11-30-2017, 08:13 PM | #261 | |
Mad Scientist
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,371
|
I'm not at all surprised with Matt Lauer. I loathed him way before this scandal broke out, he's vastly overpaid ($20-25 million/year) and unbelievably arrogant and vindictive. There were subtle signs of his sexual harassment (in the second video seen below), but include that behavior with his massive ego (especially in getting Anne Curry kicked out of the Today show), his alleged domineering and abusive behavior toward his estranged wife, and how NBC was allegedly catering to Lauer's demands and tolerating his inappropriate sexual behavior since he brought in the viewership, it was certainly going to escalate to a massive fallout.
Quote:
In a far worse example of the entertainment/media industry twisting the moral perspective of sexual criminal behavior, is of Roman Polanski, when he was arrested and charged for raping a 13-year old girl in 1977, yet he has a standing ovation for a 2003 Oscar win by many A-listers: Last edited by Refractive Reflections; 11-30-2017 at 09:41 PM. |
|
11-30-2017, 10:17 PM | #262 |
Just...way too serious.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: purgatory
Posts: 3,519
|
I’m sick of this being discussed as a political issue. It’s not. Its an issue of people who are narcissistic and who feel like they are untouchable for punishment because of the power they hold. Just happens that a lot of Hollywood and Washington folks fit that description.
Who gives a flying f@ck which part of the political spectrum they are on. Punish everyone who thinks they can do this and get away with it. It isn’t a right issue or left issue. Its a culture of a$$holes of both persuasions who think they are above everyone else. Stop talking about this as a political issue.
__________________
|
12-01-2017, 07:42 AM | #263 |
Mad Scientist
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,371
|
The virtue-signalling is so conspicuous here.
If the media wasn't so selective about who deserves public condemnation, and at what time, it wouldn't have political/business implications or have the public's festering mistrust of the media. Take for example when NBC decided not to run the Harvey Weinstein and kept dragging its feet, and Ronan Farrow had to go to the New Yorker to get the story out. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017...einstein-story http://deadline.com/2017/11/ronan-fa...eo-1202201511/ Or when a former ex-girlfriend of Trump's has to publicly hit back at the New York Times story, about how they spun her experience about Trump as a negative one. https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...k-times-223205 ...Yeah, in a perfect world it would be nice for all of these individuals to be "called out and punished", but when you have corporate-driven mainstream media having the power to sway public perception so broadly about these powerful individuals, how can one not assume there are implications behind it? |
12-01-2017, 08:08 AM | #264 | ||
PerfectlyTunedFightEngine
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Upsidedown
Posts: 7,926
|
Yes, we know your virtue signalling is conspicuous, there's no need to lamp-shade it further.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------ Quote:
Quote:
|
||
12-01-2017, 08:35 AM | #265 | |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,129
|
Quote:
Or you seriously have thought, in your young naivety, that only "republicans / conservatives" are so vile and petty to use things like this to advance their message? Bad news for you, pumpkin. |
|
12-01-2017, 03:36 PM | #266 | |
Team Blue Boy
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: U.S., East Coast
Posts: 15,174
|
Most here should have outgrown "young naivety" years ago. Pretty sure PlastronCafe is at least as old as I am...
Quote:
Likewise. I'm tired of it being used as a tool to try to condemn a side, and then the person doing the condemning conveniently ignores what's gone on in the side they claim allegiance to. Meanwhile, the change that needs to happen in this society isn't given as much of the focus as it should. |
|
12-01-2017, 03:54 PM | #267 | |||
PerfectlyTunedFightEngine
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Upsidedown
Posts: 7,926
|
Quote:
I'm old as balls.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------ Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
12-01-2017, 05:42 PM | #268 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,129
|
Quote:
Quote:
Need less energy and more "fun". At least in Internet. |
||
12-02-2017, 03:08 AM | #269 | |
Mad Scientist
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,371
|
Quote:
So instead of discussing the media's bias and selectivity being a big reason as to why accusers are afraid of coming out in the first place, this thread is just going to restate the obvious, of how bad harassment/assault is, and have some here show off how virtuous they are in posting that all perpetrators need to be punished (aka virtue-signalling), rather than a more fruitful discussion in actively discussing how to reassess what the media states, hold the entertainment/media industry to some form of accountability, and how to carefully consume their polished, finished products? Are we going to ignore the fact that NBC was dragging its feet about Weinstein? And still put these corporate-driven mainstream news organizations on a pedestal of journalistic integrity? It's no wonder NBC wanted to break news about Lauer being fired first, as a PR image tactic to avoid even more criticism, after sitting on the Weinstein case. I mean you have an entertainment/media industry which was able to persuade a sizeable amount of Hollywood that Roman Polanski was worth a standing ovation, a man who was arrested and charged for raping a 13 year old girl, and fled the United States when he knew the judge was going to reject the plea deal for the crime. To state that entertainment/media did not have a hand in whitewashing his image (and that they don't have the power to do that with other individuals), is pure ignorance to say the least. Last edited by Refractive Reflections; 12-02-2017 at 03:41 AM. |
|
12-02-2017, 01:12 PM | #270 | |
Weed Whacker
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 29,137
|
Quote:
Bryan Singer's Queen movie shuts down under murky circumstances.
__________________
|
|
12-02-2017, 01:46 PM | #271 | ||
PerfectlyTunedFightEngine
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Upsidedown
Posts: 7,926
|
I'll admit that Polanski was/is gross.
