An Abusive Work Environment
MSNBC Host Chris Matthews runs an at times openly derisive and brazenly sexist news operation that has led at least some staffers to describe themselves as victims of “battered wives syndrome,” according to three of his show’s guests and two former producers who spoke exclusively to The Daily Caller.
Two former NBC producers independently alleged Matthews would rate the looks of his female guests on a scale and said Matthews was so abusive that staff joked about being battered women. The interviews in total paint Matthews as a tyrant liable to fly off the handle at the slightest mistake, who was eager to objectify women and made inappropriate sexual comments appear to be a matter of course for someone in his position.
Both former NBC producers requested anonymity out of concern for their future careers. One is actively seeking a job in media and the other still works closely with MSNBC. One expressed fears about being labeled a “troublemaker” and cited the string of former Fox News women who have all but disappeared from television.
“Sadly, I know other women who won’t even be an anonymous source regarding Chris [Matthews] because they’re that concerned about the door closing on career opportunities in media,” the producer concluded.
According to the two producers, whose combined time at the network nearly spans the existence of “Hardball,” Matthews frequently objectified his female guests and staffers, inappropriately commenting on their appearance and clothing. Matthews would allegedly use pet names like “cutie” and “sweetie pie” to refer to female guests and was constantly making uncouth and “boorish” remarks about women.
“He would eye down a woman who walked on set or comment on their features or what they were wearing,” one former producer said, explaining that it looked like Matthews was undressing the women with his eyes. “He would objectify them and interrupt them in a way that he would never do to his male guests. He has a very outdated view of women.”
The other producer likened his behavior to that of a “teenage boy,” alleging that Matthews would rate his female guests on a numerical scale, deciding which guest was the “hottest of the week,” and would talk about how “hot” various women in the office were, including herself.
One host on a CNBC show was allegedly on the receiving end of many of his comments and tried to avoid being around Matthews in the office.
“She didn’t want to be in the same room as him,” the former NBC producer claimed. “She wouldn’t want to get her makeup done if he was in there too.”
The former producer said that while Matthews made comments about her appearance, she never felt like she was being harassed. She described the comments as “unprofessional” and “inappropriate” and said his remarks made multiple women uncomfortable.
Matthews’ alleged casual misogyny would sometimes spill out into the open, and he has a long history of making sexist remarks in interviews or on his show.
In a 2008 New York Times profile, Matthews introduced himself to actress Kerry Washington by giving her a business card and telling her that Phil Griffin, the head of MSNBC, wanted to get her on the show because she is “black” and “beautiful.” Matthews later referred to the actress as a “total knockout.”
Matthews has also creepily told then-CNBC reporter Erin Burnett to get closer to the camera and asserted that vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is “electric” but could be “hotter.” Just last year, he was caught on a hot mic admiring Melania Trump’s “runway walk,” and in 2017 he noted that acting Attorney General Sally Yates is “attractive, obviously.”
The host was notoriously tough on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, suggesting that her political success was due to her husband Bill’s infidelity, asking a male senator if it was “tough” to debate a woman, claiming that Bill had Hillary on a “leash,” and routinely mocking “witchy” Hillary’s “fingernails on a blackboard” voice.
In addition to the troubling behavior toward women, all five of the sources who spoke to TheDC about the workplace environment at “Hardball” described Matthews as verbally abusive. They claimed that Matthews’ outbursts went beyond normal or justifiable frustration, and former staffers apparently felt like they had to “walk on eggshells” around their “abusive” boss.
The two former producers independently referred to incidents involved screaming at staffers, throwing objects around, and generally demeaning guests and the people who worked for him.
“I would describe it as verbal abuse,” one former producer asserted, recalling their own experiences with Matthews. “The screaming is beyond the screaming you’ve ever heard. You just feel so under attack.”
“He did it so openly,” the producer continued. “It’s not just sexual harassment … what are you supposed to do when somebody is verbally abusing you and attacking you this way?”
The former producers claimed that multiple female employees were often left in tears after Matthews’ angry tirades, which would frequently occur in front of guests during commercial breaks or after his show ended.
On one recent occasion, a producer said Matthews berated a staffer so aggressively during a taping that they had to halt production. Matthews left the set to continue yelling at the staffer, who he called “worthless” and an “idiot,” while a panel of guests waited for him to cool down. Two other people who were present recalled the incident immediately and seemed shaken by what had happened, although one could not remember the exact words Matthews used.
“Seeing it would have made you shudder … you don’t forget something like that,” the former producer said of the incident.
A witness with several years in broadcast media said, at the time, they had never seen anything like it and likewise haven’t since.
“Walking into the studio that day felt like walking into someone else’s unhappy home,” the witness recalled. “There was a sense of unease that was obvious from the outset, and I remember at one point hearing Matthews shouting in the distance.”
The witness, who wished to remain anonymous because he or she is still a guest on other MSNBC programs, said all of the guests seemed “horrified” by Matthews’ behavior, while the staff “reacted with what almost read as embarrassment.”
“I just cannot convey strongly enough how eerie it felt,” the witness continued. “I’ve never been in a situation like that in a TV studio.”
During the same interview block, two people present recalled Matthews asking to rearrange the seating so that he would be sitting next to the only young woman on the panel, even though producers had initially seated her at the opposite end of the table.
Two sources with experience on the show said they often couldn’t believe some of the degrading and belittling things Matthews said to his staffers, such as mocking their intelligence and telling them weren’t good enough to be working on the show. The rants were often laced with expletives and one source described Matthews as acting like “a drunk at a bar.” Both said Matthews’ behavior made guests feel highly uncomfortable.
