• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Don Geronimo Fired from Big 100

Nonsense. You know nothing about me. I always treated women with respect in the workplace. ALWAYS. Never made any comments about their appearance, good or bad. Never "hit on" coworkers. Nothing like that ever. I witnessed plenty of that, but was never one of those guys. Based on what I read, it seems like an overreaction. FIRING over calling her Barbie? That "woke" BS is as bad as MAGA.
I went by what you said. Your words, not mine.

Good for you that you never did that personally. Mr. Unemployed did. Also, he has yet to show one iota of remorse or responsibility, but is huddling with advisors to plan his future actions. He and his admirers refuse to even admit that there is recorded audio of what was said, and instead, he says that the 'real' story will come out. Sound like someone else?

Calling an attractive blonde "Barbie" would be like calling a Black woman "Beyonce" or a Native American woman "Pocahontas". That crap doesn't fly in 2023, and Mr. Unemployed found out the hard way. It's demeaning. It's also probably indicative of his true feelings. Sometimes an on-air act isn't really an act, but a reflection of who you truly are. I don't know. That's for someone who knows him to relate.

They say liquor removes inhibitions and shows your true character. Maybe a microphone does the exact same thing.
 
"Barbie" is innocuous. "Barbie" is a healthy-looking California chick. Hardly insulting. I have seen some egregious behavior by men in the workplace. This is laughable. BARBIE? Really? lol

Once again, spoken like a man.

Based on what I read, it seems like an overreaction. FIRING over calling her Barbie? That "woke" BS is as bad as MAGA.

You don't really know. Initially he was just suspended. Then they did an investigation. Perhaps they found other examples. Typically one example is indicative of deeper issues. Once again, if he feels he was dealt with unfairly, he can sue. But the problem we have today, where we have politicians throwing around that "woke" line, is that some feels it's OK to insult women or black people or gay people or anyone they don't like. That's the culture it has bred. And it's not OK. It's also not legal, and all of those groups are protected by the law regardless of what a few mindless people think.
 
Last edited:
The real difference with this incident is Don was at a high-profile job. Think of it as you're in a huge conference room full of executives and colleagues when a woman walks by and you loudly blurt out: "Hey look at this one, she looks like Barbie!" "Hey, Barbie, how's it going??"
Companies rightfully don't put up with that sort of behavior anymore, let alone by some high-profile caveman who should know better. As a talent, Don is a representative of his work. No company wants to be represented in that sort of light.
But that's just the point, he was not in a conference room full of executives. Everything has a particular context. Strippers are not OK in a church. Look at the kind of show he does and the demos he does it for.
 
Calling an attractive blonde "Barbie" would be like calling a Black woman "Beyonce" or a Native American woman "Pocahontas". That crap doesn't fly in 2023, and Mr. Unemployed found out the hard way. It's demeaning. It's also probably indicative of his true feelings. Sometimes an on-air act isn't really an act, but a reflection of who you truly are. I don't know. That's for someone who knows him to relate.
Black women and native Americans have had a bit of a steeper mountain to climb than attractive blondes.
 
Once again, spoken like a man.



You don't really know. Initially he was just suspended. Then they did an investigation. Perhaps they found other examples. Typically one example is indicative of deeper issues. Once again, if he feels he was dealt with unfairly, he can sue. But the problem we have today, where we have politicians throwing around that "woke" line, is that some feels it's OK to insult women or black people or gay people or anyone they don't like. That's the culture it has bred. And it's not OK. It's also not legal, and all of those groups are protected by the law regardless of what a few mindless people think.
You have ZERO knowledge of my lengthy support of women's causes. You think I'm misogynistic because you choose to have a knee-jerk reaction to this. It's that mentality that is pushing people to the MAGA crowd. CONTEXT: Don Geronimo clowns around on his show incessantly and has for decades. Calling her "Barbie" was as on-brand as Archie calling Mike "meathead".
 
It can happen to men, too. BBC weatherman Tomasz Schafernaker flipped out when the news anchor called him "petal" (alluding to him being a certain kind of flower that is used as a slur):

 
There's a time & a place for everything. This obviously wasn't the time or the place, and he's old enough to know better.

