People Mag Editor explains to Wash Post what would have (not)happened if he had known about assault

[wishstar]

I knew Natasha Stoynoff had asked People mag to be taken off coverage of Trump and told several people about the assault. But she did not tell her editor. In this interesting article, he explains why he thinks she did not tell him, admits he would not have wanted a story to be about the reporter rather than the subject and he would not have publicly exposed Trump, but would have contacted his publicist and made a mutual truce instead.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/10/14/i-edited-the-people-reporter-who-says-trump-groped-her-heres-why-she-never-came-forward-before/?utm_term=.63070494ccff

"For a second there, I imagined a scene of Ben Bradlee-esque outrage, calling out the swine for his behavior and striking a blow for reporters everywhere. But in reality, I would probably have simply killed the story that Stoynoff had gone to Palm Beach to report. I would have then called Trump’s public relations operatives, told them about their boss’s bad behavior and agreed to a truce of mutual silence. In the end, few people would have learned of the event, we’d have had to fill a few more pages in the next issue, and Trump would have avoided any public embarrassment.

News organizations are devoted to the idea that unless something truly gruesome happens during the course of reporting, the subjects, not the reporters, are the real story. They instinctively feel pressure to absent themselves from the narrative. It’s the right instinct, but in the case of sexual assault, whose violations are not always visible, reporters face a terrible choice. No wonder Stoynoff didn’t feel able to confide in me or her other editors in 2005. The ghastly truth is that had Trump punched her, our course of action would have been much clearer. Instead, he exploited power, privilege and media sclerosis to his own sweaty ends."

[wordpix]

1. whaaa? If Trump "punched her," the ed would have blown the whistle but

Last edited Sat Oct 15, 2016, 07:49 PM - Edit history (1)

since Trump's "just" a sex predator, the editor would have worked it out with Trump's PR people.



How would this editor like it if sexual predators were rubbing private parts in greeting?

[yardwork]

6. At least the editor is being honest. There it is, right there.

[Maeve]

11. If he had punched her, she might have had bruises or other physical evidence

It's a truth women deal with--in "he said, she said" cases, the person with money and power is usually protected.
Growing up in the '60's, we were taught that we better try to stay out of 'hazardous situations' or we would be treated as if we "asked for" whatever happened. And so we felt guilt if anything did happen--we must have dropped our guard, or trusted the wrong man, or.....It's gotten better, but those ideas are still too, too common.

[Rose Siding]

13. I believe the editor's objective here is to validate her decision at the time

-to not put the assault in the story. That's important because Donald uses that against her in his ongoing attack.

Best case for us, journalists have a code that isn't fair to themselves,rather to the story. It seems especially unfair in the instance of the puff piece she was doing, but I get his point about the not wanting the story to be about the reporter.

[wordpix]

18. I understand but it stood out that the editor

admitted to this

[mopinko]

2. what an asshole.

i hope his female employees light this asshole on fire.

[tblue37]

4. Actually, I bet as a result of these stories LOT of men are now facing

the uncomfortable reality that their own attitudes and actions (or failure to act, or even to believe and understand) have enabled such sexual aggression against women, just as a few decent cops must be starting to realize that they too are complicit in the brutality and murders committed by their vicious colleagues.

This editor's comments are an effect of what we early feminists called consciousness raising. I do not think he should be called a**hole and slammed for this important confession, but thanked instead for shining a light on this essential truth about why women don't come forward when such things happen to them.

[whttevrr]

9. RE:"LOT of men are now facing the uncomfortable reality that their own attitudes and actions"

Yeah...

Some snicker a little...

But mostly, in my circles, it's "what the fuck!?"

... and then the slow realization that maybe some of 'those' 'jokes' aren't so funny.

[geek tragedy]

5. he's telling the truth, which is what is needed. nt

[WillyBrandt]

15. I read this as very harsh self-criticism by the editor

An indictment of how own cowardice and that of his profession.

What am I missing?

[obamanut2012]

17. I read it that way, too

Major props to him for this.

[Silver Gaia]

24. Yes, I agree with that, too.

He was taking responsibility for his own behavior, assessing it, and admitting, in hindsight, that he would have done the wrong thing. He is offering support for her as to why she didn't come forward at the time.

[oberliner]

3. Brutal honesty

Disturbing but at least he admitted the dark truth.

[Coyotl]

7. And this is why it has taken so long for the issue to come to the fore.

We need a cultural revolution wherein we change ourselves. We are suitable government already, we have a great democracy, we need the people to change.

