• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Fox News settled O'Reilly SexHas suit for $32M. Then re-upped him a month later (NYT)

kirblar

Member
This was also the sixth suit brought against O'Reilly and settled with a cash payout. And was 6 months after they ousted Ailes for the same thing.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/21/business/media/bill-oreilly-sexual-harassment.html

Last January, six months after Fox News ousted its chairman amid a sexual harassment scandal, the network’s top-rated host at the time, Bill O’Reilly, struck a $32 million agreement with a longtime network analyst to settle new sexual harassment allegations, according to two people briefed on the matter — an extraordinarily large amount for such cases.

Although the deal has not been previously made public, the network’s parent company, 21st Century Fox, acknowledges that it was aware of the woman’s complaints about Mr. O’Reilly. They included allegations of repeated harassment, a nonconsensual sexual relationship and the sending of gay pornography and other sexually explicit material to her, according to the people briefed on the matter.

It was at least the sixth agreement — and by far the largest — made by either Mr. O’Reilly or the company to settle harassment allegations against him. Despite that record, 21st Century Fox began contract negotiations with Mr. O’Reilly, and in February granted him a four-year extension that paid $25 million a year.

Interviews with people familiar with the settlement, and documents obtained by The New York Times, show how the company tried and ultimately failed to contain the second wave of a sexual harassment crisis that initially burst into public view the previous summer and cost the Fox News chairman, Roger Ailes, and eventually Mr. O’Reilly, their jobs.

In January, the reporting shows, Rupert Murdoch and his sons, Lachlan and James, the top executives at 21st Century Fox, made a business calculation to stand by Mr. O’Reilly despite his most recent, and potentially most explosive, harassment dispute.

Their decision came as the company was trying to convince its employees, its board and the public that it had cleaned up the network’s workplace culture. At the same time, they were determined to hold on to Mr. O’Reilly, whose value to the network increased after the departure of another prominent host, Megyn Kelly.

But by April, the Murdochs decided to jettison Mr. O’Reilly as some of the settlements became public and posed a significant threat to their business empire.

Early that month, The Times reported on five settlements involving Mr. O’Reilly, leading advertisers to boycott his show and spawning protests calling for his ouster. About the same time, the O’Reilly settlements arose as an issue in 21st Century Fox’s attempt to buy the European satellite company Sky.
 

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
Damn I wonder how much they paid out over all the years to keep O'Reilly around.
 

kirblar

Member
Just goes to show that people in power think they can get away with anything, and sometimes they are right.
It's the freakonomics daycare problem in action - http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/books/chapters/freakonomics.html
Imagine for a moment that you are the manager of a day-care center. You have a clearly stated policy that children are supposed to be picked up by 4 p.m. But very often parents are late. The result: at day's end, you have some anxious children and at least one teacher who must wait around for the parents to arrive. What to do?

A pair of economists who heard of this dilemma - it turned out to be a rather common one - offered a solution: fine the tardy parents. Why, after all, should the day-care center take care of these kids for free?

The economists decided to test their solution by conducting a study of ten day-care centers in Haifa, Israel. The study lasted twenty weeks, but the fine was not introduced immediately. For the first four weeks, the economists simply kept track of the number of parents who came late; there were, on average, eight late pickups per week per day-care center. In the fifth week, the fine was enacted. It was announced that any parent arriving more than ten minutes late would pay $3 per child for each incident. The fee would be added to the parents' monthly bill, which was roughly $380.

After the fine was enacted, the number of late pickups promptly went ... up. Before long there were twenty late pickups per week, more than double the original average. The incentive had plainly backfired.
The lawsuits effectively became a normalized cost of his employment to them.
 
Damn, his sixth allegation? I wonder how many women he ended up silencing through force. :/

I’m sure there are more out there.
 

Slayven

Member
It is like bad cops, cities rather pay out lawsuits then get rid of the problem.

It's literally built into the cost of doing business
 

Scuffed

Member
Like Weinstein we knew about O'reilly for god knows how long. It's amazing that these people are just left alone despite very public allegations.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
"nonconsensual sexual relationship"

So rape, then.
Why are we only calling this harrassment?
 

