Nothing better than a cup of cheap coffee and a good laugh in the morning. Roger Ailes writes in his journal: I guess being in a position of power and being desirable are not the same thing.

but Ailes is so deserving. I laughed! Bravo!

Pardon me while I go throw up.

though saying no to that repulsive slug probably didn't require much in the way of probity.

sexual relationship with Ailes, I still don't get how having sex with him would "solve" the problems Gretchen was complaining about. It's obvious what he would get out of it, but there doesn't seem to be any offer that he would actually do anything for Gretchen if she acquiesced. Perhaps he felt the root of Gretchen's complaints was her unrequited passion for him.

Which brings us back to ew.

The harasser always claims that the relationship will be mutually beneficial. Of course it is not, but when the harasser has so much more power than their target, there aren't good options for the target. Resist and lose your job or be demoted? Complain and lose your job and/or reputation? Acquiesce and then it's "consensual?"

This is the problem.

"Really?..and why would that be"? would seem to be the correct response, as the words "should" and "sexual relationship"

Should rarely, if ever, be used in the same sentence.

they put up with it for years, then get paid for it

these are not women who had no other options

saying "why didn't they leave if they didn't like it" or something along those lines.

While these women should be held accountable for the bullsh*t they have peddled as "news" over the years, they are still entitled to NOT be subjected to illegal harassment in the workplace. I do not like these women. I do not like coming to the defense of these women, but they do, in fact, have a right to do their sh*tty jobs without this kind of nonsense.

these women were not powerless, just nicely compensated

make sexual harassment in the workplace ok? Why the frak is anyone on DU defending sexual harassment in ANY workplace??

How were these women empowered when the normal chain of command that should have handled such complaints was part of the coverup? They did what so many women do and complained to bosses and management, for which they were retaliated against. That indicates a lack of power.

Do you really think "these women" were the only ones harassed in a workplace environment where there were widespread complaints and coverups? It's telling that so many more women came crawling out of the woodwork when the lawsuit was filed.

Would it be more or less appropriate to you if the victim were an unpaid/barely paid intern trying to get through college? If it's the FOX thing, would it still be appropriate to you if it had been Maddow or Joy Reid who was harassed by their bosses?

Again, NO ONE should have to put up with that crap, no matter how well they are paid. It's why it's frakin illegal in the first place.

But yeah, those women should totally suffer for collecting a paycheck from a news agency we "good liberals" don't like.

You'll lose, and you'll look bad doing it.

She isn't saying the harassment isn't wrong. She's saying these women were not in some one stop-light town with no education, no one to turn to, and no other options. They're millionaires with a national spotlight. They had the ability and opportunity to say 'no'. And it sounds like GC did.

ETA, if someone chooses to put up with crap at work for the sake of their careers, I'm not going to shame them for it. Blame Ailes, not them.

The victims are to blame for not reporting it sooner.

Once again, these are not battered women in an abusive relationship who could be killed by the abuser for reporting the abuse.

I quit a job many years ago because of sexual harrassment by the boss, who owned the business. My friend stayed, afraid she wouldn't get a better paying job. These women at Fox were in a tough spot, and I would not shame them for doing what they felt they had to do. This is 100% on Ailes and Fox news.

ETA- I takes guts to fight back against a powerful man like Ailes. Good for them for getting him on tape, or they would not have been believed. Look at Bill Cosby- it took 50+ women for many people to start taking them seriously.

I was questioning their apparent lack of empathy for victims of a crime. Believe it or not, that is not picking a fight.

They did say "no". They were ignored. They were harassed and retaliated against. It took one of them secretly recording the harassment in order to bring it to light and bring some kind of justice. Now proof surfaces and people are saying "well, they could find a new job".. which does nothing to protect the other women working at FOX who are still subjected to the same culture of abuse.

When they attempted to go public, they were publicly harassed, insulted, called liars. That too is part of the reality of sexism in the professional world. Women often do not get taken seriously when they report sexual harassment. It doesn't go away just because the person is famous, paid well or even if your employer is the federal government.

But yeah, go ahead and back up your friend with hostility, projections and insults. I'm quite f*cking done trying to engage.

Kelly and Carson are not living from paycheck to paycheck. They are well educated and earn a ton of money. Yet they and others were harassed. Women who complained were shown the door or ran as fast as they could to the door. And it still took GC recording the sexual harassment for her to be believed.

I want people to think about that for a minute. Truly think about it. Despite a previous settlement for sexual harassment, despite numerous complaints, despite women coming forward and saying it also happened to them, despite it being well know at Fox, it took GC recording the sexual harassment to be believed. A well known and (in some) circles respected anchor would not be taken at her word, over her harasser's.

Sure she could have left. Just like the woman in the story, her career was over before it ever started. Ailes was and is not above black listing women who complained.

Now fuck-face has hired him. He gets rewarded and people question why GC didn't quit and go somewhere else.

you get it

Everyone has the right to do their job without being sexually victimized, no matter their pay grade.

