NBC announces 'Today' show co-host Matt Lauer fired due to inappropriate sexual behavior at work

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Maybe I'm older than most on here but I vividly remember a Matt Lauer scandel where he was practically stalking someone on staff. This was many many years ago, the evidice was damming back then and I wondered why he was not fired then. I can only imagine the many incidents since then.

a reply to: ketsuko

This would have come out no mater what NBC did.

John Smith who works for the Podunk Telegraph in little NoWhere USA gets let go for the same reason, it's not "big news" (except for the 800 people that live in that little town).

A big celeb who works for a major news network (NBC) gets let go and it's big news, no mater what the reason.

Even if they'd called him in behind closed doors and told him to "resign", it still would have made eyebrows rise and questions get asked, and in the end: someone would blab.

Then what happens is: another major news network gets the scoop on NBC.

NBC then looks bad for trying "cover it up"

When big names do things, it's big news.

I mean that should be really obvious now: Trump drinks water 2 times during an announcement and the media went wild on it.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Since it appears a can of worms is opening, WTF is this 'unsolved mystery' Trump just tweeted about??..........

link

Wow...that is a strange story.

Perhaps......I had a friend who was at the copier one second and he just had a massive heart attack and died before he hit the ground. No indication of any problem.

Now if there was a Congressional Slush Fund payout.....

Don't know if that was even in existence then.

I was watching MSNBC and Morning Joe, and they were lamenting what a "sad" story this is.

Now, I like Joe Scarborough (although I'm NOT a big fan of other MSNBC shows/hosts), and I don''t watch FOX News, but let's say the person who was accused/fired was someone on the "FOX and Friends" morning show instead of Matt Lauer...


...Do you think the people on MSNBC would have called that revelation "sad",

OR

Would they instead have been smiling like a butcher's dog and jumping all over the accused FOX and Friends host, demonizing him and pulling all kind of dirt out of the woodwork on him, and talking about how outraged (instead of saddened) they are over this?

I'm betting it would have been the latter.

a reply to: ketsuko

Like I mentioned above, other outlets already had the story. It was going to come out one way or another. This way though it doesn't look like NBC are trying to cover something up.

Let's be honest, NBC aren't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. They're doing it because it's what's best for business in the current climate. They don't want to have what happened to Fox when they covered for O'Reilly to happen to them.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Or they're trying to maintain the credibility of the organization by making a clean decisive cut. They don't want to start losing advertisers. The atmosphere is ripe right now.
There probably isn't room for ambiguity in that type of organization that depends on advertisers.
If there's nothing to it they can rehire him but for now this is a wise move on their part.
It says they believe the woman. That's where we need to start.

These people also are from the same crowd that promotes false harassment against political opponents.

But now their own bottom line is at risk, so now they vigorously support their own bank account, not the victims of any harassment.

Just so we are clear on that.

a reply to: abago71

Oh man! Nice catch!!

I'm an independent and I did vote for trump. Really it looks like the liberals have bitten off more than they can chew by trying to win elections by accusing their opponents of sexual misdeeds. Now it's coming back full circle. I'm sure some more Repubs will go down with the group but its starting to look like the left are full of perverts.

Sex predator another one bites the dust..

Modern day witch hunt, this stuff is kinda funny considering bill Clinton being one of the biggest predators and he is a celebrity to many, not to mention cheated on his wife and he is still married, lol this society is CRAZY...

I have to wonder about the speed of this....they must have had damning evidence.

However, it is fun to watch the left eat their own. I have a feeling that part of this being done was motivated by another factor.....for the MSM to keep pounding on Trump and Moore allegations, they need to maintain credibility by ousting their own. Actually, kind of like republicans have always done...for the most part...a congressman accused of inappropriate deeds resigns. Of course, on the left, they circle the wagons. For example, Franken and Conyers.

I also believe, as mentioned earlier, the constant attack on Trump is coming full circle and biting them.