Comparing a script from a 50 year old TV show to real life is missing the entire point. Is he man enough to apologize?
The age of the script is irrelevant. The point is CONTEXT.
 
It can happen to men, too. BBC weatherman Tomasz Schafernaker flipped out when the news anchor called him "petal" (alluding to him being a certain kind of flower that is used as a slur):

I guess I don't regard "Barbie" as a slur. Is calling a preppy-looking guy "Ken" a slur?
 
But that's just the point, he was not in a conference room full of executives. Everything has a particular context. Strippers are not OK in a church. Look at the kind of show he does and the demos he does it for.
It was worse actually. He was at a high-profile event that included other members of the press, team members of the Commanders,
and the new ownership. His job was to promote the partnership of Big100, the station he works for, and for being the flagship station of the Commanders during this coming NFL season. Instead, he openly mocks the sports anchor from a local CBS affiliate, calling her Barbie. As has been pointed out already; the Commanders and before that Redskins, have had a long-standing reputation for sexual harassment and internal misdeeds, going all the way up to the team owner. The last thing the new ownership and iHeart needs is some leering social neandertal making inappropriate comments about a female reporter when he's supposed to be representing the partnership.
 
I have a friend who listened to Don’s Big 100 show since Day 1, and my friend said that the first day on air, Don said that he was prerecording his breaks. Why that was and whether he or the station chose to have him do that, I don’t know. I only listened when Dennis Murphy was on.

Something no one has brought up yet is that for the last few years and maybe even longer, stations regardless of format have wanted to get more female listeners. I wouldn’t be surprised if that also played some part in Don’s firing.
 
Something no one has brought up yet is that for the last few years and maybe even longer, stations regardless of format have wanted to get more female listeners. I wouldn’t be surprised if that also played some part in Don’s firing.

I don't view that as relevant. I think the results would have been the same regardless. The real question is why he was there at all.

Whenever the topic of demographics comes up it's not what the station wants, but rather what the advertisers want. Otherwise a station doesn't care about the makeup of the audience. Looking at the format profile, it's 60/40 men. The fact that this station carries the football broadcasts tells me they're happy with the demographics. An all sports format would be 75/25 male.
 
I don't view that as relevant. I think the results would have been the same regardless. The real question is why he was there at all.

Whenever the topic of demographics comes up it's not what the station wants, but rather what the advertisers want. Otherwise a station doesn't care about the makeup of the audience. Looking at the format profile, it's 60/40 men. The fact that this station carries the football broadcasts tells me they're happy with the demographics. An all sports format would be 75/25 male.
Thanks for explaining. He was probably there because the station has a contract with the Commanders.
 
I guess I don't regard "Barbie" as a slur. Is calling a preppy-looking guy "Ken" a slur?
Didn't Don Imus call someone "Nappy Headed Ho"?

In 2023, the use of "Barbie" is unacceptable unless talking about the movie. It infers "Dumb Blonde" or "Bubble Head" I suppose . Some of these jocks have said ignorant stuff for so long, they have no idea what they're spewing much of the time...
 
An all sports format would be 75/25 male.
WFAN is typically 80% male. Others, like WBZ-FM and WSCR, are closer to 85% male.
 
Didn't Don Imus call someone "Nappy Headed Ho"?

In 2023, the use of "Barbie" is unacceptable unless talking about the movie. It infers "Dumb Blonde" or "Bubble Head" I suppose . Some of these jocks have said ignorant stuff for so long, they have no idea what they're spewing much of the time...
Geeez, you think calling a black woman "nappy headed ho" is the same as calling a blonde-haired woman "Barbie"? Okie dokie.
 
It was worse actually. He was at a high-profile event that included other members of the press, team members of the Commanders,
and the new ownership. His job was to promote the partnership of Big100, the station he works for, and for being the flagship station of the Commanders during this coming NFL season. Instead, he openly mocks the sports anchor from a local CBS affiliate, calling her Barbie. As has been pointed out already; the Commanders and before that Redskins, have had a long-standing reputation for sexual harassment and internal misdeeds, going all the way up to the team owner. The last thing the new ownership and iHeart needs is some leering social neandertal making inappropriate comments about a female reporter when he's supposed to be representing the partnership.
Ok. Makes more sense.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom