Letterman scandal

It was weird how Letterman kept referring to what he did as "creepy" and "terrible". I don't know if he was deliberately being sarcastic or not. I mean, would this producer clown try and blackmail Letterman for 2 million if all he had on Letterman was that he knew had consensual sex with a co-worker? The devil will be in the details... it could get "creepy" though.
 
Marc39 said:
Harrassment is subjective. Letterman may not have openly suggested anyone's job might be jeopardized if they didn't do the nasty with him, however, it could have been inferred by his victims. Any women subordinate to Letterman could have felt vulnerable.
Click to expand...
That wasn't my point at all.

My point was, no one yet knows if Letterman's sexual sideline constituted harassment. Yet 90% of the discussion on the news and in this thread is as if that were already known.
 
I don't watch Letterman at all. While there are a few things he does that are quite funny, for the most part, I find him just a little too smug, a little too much of a smart-ass. I don't find it funny to make fun of people like Sarah Palin's minor daughter, or Linda Tripp, the g-man-wannabe who blew the whistle on Monica Lewinski and Bill Clinton. (If you want to make fun of Linda Tripp, why not point out SHE'S NOT A FRIGGING COP, instead of laughing at her appearance?)

The shoe is on the other foot? Now we know of David Letterman's particular moral failings? Sorry. I won't be laughing when the jokes start to fly. I've too many of my own failures to be laughing at his. This might indicate a lack of a sense of humor on my part, (just ask Penn Jillette), or it could be sympathy for his situation. Either way, I won't be inflicting my own laughter on him for this.

As to his blackmailer, I hope he spends quite a bit of time in prison for this. I've been the victim of people like this, though for far lower stakes, took the same stance Letterman did, and have been better off for it. On the other hand, they got off. I can't say as I have any sympathy for the SOB for what he's pulled. I find people like this to be among the lowest of the low.

Frankly, I don't give a damn what his motives were. And the fact that he's an award winning producer leaves me wondering if we shouldn't take a second look at his earlier work, auditing what he gave us for its basis in fact. Were the awards justified? I think he should fall, long and hard, and the final impact should hurt like hell.
 
GreyICE said:
Yeah, I'm going to agree with this 100%. His wife of 6 months, who he has a 5 year old kid with, hmm. Not thinking that he's either particularly deceptive, or particularly vanilla here.

God I do not get why sexual mores are stuck in the frikkin 1950s when housewives were popping pills to keep from killing themselves. Yes, I will have a self-righteous twitter when some idiot who preaches family values gets caught smoking cock in a restrooom, but it's the hypocrisy I find so hysterical (and objectionable) not the action.

Maybe him and his wife enjoy sleeping with whoever, or swinging, or doing whatever the hell they want. Who cares? No skin off anybody's nose.

If that's the case I am annoyed that he's decided to do the self-recrimination thing, but I guess mainstream TV isn't ready for anything past Leave it to Beaver, no matter what we think happened in the past 40 years.
Click to expand...

Oh, come on! Everybody knows America reached it's moral zenith in 1957 and has been in steady decline ever since due to the gays and hippies and such. I mean, look at those Cleavers or Mary Tyler Moore and Andy Griffith. Those families were American heroes, people!
 
Ziggurat said:
Actually, it's not that simple. For example, the women he slept with could have been willing participants (ie, he did not harass them), but if they did it to advance their careers, and if he indeed helped out their careers, then that could still count as sexual harassment, and would still be illegal, whether or not it was completely consensual.

I'm not saying this happened, we really don't know. Maybe it was just mutual attraction (shudder). But the fact that it was employees he was sleeping with does in fact raise questions, both legal and moral, questions which we do not have the answer to at this point.
Click to expand...

Those were some of my first thoughts as well ... Gold Diggers of a sort. Of course, we don't yet know, but it's not entirely without merit.

I was also rather surprised at the positive response the audience gave Dave when he admitted to sleeping with some employees. Is that type of behavior so accepted in general, or is it a response typical of his studio audience personalities?
 
Last edited:
One would think that Letterman wouldn't need to use any pressure to have women want to have sex with him. He's rich, successful, good-looking for his age, and probably a nice guy. Certainly quite a few younger women would be very flattered by his attention, and would consider it a nice adventure to have a fling with him.

This hardly means any woman would have sex with him, and human beings are strange -- perhaps he became attracted to just those on his staff who didn't want him, so he pressured them. But common sense suggests that they were willing partners. Besides, if there was any coercion involved, one would at least think that we'd hear about it from the women involved.

I'd wait and see, but if I had to bet, I'd bet about 90-10% against coercion in his particular case.
 
Just thinking said:
I was also rather surprised at the positive response the audience gave Dave when he admitted to sleeping with some employees. Is that type of behavior so accepted in general, or is it a response typical of his studio audience personalities?
Click to expand...

I think they admired his bravery for admitting it so openly. It takes guts to do what he did. I, for one, don't see why it has to be that either he pressured them or they were "gold-diggers" who thought this would advance their career. What if they both simply had fun without thinking of threatening, or using, the other person? Certainly nothing that came out so far suggests otherwise, so far as I know.
 
This just in: Women are attracted to rock stars!

In other news: World is round!