I'll also cop to the fact that people who are close with someone often times find it difficult to reconcile the person they love with someone capable of doing something horrid. Which doesn't mean we don't hold them accountable for their words and actions, but at least begins to explain why they do and say what they do and say. And I think we need to have compassion for those people caught unawares. I don't believe such compassion should be extended to those in the know who overlook such behavior, but for someone reeling from the aftermath of an explosion like this? Yeah...I think we should maybe give them some time to process before we shove a microphone in their face and ask them how they feel. And while folks can maintain that talking about this, and condemning this sort of thing online, doesn't actually exert any change....I respectfully disagree. Changing the culture means changing the conversation. It means having the conversation in the first place. It means calling out folks who demean others all the time, and not just when it's politically expedient. It means holding people accountable for their Locker Room Talk. It means reminding them that this kind of behavior won't be tolerated, and in doing so it tells victims of such abuse that they're not alone. It means taking women like Megan Fox seriously when they say they have issues with a certain director, and not cast aspersions her way. The media is a reflection of us. Not liking the reflection isn't just the fault of the mirror.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------ Quote:
Quote:
|
||
12-03-2017, 01:44 AM | #272 |
Mad Scientist
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,371
|
Thank you... this is the deeper conversation I was looking for.
While I agree on almost all points, that conversation is needed and the culture does need self-reflection, the problem that I'm referring to is the "calling out" aspect of your argument. That's the aspect which I'm strongly criticizing, when you have people in power (with their own business and political motivations) that can broadly influence the public through media/entertainment as to what selectively needs to be "called out" and "deserves" public outrage, then that's a troubling sign of just how influential media/entertainment is over the masses, especially in cases as vile as sexual harassment/assault. ...And if they can influence the public to just the right extent, in the minds of the public, it was if the behavior/crime was never committed at all, and the accusers were not credible; since ultimately public reputation is what can make/break careers and lives. While entertainment/media has the "freedom of speech" right to state their viewpoints and what gets aired, it's very difficult to take their posturing of integrity and virtue seriously against their ideological opponents, when they have incidents of habitually covering up their own (or business/political allies) who have done similar acts. For example, in comparing the Access Hollywood tapes during the 2016 election (Access Hollywood is owned by NBC-Universal, and owned by Comcast) and the supposed "shock" of this behavior, and the problem with the NBC-Lauer incident stating that this is the first time they heard of a "complaint", but there are clips and behavior which make it obvious that the sexual harassment culture was evident to many in the organization (in the below clip). In addition to NBC dragging its feet to run the Weinstein story. Yet some in the public still place NBC as having the journalistic integrity and societal power to decide what deserves outrage and condemnation, by the public going back to viewing and accepting their NBC news programs at face value? Should we (the public) be surprised that big business wants to protect their own? Not really... but as consumers of entertainment/media, choosing to go back to these big media conglomerates (since only 5 companies control 90% of American entertainment/media) through viewership, taking their news reports at face value, or by seeing their shows/movies, aren't we also condoning their behavior as well? ...Since ultimately it's the financial bottom line that's important to these corporations, and would make the deepest impact. Last edited by Refractive Reflections; 12-03-2017 at 02:05 AM. |
12-03-2017, 07:20 AM | #273 | ||
So Long, Stinktown!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,463
|
Quote:
(And the same goes for those who complain about "getting political" in topics every time someone expresses a view they don't like, yet stay silent or even contribute when the conversation agrees with their own views. Hrm.) Quote:
NBC also owns and distributes "Access Hollywood". The AH tape of Trump admitting to sexually assaulting women was made in 2005. They sat on that for... what, 11 years? Fox News protected Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly for over a decade, even though their constant sexual harrassment/abuse was well known in the company. Both major political parties have protected countless politicians over the years. The Catholic Church has protected priests who've molested children time and again. Corporate executives (and other company men) are famously protected from workplace sexual harrassment and abuse. And on and on it goes... Systems of power protect powerful men. No matter what "side" they're on, no matter what business or industry.
__________________
Last edited by Bry; 12-03-2017 at 08:54 AM. |
||
12-03-2017, 07:29 AM | #274 |
Dub Professor
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Dub Side of the Moon
Posts: 3,439
|
I think that when receiving any information from "the mainstream media" it's vital to keep in mind how consolidated ownership has become, and thus how susceptible stories broadcast through MSM outlets are to being spun a certain way
Spoiler:
__________________
|
12-03-2017, 08:36 AM | #275 | ||
PerfectlyTunedFightEngine
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Upsidedown
Posts: 7,926
|
Agreed.
The onus is on us as consumers to be responsible of that which we consume. For me one of the larger issues of this thread is the feigned outrage by people who perpetuate the same kind of culture that makes harassers feel comfortable in harassing. If this stuff didn't exist in the wild, the media would have nothing to report on.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------ Quote:
Quote:
|
||
12-03-2017, 09:16 AM | #276 |
*The King of Nothing*
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: No comment -_- ...
Posts: 2,755
|
Oh my lord. That's creepy ...
|
12-03-2017, 12:05 PM | #277 |
Weed Whacker
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 29,137
|
It's true. The closest thing I've seen is the Harambe thing, where everyone competes to see who can pull off being the most upset about his demise.
__________________
|
12-04-2017, 04:22 PM | #278 |
Weed Whacker
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 29,137
|
More on Bryan Singer's self-destruction and firing on the set of the "Queen" movie. Sexual allegations or not, he's definitely never working for Fox again after this: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...edium=referral
__________________
|
12-04-2017, 04:50 PM | #279 | |
Mutant Tiger
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Hialeah, Florida, USA
Posts: 13,797
|
Quote:
|
|
12-04-2017, 04:52 PM | #280 |
Emperor
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,902
|
Yeah, Rami Malek is one of the nicest guys in town. For him to complain about Bryan Singer to Fox says a lot about that set.... X-Men films are ruined a bit for me now because of his stupid behaviour :/
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|