Obviously a tweet proves nothing but this is a tweet I saw from after David left Naughty Dog.
It would seem to me from this that he didn't really have any issue with Naughty Dog as a company. A scan of his timeline shows many supportive tweets of them and some of his ex-colleagues too, including people high up in the company. On this basis it doesn't seem to me like Naughty Dog were involved in a mass cover-up because if it caused him this much distress surely he would have some big issues with them and people involved there? If David is telling the truth about sexual harassment it seems like a big failing on Sony's HR department above all else. However, it's probably best not to speculate too much. I don't want to believe David would make this up, I don't want to believe Naughty Dog has a sexual harassment problem and I don't want to believe Sony would refuse to investigate. Hopefully somebody gets to the bottom of what did or didn't happen.
Nothing mightve been better tbh. Waiting until the workweek wouldve improved the optics too.
this does nothing but prove that you dont understand how this type of situation works...there is absolutely no way in hell a corporation is going to reach out to an accuser like that...the legal ramifications of doing so would be IMMENSE...
Obviously a tweet proves nothing but this is a tweet I saw from after David left Naughty Dog.
It would seem to me from this that he didn't really have any issue with Naughty Dog as a company. A scan of his timeline shows many supportive tweets of them and some of his ex-colleagues too, including people high up in the company. On this basis it doesn't seem to me like Naughty Dog were involved in a mass cover-up because if it caused him this much distress surely he would have some big issues with them and people involved there? If David is telling the truth about sexual harassment it seems like a big failing on Sony's HR department above all else. However, it's probably best not to speculate too much. I don't want to believe David would make this up, I don't want to believe Naughty Dog has a sexual harassment problem and I don't want to believe Sony would refuse to investigate. Hopefully somebody gets to the bottom of what did or didn't happen.
I think more important than what it says literally is the subtext which indicates no knowledge of the events ever occurring and no expressed intention to investigate or reach out to the alleged victim. No part of the statement entertains the notion that the claim could be true or the possibility of wrongdoing on behalf of their HR, which is especially revealing considering this has all taken place over the weekend so they probably couldn't have even had an opportunity to discuss the matter with all relevant staff.
It's a cold message intent on denying accountability and seeking to preserve the companies reputation.
Obviously a tweet proves nothing but this is a tweet I saw from after David left Naughty Dog.
It would seem to me from this that he didn't really have any issue with Naughty Dog as a company. A scan of his timeline shows many supportive tweets of them and some of his ex-colleagues too, including people high up in the company. On this basis it doesn't seem to me like Naughty Dog were involved in a mass cover-up because if it caused him this much distress surely he would have some big issues with them and people involved there? If David is telling the truth about sexual harassment it seems like a big failing on Sony's HR department above all else. However, it's probably best not to speculate too much. I don't want to believe David would make this up, I don't want to believe Naughty Dog has a sexual harassment problem and I don't want to believe Sony would refuse to investigate. Hopefully somebody gets to the bottom of what did or didn't happen.
The second sentence of the statement is what really sticks out and causes the whole thing to come off as dismissive or non-committal. It sets a bad tone.
Original statement:
Quick revision:
Already reads better.
Of course I understand that, but to immediately indict a company for a massive cover-up after they release a simple statement saying it wasn't reported? It's way too early to say something like that just based on their response. C'mon.
I think more important than what it says literally is the subtext which indicates no knowledge of the events ever occurring and no expressed intention to investigate or reach out to the alleged victim. No part of the statement entertains the notion that the claim could be true or the possibility of wrongdoing on behalf of their HR, which is especially revealing considering this has all taken place over the weekend so they probably couldn't have even had an opportunity to discuss the matter with all relevant staff.
It's a cold message intent on denying accountability and seeking to preserve the companies reputation.
Gemüsepizza;252081302 said:There actually was evidence, for example voice recordings of an incident where Weinstein harassed an actress, also there were multiple victims/witnesses.
That tweet means nothing. He has to say something like that if he is about to go on a job hunt.
Why should they not mention that they haven't found any records? Without that it would look like they take zero action for no reasonThe second sentence of the statement is what really sticks out and causes the whole thing to come off as dismissive or non-committal. It sets a bad tone.
Original statement:
Quick revision:
Already reads better.
It hasnt even been 24 hours since the original tweet. This was too fast and coupled with the flat denial makes it look like ND just wants it to go away. Waiting until Monday and with a more sensitively worded response would have gone a long way. It also would have positioned ND itself better, in the event the allegations are true and Ballard can provide any corroboration, or if more victims come forward, they now look like the bad guy rather than being able to shift that to bad actors within the company.People have been huffing and puffing for the last 24 hours asking what has been taking them so long. Everyone has different expectations it seems.
I'm not indicting anyone for a massive cover-up. Maybe some people are but I feel like my responses are level-headed. I'm going to try to believe the accuser and hope that corroboration of his story by others could open things up in lieu of hard evidence which is rare in these cases.
So they calling him a liar? This a serious stance to take. I'm interested in seeing the resolution to this, seems like they did this quickly without due diligence
So they calling him a liar? This a serious stance to take. I'm interested in seeing the resolution to this, seems like they did this quickly without due diligence
So they calling him a liar? This a serious stance to take. I'm interested in seeing the resolution to this, seems like they did this quickly without due diligence
Curious, what's considered a 'good' statement from a company in a situation like this?
It hasnt even been 24 hours since the original tweet. This was too fast and coupled with the flat denial makes it look like ND just wants it to go away. Waiting until Monday and with a more sensitively worded response would have gone a long way. It also would have positioned ND itself better, in the event the allegations are true and Ballard can provide any corroboration, or if more gictims come forward, they now look like the bad guy rather than being able to shift that to bad actors within the company.
One that doesnt imply the victim may be lying with nothing else. Think ahead.Curious, what's considered a 'good' statement from a company in a situation like this?
If the claims are true then I have to imagine the victim is trying more to have others speak up and build a bigger case that way vs. simply getting his story proven
He started off by saying the company tried to cover it up so I seriously doubt he expected anything on their end
He's not mad at the company or a lot of the employees there. He's most likely still friends or friendly with a lot of them. It was a horrible experience with one person. He never vilified the company itself.
Shouldn't this be something you should investigate internally before putting this dismal statement out? This is a serious allegation.They didn't call him a liar. They just don't have any record of the allegations.
They completely dismissed his story by saying they have zero record of itNobody is calling anybody a liar.
I just want to say, I am not picking sides and I have NO facts whatsoever about the situation.
However, I have worked as an employment discrimination attorney for a while. And it's not at all uncommon for a disgruntled former employee to make up claims of sexual harassment.
I want to add this disclaimer in bold - sexual harassment does occur and it's, unfortunately, all too common in every industry.
However, none of us should draw any conclusions based on what little we know about the situation. It may have happened. But it may not have happened. Naughty Dog and Sony absolutely need to investigate the allegations if they have not already done so.
Shouldn't this be something you should investigate internally before putting this dismal statement out? This is a serious allegation.
They completely dismissed his story by saying they have zero record of it
Shouldn't this be something you should investigate internally before putting this dismal statement out? This is a serious allegation.
They completely dismissed his story by saying they have zero record of it
Going by this thread?Curious, what's considered a 'good' statement from a company in a situation like this?
Shouldn't this be something you should investigate internally before putting this dismal statement out? This is a serious allegation.
They completely dismissed his story by saying they have zero record of it
Yeah. He may have misjudged two things. First, he will get zero support from most gamers and some will be hostile towards him. Second, journalists covering the games industry will not chase such a case for fear of being cut off from the industry. He should contact some actual journalists.
Imagine if they really don't have any records of it. Should they not disclose that fact?Shouldn't this be something you should investigate internally before putting this dismal statement out? This is a serious allegation.
They completely dismissed his story by saying they have zero record of it
Shouldn't this be something you should investigate internally before putting this dismal statement out? This is a serious allegation.
They completely dismissed his story by saying they have zero record of it
Yes they checked their records and they didn't find anything because there is no record of it. What is so hard about that? It is entirely possible the harassment isn't on record.Shouldn't this be something you should investigate internally before putting this dismal statement out? This is a serious allegation.
They completely dismissed his story by saying they have zero record of it
Shouldn't this be something you should investigate internally before putting this dismal statement out? This is a serious allegation.
They completely dismissed his story by saying they have zero record of it
People have been huffing and puffing for the last 24 hours asking what has been taking them so long. Everyone has different expectations it seems.
One that doesnt imply the victim may be lying with nothing else. Think ahead.
To some, there isnt.Curious, what's considered a 'good' statement from a company in a situation like this?
Why should they not mention that they haven't found any records? Without that it would look like they take zero action for no reason