We also need to change some of the irredeemable people who govern and are unwilling to accept the need to improve themselves and who we are as a people.

Enough is enough! This is not normal.

[wordpix]

19. women need to say "that's not ok" when it first starts

of course in the case of a rapist, which DonCon is accused of being, that doesn't work. But in a lot of cases, it will work.

In the 90's, I had a professor who was always turning the subject to sex whenever I went to him for extra help. I ignored this talk, hoping he'd get the message it was not what I came for. I just stuck to the chemistry problems. But he got worse. Finally one day I turned to him and said, "You know, the things you're saying could be construed as sexual harassment." He never said a word about sex again.

Just sayin' with some guys it will work to tell them knock it off.

[Mc Mike]

8. Yep. And drumpfie knew the dynamic, knew he was protected by his status,

and knew he would get away with it. And that's why he pulls ALL the crimes he pulls. He always knew he'd get away with them, he never did one illegal thing that he thought even slightly threatened to have the tiniest bit of negative repercussions for his precious hide.

[LisaL]

10. When you are a star, you can do anything, according to Trump.

[Mc Mike]

12. David Cay Johnston said in an interview,

I think it was one of his Democracy Now! appearances, that he always made deals with organized crime figures, in NY, NJ, Philly. But he never went to meet with them in person, never put himself in any situation that threatened even the tiniest bit of actual danger to his precious hide.

He's real good at mauling smaller, lighter women, though. Very brave.

[wordpix]

20. The clown car is careening off the cliff with Lurker at the wheel

That's how drumpf has always appeared, like a crime boss or would-be crime boss.

I believe this is why certain repukes like Ghouly and Crispie are so happy with DonCon as their choice. Because they're totally on the take as partners in crime is my hypothesis. Ghouly was mayor during part of Don's empire-building period in NYC. Ghouly and Don made big towers happen and Crispie was helping Don with casinos and bankruptcies, both men in public positions helping a private developer in return for campaign dough is my guess.

[Mc Mike]

21. I think that both have blackmailable payola from dRumfie in their backgrounds.

Both also have wiseguy connections. Christie got confused and thought he was higher in the pecking order than drumpfie in terms of who could blackmail who, with their mutual skievy relationship. The wiseguys above them straightened that confusion out. Roy Cohn's acolyte 'trumps' whatever clout G & C have with the wiseguys they serve.

G was definitely targeting select crime figures, not wiping out NY O.C. I recall his hand picked police chief pal, and choice to run the US's Dept. of Homeland Security, had some legal troubles, of a specific nature:

"On June 30, 2006, after an 18-month long grand jury investigation conducted by the Bronx District Attorney's Office, Kerik pleaded guilty in Bronx Supreme Court to two ethics violations (unclassified misdemeanors). Kerik acknowledged that he failed to document a personal loan on his annual New York City conflict-of-interest report (a violation of the New York City administrative code) and accepted a gift from a New Jersey construction firm attempting to do business with the city (a violation of the New York City Charter). He was ordered to pay $221,000 in fines after the 10-minute hearing.

On November 8, 2007, in White Plains, New York, Kerik was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of tax fraud, and making false statements. Prosecutors accused Kerik of receiving about $255,000 in discounted apartment renovations to his Bronx apartment from a company seeking to do business with the city of New York.[25] The indictment also charged that Kerik made false statements to the White House during a background investigation for a committee position with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security relating to his children's nanny. Some of the New York charges were dropped in December 2008, after which he was re-indicted in Washington, D.C. on the same charges.[26]

On November 5, 2009, Kerik pleaded guilty to eight felony tax and false statement charges,[27] and was sentenced to forty-eight months in federal prison and three years supervised release (probation)...He was discharged from federal custody on October 15, 2013, after serving five months home confinement, and his supervised release will conclude in October 2016. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Kerik

I think his 3 year probation is up TODAY. How timely.

[Ilsa]

14. He's gotten away with molesting women for so long,

that he thinks he's immune to consequences of immoral, if not criminal, behavior.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

16. The priority was Trump's "brand" had to be preserved.

[okaawhatever]

22. The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem. nt

[Blue Idaho]

23. Whole lot of ass covering going on in the M$M.

These knuckleheads are spinning up the damage control. They created Trump and used him to sell soap. Now they want to find some cover for the monster they created and the horror show this election has become. Don't let them.