This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I'm not sure why, but this one surprised me a bit.
The New York Times has supposedly been working on a story about Lauer's misconduct for the last several weeks, seems like NBC is getting out in front of the story. Lauer was an icon at NBC, they don't fire him unless there is solid reasons to do so.
But what did that mean he did? Screw someone that work on the show? Compliment a girl? Rape someone? Its so broad now. Without specifics I hate seeing someone/anyone lose their entire career over a he said she said situation.
They are? What specifically do you think is so insane about this particular firing?
I assume that NBC knows the specifics and they seemed to think it was bad enough to immediately fire one of their top news personalities. You seem to be assuming that the allegations are vague or not very serious and I'm not sure what you're basing that on.
I am saying in general terms here. But the fact that the complaint just happened does seem a little screwy.
Or they dont want to be lumped in with the Wienstens of the world and have the SJW come down on NBC so they fire him under their broke vague company rules umbrella to appear to be proactive and get ahead of it.
I love how you use SJW as some perjorative for people who don’t like others raping people.
Or it is if the people making the decision actually know the details of what happened.
Maybe? Whatever he did NBC deemed it fire worthy and your outrage is towards people holding nbc to a high standard.
Until you know exactly what the allegation(s) are, I'm not sure why you would make any assumption as to the seriousness of the allegations. It seems especially odd to assume that NBC over reacted when you have essentially no information and they have lots of information.
They found out yesterday and fired him today? How was there adequate time to investigate the claim to ensure it wasn't someone who was upset for another reason? This is scary stuff. Presumably, Lauer didn't admit that he raped her.
Considering we have no idea what happened, what would you agree is adequate time to investigate?
I used to watch Today and the sexual tension between him and Giada was palpable. He probably banged half the women in the building.
Then I stand corrected. Thank you.
I'm guessing enough that NBC probably pulled the fire alarm with their legal team to vet the information out, and that team probably gave the green light to fire. I don't think it was just a simple knee-jerk reaction. I think the information was likely vetted, passed up the chain and the brass did quick probability math to land on "Yeah, so, we have enough to go on that the cost of our reputation outweighs us wrongfully firing with in-hand and reviewed info brought forward. Lauer's history."From the link Chet posted above:
An NBC insider said Lauer’s alleged victim complained to HR on Monday, “This happened so quickly. She didn’t go to the media, she made a complaint to NBC’s human resources, and her evidence was so compelling that Matt was fired on Tuesday night. The victim says she has evidence that this has also happened to other women, but so far we don’t have evidence of that.”
That is pretty fast. What evidence could she have that would hold up that well after almost 3 years to get that guy fired that quick? Would need to be video of what happened (doubtful) or emails/texts from him to her either apologizing or threatening/offering hush money/etc? I am thinking its the latter if this woman says she has evidence it happened to others, too
My wife had said the opposite. After the Charlie Rose thing, she said that Lauer will probably be next- she said he has always been condescending and aggressive with women on TV which she has found to often translate to other inappropriate behaviors in private. I guess her radar is working pretty well.
Oh, yeah. They clearly felt they had enough to go on. I am just curious what it is/was that she has that got him canned that quick. Has to be pretty damning (I would think).
these social justice warriors are ruining what was once a great nation
Also says that the NYTimes has been inquiring about Lauer for weeks. Have to think that NBC execs were aware of stuff like this for a while now.From the link Chet posted above:
An NBC insider said Lauer’s alleged victim complained to HR on Monday, “This happened so quickly. She didn’t go to the media, she made a complaint to NBC’s human resources, and her evidence was so compelling that Matt was fired on Tuesday night. The victim says she has evidence that this has also happened to other women, but so far we don’t have evidence of that.”
That is pretty fast. What evidence could she have that would hold up that well after over 3 years to get that guy fired that quick? Would need to be video of what happened (doubtful) or emails/texts from him to her either apologizing or threatening/offering hush money/etc? I am thinking its the latter if this woman says she has evidence it happened to others, too
No doubt. If the allegations are true, he may have been known around there to have a certain MO and this woman coming forward was what they needed to drop the hammer.
He's busy in Syria working Special Ops to defeat ISIS.NBC should bring back Brian Williams to take Lauer's spot.
Their tag line can be "Well. . . at least he hasn't sexually harassed anyone that we know of. . . yet."NBC should bring back Brian Williams to take Lauer's spot.