TheDC’s Betsy Rothstein interviewed Matthews for a piece in AdWeek in 2010, and Matthews admitted he often argued with producers but didn’t cop to being overly aggressive.
“We have to have our facts right every night – you can’t fix it later. I argue with my producers,” he said. “We argue about getting the facts right.”
One former NBC producer said Matthews did not like to be challenged and doing so would lead to one of his fits of rage, while a former guest recalled Matthews losing it over minor teleprompter errors or mistakes by producers–“stupid” things that wouldn’t warrant such an aggressive response. Segments of the show were frequently pre-taped as opposed to being live-taped, making minor technical errors even less significant.
The former producer described the HR department at the network as completely unhelpful, indicating that they didn’t take complaints seriously and would try to turn the victim into the problem.
“Their common first instinct is to protect the talent, no matter what the complaint, and then turn the victim into the problem,” the producer insisted. “When he turns on you, look out. All they do is protect him. All they do is protect him from himself.”
All five of the sources TheDC spoke to expressed fears that speaking out publicly against Matthews could hurt their careers.
“No other workplace like this exists where you can get away with that,” the former producer concluded.
MSNBC told The Daily Caller on December 16 that NBC made a separation-related payment to an assistant producer on “Hardball with Chris Matthews” after she complained to CNBC executives about sexual harassment. “Hardball” was hosted on CNBC when the complaint was made in 1999. (RELATED:NBC Made Payment To Staffer After Sexual Harassment Claim Against Chris Matthews)
One former NBC producer, who was at the network at the time of the payment, argued that the woman who made the complaint left the network because of Matthews’ behavior.
“One morning her desk was cleared out overnight,” the former producer told TheDC. “The [Hardball] staff was saying she had made a complaint and they paid her off.”
MSNBC declined to comment to The Daily Caller for this story.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Jan 2, 2018 8:36:38 GMT -5
Very sad to read this about a fellow Crusader. While I disagree with his political views, I recall that others who had met him (at HC events) said he was personable. If the story above is true, it sounds like he has a real problem with the way he treats people he works with---maybe time to retire??
|
|
|
Post by alum on Jan 2, 2018 8:46:36 GMT -5
Very sad to read this about a fellow Crusader. While I disagree with his political views, I recall that others who had met him (at HC events) said he was personable. If the story above is true, it sounds like he has a real problem with the way he treats people he works with---maybe time to retire?? He is 72 years old. He has made a fortune. The behavior that was tolerated at one time is no longer allowed. Time to go and spend his winters golfing in Florida or Arizona. He can pick up walking around money writing op ed pieces.
|
|
|
Post by lou on Jan 2, 2018 8:56:54 GMT -5
I'll wait till I hear this from more sources than this one, according to wiki...
"The Daily Caller is a conservative American news and opinion website based in Washington, D.C. It was founded by political pundit Tucker Carlson[2][3] and Neil Patel, former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney."
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Jan 2, 2018 10:12:09 GMT -5
OK, this alone makes the story suspect. Has anyone watched any of his shows when he didn't interrupt any and all guests, male/female, young/old? That's his M.O.
I am probably one of the ones KY refers to regarding having met Chris and finding him disarmingly polite and gracious - totally unexpected.
I have little doubt that Chris is probably boorish and screams at anything less than perfection. A lot of celebrities are and do. Doesn't excuse it but I'd be willing to bet that if half of this stuff is true that he likely does his screaming and hissy fits equally with his male subordinates. For equal time, they should speak with his male subordinates and peers. While he wouldn't call them cutie-pie, I'd bet he's got some male put downs if they messed up.
|
|
|
Post by nhteamer on Jan 2, 2018 10:17:54 GMT -5
That's it Lou.
When the WaPo, NYT, or HuffPo criticizes a conservative I am confident your take is.................."The WaPo (and/or HuffPo, NYT) is a liberal group think echo chamber. I'll wait till I hear this from more sources than this one."
You're a well educated man. I'm sure that would be your approach.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jan 2, 2018 10:20:08 GMT -5
sader70,
I agree. Chris can be demanding but he is an equal opportunity "offender" in that he demands the best from everyone...men and women. This is clearly in the eye of the beholder and the argument that "he would never do this to a male guest" is just stupid. Of course, in this day and age, if a woman is offended and plays the gender card, the PC thing to do is to believe her immediately (unless you are Hillary - then form a character assassination squad).
|
|
|
Post by lou on Jan 2, 2018 11:10:57 GMT -5
That's it Lou. When the WaPo, NYT, or HuffPo criticizes a conservative I am confident your take is.................."The WaPo (and/or HuffPo, NYT) is a liberal group think echo chamber. I'll wait till I hear this from more sources than this one." You're a well educated man. I'm sure that would be your approach. I'll still wait, since I have no idea who wrote the above story
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Jan 2, 2018 11:21:25 GMT -5
What does it mean to objectify someone. Why not tell us what he did in a language I understand? (Not a liberal)
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Jan 2, 2018 11:41:28 GMT -5
It's open season on people that have any kind of harassment past that someone can pin on them, no matter how slight. Tough to separate fact from fiction, and degree of the problem.
Matthews doesn't bother me as much as some others on that station, but even if he did I'd withhold judgement for quite a while.
|
|
|
Post by purplehaze on Jan 2, 2018 13:18:38 GMT -5
Do you think we'll hear from regular female guests and staffers in defense of Chris ? Doubt it. Say nothing and let a little time pass will be the strategy here.
|
|