This argument is basically the same argument Trump made, that if his daughter was sexually harassed, she should find another career or company.

It is absolutely victim-blaming, even when the victims are rich and horrible.

they chose not to because peddling rightwing garbage was their gravy train
DONE HERE

Victims of sexual harassment don't speak up because their livelihoods are threatened. The amounts and the occupations are irrelevant.

No one deserves to be treated like this. It seems the folks who are bashing you have not read the entire article ( a very common DU phenomenon).

It was not just Ailes, it was the entIre Fox news management. Who are they going to complain to? Even when the owner, Rupert Murdoch knew about it, he was like "Meh, they are making me 20 bill a year, let the boys have their fun"

Another DU phenomenon if you lurked for years you probably know: low post members are challenged on just about every opinion. It's part of the game .

Picking a fight, give me a break, Jesus.

and they could have gone public ages ago

not only did they tolerate the bullshit (enabling more victims), they peddled rightwing garbage for a living...ZERO sympathy from me

Bill Clinton?

I do wonder if Ailes was the driving force for that - vengeance for his beloved crook Nixon. Looks like they were a great pair of scumbags.

and the rest of fools thought this was the way to go


http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/roger-ailes-the-clintons-and-the-scandals-of-the-scandalmongers
<snip>
his election year, the big question was supposed to be whether Hillary Clinton would shatter the glass ceiling. Instead, it has become the year in which one of the country’s most towering glass houses has shattered. Few people may remember it now, but Fox News, which Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation launched in 1996, became a ratings leader largely because of its gleefully censorious coverage of Bill Clinton’s sex scandals. Now the network is mired in its own scandal. Last month, Roger Ailes resigned as Fox News’s chairman and C.E.O. in the face of multiple allegations of sexual harassment, including a lawsuit filed against him by the former anchor Gretchen Carlson. (Ailes has denied Carlson’s allegations.) The unfolding embarrassment at the network poses a host of questions—not the least of which is how the network’s executives justified their Javert-like pursuit of Clinton’s extramarital affairs, given their boss’s own repeated sexual misconduct. If you go back and look carefully at the chronology, some of Ailes’s most egregious alleged harassment of women was taking place at the same time that Fox News was suggesting that Clinton deserved to be impeached. Sexual harassment is a serious issue, and it merits serious coverage, but it’s hard to believe that the suits at Fox were motivated by genuine concern, given their own corporate culture.

Gabriel Sherman, in his 2014 book “The Loudest Voice in the Room,” describes how brilliantly and relentlessly Ailes exploited Clinton’s scandalous affair with the White House intern Monica Lewinsky in order to build Fox News’s brand. Sherman writes, “Whatever else it was, the scandal was a media bonanza, and no medium benefited from it more than cable news—and no cable channel more than Fox News.” Within hours of the Lewinsky story breaking, in January, 1998, Ailes inaugurated a new nightly show devoted to the melodrama, and assigned five producers and correspondents to cover it. No detail was too sordid for Fox to cover. With Ailes, a former Republican political operative, at the helm, Fox covered the affair as a criminal act, and rode the story straight up the cable-ratings charts. “Monica was a news channel’s dream come true,” John Moody, Fox’s executive editor, once admitted.

-------
Cynicism beyond belief!

that ANYONE could peddle the blame the victim nonsense here

The thought of that man dropping trou and pawing some woman is repellant. He probably wears those black socks with the suspenders......rrrrreeetch.

To me they're firing blanks

Maybe only his position of superior with power and control over careers
made it seem viable to him

A creep with an ego

I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

One wonders whether the Trump channel competing with FOX is ultimately a good or bad thing and how FOX respond - by going more conservative or more towards the middle.

Last edited Fri Sep 2, 2016, 06:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Very interesting inside look at what was going on at Fox News.

from unwanted corners: But they won't look anything like the online anchors at Fox. They'll be larger, hairier, smellier, with lots of scars, tattoos, biceps, orange jumpsuits, and otherwise unsavory attributes.

And then he'll start to understand how the women felt.

And we will cheer.

will Fox news report it when it happens?

I don't know anything about Elizabeth, but if she stayed with him, she had her reasons. This will ruin her life, or what she thought her life was. Women who have been victims of ugly men usually don't have the emotional resources to leave them, so they rationalize, minimalize, and may even take the man's side, like Cosby's wife.

I don't wish any more hurt on her, but her friends and family will have to choose how to accept this public shame. They have one son, but he'll have to decide if dad was a victim or a bad guy, and deal with it. Most likely, he'll play along as far as his mother goes, so as not to hurt her, too.

It will be her decision to figure out if staying or leaving will hurt her journalism career. It may take a while to find out.

..can talk about these women and he, looking like something you blow out of your nose....just disgusting. Why would he think that somebody would want him? I mean after all...they haven't even begun to print that kind of money yet.

half hour....she just teased it a few minutes ago

she's in for Chris Hayes on msnbc

Great post, must kick

Just got done reading it. Definitely a must-read and validates what I always thought and even posted about.