Oliver’s got guts, I’ll give him that.
And to think my introduction to Oliver was Community.
How is it even possible for Hoffman to show evidence that it didn’t happen?
I was thinking that too when I read it. How can he prove a negative?
I’d say we all know that proof of absence is a difficult thing to do, but I think that’s also not what Oliver was really about. It probably was meant along the lines of “If you did it, don’t say that it’s not reflective of who you are - unless you actually didn’t do it and can show as much.”
Note: I haven’t really followed the Hoffman story when it popped up. Did he he deny it outright or did he kinda admit that something happened, but that it wasn’t representative of the kind of person he really is?
Conyers is “retiring” effective today.
As I remember it he kind of did a Franken like apology. He didn’t really deny it and said something along the lines of it didn’t represent who he was. In Hoffman’s defense I think this went back 20-30 years?
1985/6 during the filming of the Death of a Salesman TV movie.
Here’s the article again, for those who missed it:
Weinsteingate is spreading to the classical music world, by the way:
I’m having trouble embedding this Oliver/Hoffman 92Y video but you can see it at this link:
It makes for interesting viewing.
It’s interesting that the revealed cases have mostly been arts and entertainment, along with their close cousin, journalism. I think that each industry silo is probably somewhat independent here: people may think “sure, the wave is turning in the arts, but probably not in <tech/finance/etc>”.
It will be interesting to see if those walls do get broken down before this thing loses steam.
(May only mean that Lionsgate execs just watched the final release cut of the movie.)
Following multiple rape allegations and some seriously dumb comments from an executive, Netflix have finally written off Danny Masterson from The Ranch.
In movie news, Gabriel Byrne says that during the filming of The Usual Suspects, the shoot was paused for a couple of days due to Spacey being “accused of sexually inappropriate behavior toward a younger actor.”
(1/7): I wrote a piece for a mainstream outlet (not the NYT), mentioning the sexual assault allegations against Roy Moore. Some nervous lawyer edited it to “sexual misconduct.” I said, okay, pull my piece. They reverted back to “sexual assault.” Writers, don’t let them lawyer you down.
(2/7): By the way, I think it is appropriate to be careful, and not unduly smear people with allegations and accusations, but it is ridiculous to claim that we cannot correctly describe the accusations especially after multiple non-anonymous accusers have come forward. Spine up, media.
(3/7): Not correctly distinguishing between the severity of the situation, too, is a great disservice to both victims and accused! Accused of molesting minors is not in the same universe as many of the other accusations. It all matters, but so does severity.
(4/7): Look, there is a whole range of human “misconduct”. We can get mad at it all. Some, we try to forgive, move on. Some cross such a line that we have laws, and even when the law does not work as it should, we remain in recoil. Blur that line, and society will become unlivable.
(5/7): Yes though a flood of false accusations can be used to smear, too. I do think we should worry about protecting basic rights of the accused, too, especially in the age of social media. But no “one simple rule” to get out of using judgment. https://t.co/3YxpWjn5yg
(6/7): I want to clarify: obfuscation of allegations of serious crimes by conflating them with much less severe ones is a form of censorship. It’s censorship by conflation. That’s why I couldn’t put my name on it. This isn’t taking a giant stance; it’s a basic responsibility.
(7/7): Yes, women coming together to find a common voice represent a breakthrough; it will be attacked via false claims, challenging credibility, victim wearing down, and conflating types of assault/misconduct. That’s actually what my piece is about! https://t.co/958FPA1kkm
Spacey and Singer on the same set. Competition!
The New York Times has released a huge 7,500 word story on Harvey Weinstein, with five bylines, detailing exactly how he got away with his actions for so long, and naming those who aided and abetted over three decades.
“Some aided his actions without realizing what he was doing. Many knew something or detected hints, though few understood the scale of his sexual misconduct. Almost everyone had incentives to look the other way or reasons to stay silent.”
Makes me happy for two reasons:
#MeToo deserves to be Person of the Year, and I’m happy – even with the hurt of seeing people I like being taken down – that we’re having this discussion out in the open.
We predicted it at work. :)