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Since it appears a can of worms is opening, WTF is this 'unsolved mystery' Trump just tweeted about??..........

link

The tin foil is getting thick! I can't believe I've never heard of this. Very interesting.

originally posted by: theatreboy
I have to wonder about the speed of this....they must have had damning evidence.
..

We don't know the speed of this.

We don't know how long ago the accuser came out. NBC could have been investigating this for a while, but did not have enough corroborating evidence to suspend him during the investigation.

a reply to: theatreboy


I have never seen anything like it. I don’t believe everyone accused is guilty, the speed of it reminds me of a witch hunt, if you go back in history back in the colonial days because people were scared of Indians they were burning women simply because people accused them of feeling bad. Scary stuff, but we have seen this before in history. Similar,

Not saying Weinstein was not a bad guy either. That guy was and is bad.. just saying it’s strange.

originally posted by: FauxMulder

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Since it appears a can of worms is opening, WTF is this 'unsolved mystery' Trump just tweeted about??..........

link

The tin foil is getting thick! I can't believe I've never heard of this. Very interesting.

I became aware of the case a couple of years ago.
It smelled fishy...and was really was pretty much ignored because of 9/11.

a reply to: IAMTAT

It got joe out of politics when he was pretty popular nationally.

This (all the recent exposures really) really makes Fox paying out $32 million to settle a case make a whole lot of sense.

If you want to catch sharks you have to "chum" the water.

I'm not saying the exposures and accusations are unfounded, very much the opposite actually.

Two years ago, these #^%$ could do what they wanted and settle a case for 50-80 thousand. Now with Fox spaying out $32 million for one case, the victims are going to want life altering financial windfalls to remain silent.

It's cheaper to distance the company/network at the first sign of trouble to attempt to reduce liability as much as possible.

All it takes is that one associate/intern that refuses to take the lowball offer and the dogpile begins.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: theatreboy
I have to wonder about the speed of this....they must have had damning evidence.
..

We don't know the speed of this.

We don't know how long ago the accuser came out. NBC could have been investigating this for a while, but did not have enough corroborating evidence to suspend him during the investigation.

The accuser went to HR on Monday. By Tuesday night they were ready to fire Lauer, citing detailed evidence by accuser and how this person has evidence other people were victims, too.

That's pretty fast.

originally posted by: 200Plus
It's cheaper to distance the company/network at the first sign of trouble to attempt to reduce liability as much as possible.

True.

If NBC can show that they fired Lauer immediately after having proof of the misconduct, AND if NBC can show that they could not have reasonably known about this ahead of time or any other misdeeds by Lauer that may have raised red flags, AND if they can show that the workplace environment ant NBC is not one that could breed this type of behavior, then they should not need to pay out a huge settlement.

However, proving that NBC "could not have known" will be difficult. Most of us will say it was all Lauer, but a good lawyer could find reasons to claim that NBC is also to blame for cultivating an environment in which one of its employees could do this.

I thought he impregnated one of his co-workers at some point in time and has some secret kid.
Truthfully he always seems sketchy to me and arrogant.
So I am not supersized this has come out. Kinda thought it would have been unveiled at the start of all the sexual harassment outings.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Actually we do know. The accuser sent NBC a letter on Monday detailing what happened. Now whether or not NBC knew about it beforehand is undetermined. The fact that the accuser wishes to remain anonymous I feel lends credibility to her claims since it rules out her looking for fame. I also think that since Lauer was fired it also means she isn't looking for money.

I'm guessing the reason she didn't come forward sooner is because she was worried about her job. It would be her word against Lauer and, let's be honest, Lauer has a reputation of getting people more important than her fired. Then when she saw that the climate was changing and that accusations of sexual assault were actually being taken seriously she decided to step forward.

I'm guessing the reason things moved so fast is because she didn't give NBC any other option. Reports have other outlets picking up the story at least as late as yesterday. I wouldn't be surprised if she gave NBC the letter and then let them know that she would also be sending it out to all of their rivals as well. That way they had no choice but to take action.