Lawsuit over Hardwick podcasts. I found this interesting. LINK <https://www.tmz.com/2019/04/16/chris-hardwick-sued-podcast-partner-id10t/>
On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 3:27 PM Mark Jeffries <[email protected]> wrote: > It is interesting that, as Jon has previously brought up, the "Dietland" > post mortem "Unapologetic" was much, much more than a fanboi wallow. Of > course, the series itself wasn't a genre exercise but a satire of attitudes > towards feminism and in many of the episodes Aisha Tyler was turning > "Unapologetic" away from "OMG it's Julianne Marguiles" to a discussion of > many things that have come up in the last year, with strong statements that > justified the opinions-expressed-are-those-of-the-participants disclaimer > in the small print at the end of the credits. In fact, I will say that > "Unapologetic" was much more interesting than "Dietland" and a strong > statement for Tyler as a late-night host on her own, if anyone's got the > cojones (and I see she left "The Talk" last year, thanks God). > > Mark Jeffries > Saints Spotlight Editor > [email protected] > > > On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 11:32 AM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I will make a comment, because popular culture, mostly mediated through >> Twitter and its cousins, simplifies complex issues. >> >> AMC’s investigation was not about finding Dykstra guilty of lying or of >> any wrong doing, or even about proving Hardwick was not guilty of the >> crimes and misbehavior she indirectly accused him of. It was to see if >> there was any good faith basis for them to terminate Hardwick’s employment. >> It is quite possible, in principle, for it both to be true that A) in a >> civil or criminal trial things would go against Hardwick, but B) in any >> real investigation an employer could conduct things would not go against >> him. >> >> We obviously can not end up with a culture in which every person accused >> of wrong doing is automatically fired. OTOH, as has been made very clear in >> cases of domestic violence involving NFL players, we also can not tolerate >> a culture in which employers only terminate employees after a formal >> conviction (if even then). The only alternative then is to expect employers >> to set up some kind of fair and minimally rigorous investigation of their >> own into the charges. >> >> The criticism that any such employer should be open to then would be >> about the fairness and rigor of the in-house investigation. I know just >> such criticisms have been made about AMC’s Hardwick investigation. This is >> where I think the focus of public reaction should be. None of us are in a >> position to judge whether there is enough available evidence to terminate >> Hardwick, but we should be given enough evidence to judge the fairness of >> the investigation, and to call for a better one if indicated. Employers who >> select investigators with bias or conflicts of interest should not be >> allowed to benefit from doing so, which should set up pressure going >> forward to retain neutral, professional investigative services. >> >> Personally, I am pretty neutral about Hardwick as a performer. I listened >> to the Nerdist Podcast for about a year, but a little of that goes a long >> way. I never really liked his CC central “game show” that much, and rarely >> watched it even when it followed TDS and I had it on DVR every night (my >> preset recording of TDS is still set for an hour, from the old >> Stewart/Colbert days). I have enjoyed his post show discussions of Breaking >> Bad, Walking Dead and Fear the Dead (although the last of those makes >> really transparent the extent to which the “Talking” shows are shameless >> hype-machines rather than fan forums). I have never been tempted to check >> out any of his often self-hyped stand up comedy. Hardwick is an articulate, >> smooth media personality; most people in the world can not do what he does, >> but there are hundreds and maybe thousands of people who can do it as well >> or better, and I am sure AMC would be able to find one of those to take his >> place if need be. >> >> I don’t care about saving Chris Hardwick’s job or reputation. I do care >> about devising some kind of non-legal culture that both provides due >> process and protection to people accused of wrong doing while working to >> ensure that people employers have a good faith basis for judging have >> engaged in assulative and otherwise intolerable aggressive behaviors lose >> their jobs. Such a process can never be perfect, but it can get a lot >> better, and should. >> >> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 11:20 PM Kevin M. <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Posted without comment >>> >>> https://mobile.twitter.com/skydart/status/1028006987550810112 >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 9:43 PM 'David Bruggeman' via TVorNotTV < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> It has seemed to me that much of the second act of his career was due >>>> more to his hustle/workaholism and early adoption of new media than any >>>> innate talent. >>>> >>>> I'd guess he'd have enough money (even before marrying into the >>>> Hearsts) from the sale of Nerdist to not have to work for a while longer, >>>> but I could be wrong. >>>> >>>> David >>>> >>>> On Friday, August 10, 2018, 11:01:08 PM EDT, Kevin M. < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 7:56 PM Doug Eastick <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> I just watched him the other night as a guest judge on America's Got >>>> Talent. No matter where I see him, I always just think he's a.... I dunno >>>> what it is. I just don't like him. >>>> >>>> >>>> No matter where I see him, I always think that hosting a mockish and >>>> smug clone of The Dating Game for MTV was the absolute limit of his talents >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018, 8:16 PM Steve Timko, <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Some "Taking Dead" staffers quit in protest of Hardwick's return. >>>> >>>> LINK >>>> <https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chris-hardwick-talking-dead-qutting_us_5b6e0888e4b0530743c9ef2e> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 7:48 PM M-D November <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> From the linked article: >>>> “I have been adamant since I came forward with my essay that I never >>>> set out to ruin the career of the person I spoke about. I could have >>>> provided more details, but chose not to,” she wrote in a lengthy statement >>>> shared on Twitter. >>>> >>>> “I have said what I wanted to say on the matter, and I wish to move on >>>> with my life. For that reason, I chose not to participate in the >>>> investigation against the person I spoke of. I do not believe in an eye for >>>> an eye, and therefore I have only shared my evidence with those who I felt >>>> should see it.” >>>> >>>> — >>>> >>>> Uh huh... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Kevin M. (RPCV) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> -- >>> Kevin M. (RPCV) >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