The Kree

Banned
Very telling how they handled this situation versus the Kelly situation. It's clear what the culture is like over there for women.
 

RDreamer

Member
But... Fox News anchors seemed so against sexual harassment when they were busy trying to turn the Weinstein scandal into a problem for Hillary Clinton. Are you telling me their concern wasn't genuine?
 
And O’Reilly runs around claiming he’s a victim and he “has proof” he just doesn’t want to reveal it “to spare his family.”

What a colossal piece of shit. Please let this be the end of him poking his head out of the sand hoping everyone has forgotten that he’s a sexual predator.
 

Strike

Member
And O’Reilly runs around claiming he’s a victim and he “has proof” he just doesn’t want to reveal it “to spare his family.”

What a colossal piece of shit. Please let this be the end of him poking his head out of the sand hoping everyone has forgotten that he’s a sexual predator.
He's an all-around terrible human being. Even his kids want nothing to do with him.
But... Fox News anchors seemed so against sexual harassment when they were busy trying to turn the Weinstein scandal into a problem for Hillary Clinton. Are you telling me their concern wasn't genuine?
"Locker room talk."
 
Pls close thread modbot said o'reilly will issue a statement soon.

tenor.gif
 
A big part of this is the fact that many people in the entertainment industry don't consider settlements to be admissions of guilt in any case, just a transaction that balances the cost of the accusation coming out (whether it's true or not) vs. the amount of settlement. Especially since most of the time when they settle, they don't actually put out a real refutation of the accusations because they just want the story to go away.
 

Jombie

Member
And O’Reilly runs around claiming he’s a victim and he “has proof” he just doesn’t want to reveal it “to spare his family.”

What a colossal piece of shit. Please let this be the end of him poking his head out of the sand hoping everyone has forgotten that he’s a sexual predator.

He worried about sparing his family when he tried to choke his then-wife and drag her down some stairs.
 

Goo

Member
I wonder how much Stephen Colbert knew about him. He had him as a guest multiple times on his shows.
 
32 mil to one victim, that is crazy. She must have had crazy proof on him to extract that. That victim I recall, she seemed very intelligent, so she probably did a great job documenting everything.
 
$32 Million, well, that's a pretty big sum.

That's way more than Gretchen Carlson got and she had Ailes on tape harrassing her.

How very, very bad must it have been?.
 
$32 Million, well, that's a pretty big sum.

That's way more than Gretchen Carlson got and she had Ailes on tape harrassing her.

How very, very bad must it have been?.

Well a nonconsensual sexual relationship is about as bad as it can get. It sounds like he may have had the woman as some sort of sex slave. Given the allegation of a nonconsensual sexual relationship. This is ridiculous fox should be going down for this bs. They covered for a serial abuser.
 

Anticol

Banned
Reminds me of this classic exchange a few days ago:

w4C6z2O.png

Oh wow that will put him on his place. A rapist, according to the article, that only got fired after years of harrasing and assaullting women, still love by many in the country, still seen as the victim of an injustice, allowed to live as a free man after all the shit he did, allowed to keep his millions.

Yet we have to think that getting fired was enough pubishment? If you are a person of colour and a girl claims she was raped by you, you would be put in jail for years before any investigation happens and yet you guys are ok with this asshole free.

That country will never change.
 

Lord Panda

The Sea is Always Right
Oh wow that will out him on his place. A rapist, according to the article, that only got fired after years of harrasing and assaullting women, still love by many in the country, still seen as the victim of an injustice, allowed to live as a free man after all the shit he did, allowed to keep his millions.

Yet we have to think that getting fired was enough pubishment? If you are a person of colour and a girl claims she was raped by you, you would be put in jail for years before any investigation happens and yet you guys are ok with this asshole free.

That country will never change.

Yep it's simply incredible that these arseholes aren't in jail.
 

gtvdave

Member
That is genius. Weinstein should have been fired sooner without all the outcry to save himself and earn some nice money too.
 
Top Bottom