Didn't he take these real early in the morning? Maybe he was picking up someone for a romp..
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Shock Jocks...
- Thread starter Shredder
- Start date
Didn't he take these real early in the morning? Maybe he was picking up someone for a romp..
Didn't he take these real early in the morning? Maybe he was picking up someone for a romp..
And perhaps she wasn't as interested as he.
There's more to the story here. Maybe TMZ or Inside Edition will find the girl, and we'll get her side of the story.
I'm ashamed that some of you are or were ever a part of my industry. Pathetic.
What industry are you a part of, anyway?
That sounds suspicious to me, considering how easy it would have been. So instead, he goes on a Twitter rampage. Very responsible.
I remember reading one of his tweets saying that he did not call the police since she said she would claim sexual harassment. He also said it is his word, a white male, against that of a black woman so he felt he could not win. I do not see anything odd about this since it is a common tactic to play the sexual harassment and race card.
What I thought was suspicious was that I remember some hoax or twitter account hack some years back with them that everyone jumped on that turned out not to be true.
Last edited:
I remember reading one of his tweets saying that he did not call the police since she said she would claim sexual harassment.
So did this work out better for him?
If he has any chance taking Sirius to court, he needs a police report. Right now, he doesn't have one.
U
Unregistered
Guest
I think he may have filed one by now.
That summed up the situation from his perspective. Assuming it went down exactly as he said. You know what they say about assume.
I don't have to assume anything. I KNOW he's not lying. I know the guy. Not well, I'm closer friends with people who are close to him though. He is NOT lying.
The most likely scenario, and he's not even quite sure of this himself, but the woman was probably a prostitute that got mad she was in one of the photos he took. He was walking back to his apartment after a night out at some pub near Times Square. He wasn't out "trolling for hookers". He just happened to get on the wrong side of one.
And we end up with the VICTIM of an assault losing his livelihood over it. If you don't think the outrage industry has us ALL by the short and curlies, you're part of the problem.
And we end up with the VICTIM of an assault losing his livelihood over it. If you don't think the outrage industry has us ALL by the short and curlies, you're part of the problem.
None of us would have known or cared about it had he not chosen to rant on Twitter. He brought this "outrage" on himself. Personal responsibility.
He only loses his livelihood if he walks away. I don't expect that to happen.
None of us would have known or cared about it had he not chosen to rant on Twitter. He brought this "outrage" on himself. Personal responsibility.
He only loses his livelihood if he walks away. I don't expect that to happen.
I wouldn't have ranted about it on Twitter, but there is so much lying and distortion going on about what he even said on Twitter that the response was WAY out of proportion to the perceived offense.
The APPROPRIATE response from SiriusXM would be to ask him to stop posting stuff like that on Twitter.
And stop with the "personal responsibility" stuff. He didn't do anything worth being fired over. Period.
I hope you're right about the second part. I hope he and Opie both go somewhere and make even more money.
And stop with the "personal responsibility" stuff. He didn't do anything worth being fired over. Period.
You think it was an isolated incident?
You think it was an isolated incident?
People get fired all the time for unrelated stuff they post online.
IT IS WRONG EVERY SINGLE TIME.
I'm sick of this outrage culture.
If you post bad stuff about your employer, they should fire you. If you post something illegal they should fire you. If you're a SHOCK JOCK on an UNCENSORED platform and you call some criminal the "c-word", you should keep your damn job.
Last edited:
If you're a SHOCK JOCK on an UNCENSORED platform and you call some criminal the "c-word", you should keep your damn job.
Doesn't change the fact that no one forced him to post this rant on his Twitter page. Not just one post, but multiple posts. He was clearly out of control.
No one's defending the girl. The proper course of action was go to the police. The fact that he didn't doesn't help him.
As I've said before, there is no defense for a celebrity who goes nuts in public. When you work for a publicly-traded company, what are they supposed to do? It's bad for business. You want to be a star? You want to make the big bucks? Then stay out of the spotlight when you're off the clock. Very simple.
Last edited:
As I've said before, there is no defense for a celebrity who goes nuts in public.
Yes there is. Stop immediately firing anyone Gawker says you should fire. Problem solved. The VICTIM in this case is the one being punished. Enough is enough.
Yes there is. Stop immediately firing anyone Gawker says you should fire. Problem solved. The VICTIM in this case is the one being punished. Enough is enough.
Had he reported the attack to the police, he would have been the victim. But unfortunately, he chose not to.
Once again, we're talking about a publicly traded company with stockholders and paying subscribers. Some of them just might be offended. You don't say something that offends your customers. Even if you're the victim. Not all of them subscribe to this "shock jock" channel. All they have to do is start a boycott, and you're out of business. It's their right.
As Richard Nixon said, he gave them the sword.
Had he reported the attack to the police, he would have been the victim.
Are you serious? An unreported crime isn't a crime?
Do you know the majority of rapes go unreported?
It's a good thing we don't know where you work. That monumentally stupid thing you just said would get you fired if a radical feminist blog picked it up.
See how easy it is?
Are you serious? An unreported crime isn't a crime?
Do you know the majority of rapes go unreported?
We'll see how many women rise to his defense. My bet is none. Why was he photographing this woman who you call a criminal? What was the purpose of that photograph? Once again, he wasn't fired because of the activity in Times Square, but because of the violent rant on Twitter.
My guess is equating this with unreported rape will more likely get YOU in trouble with radical feminists, not me.
We'll see how many women rise to his defense. My bet is none. Why was he photographing this woman who you call a criminal? What was the purpose of that photograph? Once again, he wasn't fired because of the activity in Times Square, but because of the violent rant on Twitter.
He was doing what people do in Times Square. Taking photos of people. I've been there dozens of times. Taken photos of hundreds, if not thousands, of people. There is absolutely NO expectation of privacy in public. You should know this.
Again, if you'd actually followed this instead of just believing the conflict merchants without question, you'd have seen some of the photos he took before this happened. They were actually really good street photography. It's not like he was taking photos up womens' skirts with his iPhone. He had a $5000 camera and was doing legit shooting. This criminal, and make no mistake she IS a criminal, was in the wrong. He had every RIGHT to be upset about this.
My guess is equating this with unreported rape will more likely get YOU in trouble with radical feminists, not me.
Wanna make a bet? Send me your contact info and I'll forward it to Jezebel and XoJane. All they need to do is be told you're a sexist and they'll put their own spin on it. You'd be out of a job before the day's end. I, on the other hand, would get some sort of award for bringing up the point that even unreported rape is still rape. (Which is true, by the way.)
The bottom line here is this could have been solved without firing. But SiriusXM is letting Gawker and Buzzfeed make their HR decisions now. This is the world we live in, mainly because spineless people like you allowed it to happen. SOMEONE in our business has to stand up to these people or they will destroy the entire industry.
This criminal, and make no mistake she IS a criminal, was in the wrong. He had every RIGHT to be upset about this.
No one's questioning that he was upset. That's not the issue. The issue is how he reacted. He didn't act responsibly, and for that, he was fired.
To be honest, I haven't seen either of those sites, and I don't care to see the pictures. I'm sure Sirius has a written policy for these kinds of things. Most companies do. Read your employee handbook. If he feels he was wrongly fired, then he can take them to court. That's how you "stand up to these people."
No one's questioning that he was upset. That's not the issue. The issue is how he reacted. He didn't act responsibly, and for that, he was fired.
Which is an overreaction. That's the point.
To be honest, I haven't seen either of those sites, and I don't care to see the pictures.
Do you think Gawker is going to post the legit photos? Of course not. It doesn't fit their narrative. Ant posted them on his Twitter. They were your run of the mill photos of Times Square. Nothing worth getting punched in the face repeatedly for.
Last edited:
Which is an overreaction. That's the point.
Once again, read your employee handbook. It's been 7 years since the Imus case. Companies have done their homework, contacted their lawyers, and have protected themselves against future problems. Companies don't react to websites. They follow policy. Otherwise they could get sued. If they over-reacted, it's his right to sue. That's it. Your belaboring of this issue isn't going to change anything.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.