Breaking Now: Being on TV makes you sexy!
 
LibraryLady said:
I was thinking the other day that blackmail must be a dying art, because everyone's life seems to be open to scrutiny and shame is no longer really a factor in people's decisions. It would seem I am wrong.



Wow.

I am not really a Letterman fan, but I give him props for his "publish and be damned" actions. This is the only way to really deal with the situation. However, this is a man who got married very recently to a woman he's lived with for about 20 years and with whom he has a 5 or 6 year old son. Does he really just think of women as receptacles? Or is he so driven by his libido that nothing else really matters?

We see a lot of this, I know. And I know that not all men are this type of pig. However, it just seems so damn wrong to me.
Click to expand...
Well he did the right think in not paying the money. He also did the right thing by prosecuting the blackmaiiler. His character is low but he's an entertainer not a role model.
 
For what it matters, Letterman was with his girlfriend from the late 80's (1988, I think) and he joined CBC is 1993. Since the affairs were with CBS producers, the affairs must have occured sometime after he joined 1993 and (according to reports) before his marriage with his recent girlfriend.
 
Skeptic said:
I think they admired his bravery for admitting it so openly. It takes guts to do what he did. I, for one, don't see why it has to be that either he pressured them or they were "gold-diggers" who thought this would advance their career. What if they both simply had fun without thinking of threatening, or using, the other person? Certainly nothing that came out so far suggests otherwise, so far as I know.
Click to expand...

True as all the above may be ... it's just the idea of one's employees becoming romantically involved that raises eyebrows. Remember, employees, not co-workers. Big difference. It can cause much talk and second guessing when raises and promotions come due. It's just unprofessional.
 
Putting asside the question of the wisdom of sleeping with a subordinate, we really don't know the exact timing of these affairs and the status of his relationship with his girlfriend at the time.
 
Skeptic Guy said:
For what it matters, Letterman was with his girlfriend from the late 80's (1988, I think) and he joined CBC is 1993. Since the affairs were with CBS producers, the affairs must have occured sometime after he joined 1993 and (according to reports) before his marriage with his recent girlfriend.
Click to expand...

I am not aware of liaisons with producers, only interns. The pattern appears to be Letterman selecting interns who then received favorable treatment, such as being put on the air.
 
Just thinking said:
... Remember, employees, not co-workers. Big difference. ....
Click to expand...
Yeah, if he wasn't a TV star. People are attracted to stars. How do you separate out the boss from the star effect? You can't. That's why this is not going to become some cause ce'le'bre for workplace harassment activists.

Just as my reaction, so is the public's in general, the guy was attractive. Who would feel harassed by attention from him? It's the news media looking for their story template trying to make this into something it probably won't turn out to be.

Now a personality like O'Reilly, trying to get a producer to talk dirty on the phone, that is creepy. The public would see that as work place harassment. Friendly non aggressive David Letterman having sex with coworkers? Not so much.
 
Last edited:
skeptigirl said:
Yeah, if he wasn't a TV star. People are attracted to stars. How do you separate out the boss from the star effect? You can't. That's why this is not going to become some cause ce'le'bre for workplace harassment activists.

Just as my reaction, so is the public's in general, the guy was attractive. Who would feel harassed by attention from him? It's the news media looking for their story template trying to make this into something it probably won't turn out to be.

Now a personality like O'Reilly, trying to get a producer to talk dirty on the phone, that is creepy. The public would see that as work place harassment. Friendly non aggressive David Letterman having sex with coworkers? Not so much.
Click to expand...

I just love those double standards. But what's worse, is how some spin them into looking as not such a bad thing ... eh?
 
skeptigirl said:
Yeah, if he wasn't a TV star. People are attracted to stars. How do you separate out the boss from the star effect? You can't. That's why this is not going to become some cause ce'le'bre for workplace harassment activists.

Just as my reaction, so is the public's in general, the guy was attractive. Who would feel harassed by attention from him? It's the news media looking for their story template trying to make this into something it probably won't turn out to be.
Click to expand...
Given Letterman's personal worth and the deep pockets at the network for a prospective lawsuit, I think that were sexual harassment the issue it would have been raised long ago. The ethics of banging your subordinate employees, or those in other departments, consensually, as two consenting adults may or may not have run afoul of the network's HR regulations.

I cannot see where sexual harassment fits here, unless Letterman was, or was not, offering up improvement in position (from missionary to Kama Sutra number xx, ba dump, tsh!! had to pun that) or other office related status and perks based on sexual relations. Sexual harassment rules have been established, and the remedy, for two decades.

Absent a claim/charge, there is no smoke to indicate a sexual harassment fire.

DR
 
I haven't been following the Letterman story that closely, but is there any evidence that whatever relationships Letterman had with these women was anything but consensual? I mean, real evidence, not something the tabloids made up? Is he accused of rape, sexual harassment, or something perverse?

If not, then I fail to see where an adult man having consensual sex with adult women is even newsworthy. Happens a lot in my neighborhood. Probably happening right now. :D
 
desertgal said:
If not, then I fail to see where an adult man having consensual sex with adult women is even newsworthy. Happens a lot in my neighborhood. Probably happening right now. :D
Click to expand...

Consensual sex in the workplace. Big distinction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom