Weinsteins step down as Miramax CEOs

if he needs to not be disturbed he can walk right over and lock the door
why are people going out of their way to defend a door lock button?!

I get what Evan is saying but now IM confused because an electric deadbolt would be a clear fire code violation I believe

Sorry, who is confused or defending door lock buttons here?

La Lechera you said: "there is no excuse for matt lauer being able to lock people into his office from a secret button on his desk."

So I thought "holy shit he's locking them IN?!" and asked the question.

Isn't that all we're clarifying here?

Of course he's locking them in.

maybe you are not thinking about what it feels like to be locked in a room alone with a gross creep like matt lauer regardless of the mechanics of his stupid gross door lock
it's not like the lock is the only thing going on here -- regardless of how the lock works, YES he is locking them in while he claims to be locking other people out

evan, you think the lock only works when there is one person in the room?

sometimes it's better to google than ask

lock thread

NBC is definitely liable for SOMETHING if they let him turn his office into a panic room with a deadbolt that can only be unlocked from his desk.

maybe you are not thinking about what it feels like to be locked in a room alone with a gross creep like matt lauer regardless of the mechanics of his stupid gross door lock
it's not like the lock is the only thing going on here -- regardless of how the lock works, YES he is locking them in while he claims to be locking other people out

― weird woman in a bar (La Lechera), Thursday, November 30, 2017 11:10 AM (two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

If that's what you meant- got it! But aside from that if the other person in the room can't physically leave unless they reach under the desk and push the button again themselves then (again) holy shit it's worth pointing that out.

evan, you think the lock only works when there is one person in the room?

― Frederik B, Thursday, November 30, 2017 11:11 AM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

no? ...what???

p sure i read on twitter or elsewhere this was not unique to his office, @ least some other nbc offices have the same mechanism. i think it has to be how ye mad puffin sez, keeping ppl from entering not from exiting

lock thread

― Simon H., Thursday, November 30, 2017

Ned Ragged with a button at his desk.

*Raggett

Perhaps.

the button-down mind of ned raggett

top button buttoned

Good DeRo piece at the New Yorker:

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/why-has-r-kellys-career-thrived-despite-sexual-misconduct-allegations

i guess i've never even seen office doors that had locks, like usually if my bosses door is shut it means do not disturb or they are on a call or something but also we have a lot of glass walls, but yeah it seems weird to have locks on office doors IMO

i’d kill for an office with a lock, the quality of my sleep would improve markedly

oy, now horovitz.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/theater/israel-horovitz-sexual-misconduct.html

Derogatis piece is weird. Does it contain any new info or r is it a blandly philosophical piece abt not separating art from artist? If he’s not doing investigative journalism on the ppl still pushing/enabling r kelly whats the pt

Not a bad idea to remind people about it in this new climate

This is that kind of annoying copycat journalism that takes the Weinstein headline subtext (Ronan farrow goes after the guy who enabled Woody Allen post abuse allegations!) and tries to bank off it without doing the legwork in a difft context, idk feels weirdly exploitative

Dero is definitely the one person alive who should be upbraided for not doing investigative journalism on R Kelly and ppl around him, good call

Sorry for not wanting to read the same article eight times

Fight the same series of wimps in the forect for an hour or two? I DON'T THINK SO. I think I'll BEAT THE GAME 3 times.

'what's the point' of continuing to call out a celebrity who's gotten a free pass? it took years, even decades for some of these guys to go down, and it took a critical mass of attention on them, not new investigative journalism.

i don't see the Russell Simmons news posted, so

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-entertainment-news-updates-russell-simmons-steps-down-from-1512055100-htmlstory.html

it's a bit upthread, busy morning. Simmons story was simmering for a while

'what's the point' of continuing to call out a celebrity who's gotten a free pass? it took years, even decades for some of these guys to go down, and it took a critical mass of attention on them, not new investigative journalism.

― iatee, Thursday, November 30, 2017 1:55 PM (ten minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Also, as DeRogatis points out, the shit with Kelly is ongoing:

One of the women in the “cult” has said that she is “happy where I am at.” None of the others have spoken publicly, but the parents continue to contact me regularly, asking why, given the current public conversation, Kelly’s history, and what they call his ongoing abuse, the media isn’t focussing more on him.

the reason the media isn't focusing on him is because he went to trial and was found innocent. he is, in many people's minds, "old news". and his fans don't care.

just dropping by to say La Lechera otm re door locks
& who cares - and LL’s student is otm abt surveillance in supervisor offices. I still havent watched that Frontline doc, I keep meaning to!

LL otm about how it is like being locked in regardless of how the door works. But still, we should definitely care if executives are physically locking people inside their office. That's all I was saying earlier.

xpost Kelly hasn't gone to trial for all the cult-ish current activity that has been laid out about him this year.

true, all of which is gross and creepy and wrong but also not illegal and between (apparently) consenting adults. and it's of a kind with previous accusations - ie, stemming from general sexually predatory behavior - so I'm sure it just seems like "more of the same" to those that are eager to give him the benefit of the doubt a la Dave Chappelle.

the reason the media isn't focusing on him is because he went to trial and was found innocent. he is, in many people's minds, "old news". and his fans don't care.

― Οὖτις, Thursday, November 30, 2017 1:09 PM (thirty-two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

literally no one cares, and everyone knows! People have resolved to make their peace w/ how they view his old work or they haven't but it's pretty much widely understood who R Kelly is! No one needs to know. there are other people in the music industry who could be pointed to, artists who are new and relevant today. why not point to that?

I'm not gonna begrudge DeRo his moral crusade

'what's the point' of continuing to call out a celebrity who's gotten a free pass? it took years, even decades for some of these guys to go down, and it took a critical mass of attention on them, not new investigative journalism.

― iatee, Thursday, November 30, 2017 12:55 PM (forty-eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

how has he gotten a 'free pass'? the music industry protects him, but they're the only ones--the 'harvey weinsteins' in this case, who derogatis is not chasing down. r kelly's crimes are common knowledge.

as an artist hes at a nadir of cultural relevance

i mean, whatever, i guess he did another good deed fixating on r kelly again so we can all share it & say 'good piece, otm'

as someone mentioned on another thread the industry support for xxxtacian and kodak black are pretty disturbing

xps

artists who are new and relevant today

I'm pretty sure that being sexually abused or predated upon is always relevant to the victims. The only added value of outing a respected public figure is that it pierces the bubble of respectability that has protected the perpetrator and put the victim at a greater relative disadvantage. The 'relevance' of the perpetrator within his field has no bearing at all, imo, except that it titillates the public's interest -- at the same level as supermarket tabloids touting "Jennifer Anniston's Secret Sorrow" or the breakup of Bennifer.

of course its relevant that someone is abusing someone. but we already know about it! he is not relevant; the only time he touches headlines today is when this comes up.

what matt is saying, is more the point

as an artist hes at a nadir of cultural relevance

so it's cool if he imprisons and intimidates and brainwashes a houseful of young women, good to know

thanks for never writing the same post twice btw, you're a better investigative journalist than Jim Derogatis

How is R. Kelly's industry support any different? His major label hasn't dropped him, right? What does relevance matter if he's still selling records and doing huge shows?

Even seventeen years of reporting hasn’t been enough to turn as bright a spotlight on Kelly as the one exposing many others, because no one, it seems, matters less in our society than young black women.

so it's cool if he imprisons and intimidates and brainwashes a houseful of young women, good to know

thanks for never writing the same post twice btw, you're a better investigative journalist than Jim Derogatis

― shackling the masses with plastic-wrapped snack picks (sic), Thursday, November 30, 2017 1:57 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah thats what i fucking said, great work

just another fucking ilx thread where ppl read me in the worst possible faith

go fuck yourselves

an idiom comes to mind

we gotta keep digging though, until every predator is outed