Connect with us

U.S.

Matt Lauer Accused of Rape in Ronan Farrow’s New Book

Published

on

  • Ronan Farrow’s new book, Catch and Kill, includes an interview with Brooke Nevils, who accused Matt Lauer of raping her in 2014 during the Sochi Olympics.
  • Lauer was fired in 2017 over an unspecified sexual misconduct claim, but this is the first time specifics about the alleged assault have been released.
  • NBC News and TODAY Show anchors responded by saying they were appalled by the news. 
  • Meanwhile, Lauer defended himself by saying all of his relations with Nevils were consensual.

Farrow’s Book Reveals Rape Allegation

An NBC colleague accused former TODAY Show anchor Matt Lauer of rape in Ronan Farrow’s upcoming book.

Back in 2017, Lauer was fired from his position for alleged sexual misconduct. No details about the claim were made clear at the time. Farrow’s book, Catch and Kill, will now provide the first detailed explanation of the alleged assault.

Catch and Kill is not out yet, but Variety received an advance copy of it and reported on the account about Lauer. Farrow interviewed the accuser, Brooke Nevils, who says that incident happened while she was working for Meredith Vieira while in Sochi covering the 2014 Olympics. 

Nevils and Vieira were at the hotel bar when they ran into Lauer. Nevils had six shots of vodka before going to Lauer’s room on two separate occasions. The first was to get her press credential that he jokingly took, and the second was because he invited her back. She told Farrow she “had no reason to suspect Lauer would be anything but friendly based on prior experience.”

When she got there, however, he pushed her against the door kissing her, and then pushed her onto the bed. According to Farrow’s book, he flipped her over “asking if she liked anal sex.”

“She said that she declined several times,” the report continues. Nevils “was in the midst of telling him she wasn’t interested again when he ‘just did it.’” 

The report also details the specifics of the incident, which are incredibly disturbing. Nevils recounted the experience as “excruciatingly painful.” She added that at some point, she stopped saying no a wept silently into a pillow. Afterward, Lauer asked her if she liked it and she told him “yes.”

“It was nonconsensual in the sense that I was too drunk to consent,” Nevils told Farrow. “It was nonconsensual in that I said, multiple times, that I didn’t want to have anal sex.”

Farrow goes on to say that the two did have sexual encounters with one another after the fact. Farrow noted that this was a common occurrence he heard from the numerous other women he had interviewed who shared similar stories of assault.

“This is what I blame myself most for,” Nevils said to Farrow. “It was completely transactional. It was not a relationship.”

NBC’s Handling of the Allegation

On top of these allegations against Lauer, Farrow’s book also details the way NBC handled them. Nevils said that after their encounters had ended, she told several people within the company. Nothing ever happened until Farrow’s bombshell report on Harvey Weinstein led to a cultural reckoning in 2017, prompting her colleagues asked her about Lauer. 

Nevils then told Vieira about what happened. Vieira advised her to go to HR with a lawyer, which Nevils did.

Once Lauer was fired, Nevils learned that executives at NBC News were looking to paint the incident as not being criminal or an assault. Learning this made her throw up.

Nevils also said that HR promised she would remain anonymous. Still, many were able to figure out she was the one who filed the complaint as an internal memo contained details specific enough for people to connect the dots. 

Despite the fact that Nevils insisted she did not want money, she went on medical leave in 2018. Farrow says NBC paid her seven figures. 

NBC and TODAY Respond

NBC responded to the news in a statement that aired on the TODAY Show Wednesday morning. 

“Matt Lauer’s conduct was appalling, horrific and reprehensible, as we said at the time,” the statement read. “That’s why he was fired within 24 hours of us first learning of the complaint. Our hearts break again for our colleague.”

TODAY Show anchors and former colleagues of Lauer, Savannah Guthrie and Hoda Kotb, also responded to the news on air. 

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

“I feel like we owe it to our viewers to pause for a moment,” Guthrie said after a news package detailing the allegation aired. 

“You know, this is shocking and appalling and I honestly don’t even know what to say about it,” she added. “I want to say that we know it wasn’t easy for our colleague to come forward then, it’s not easy now, and we support her and any women who have come forward with claims.” 

“There are not allegations of an affair. There are allegations of a crime,” Kotb later added. “And I think that’s shocking to all of us here who have sat with Matt for many, many years.” 

Matt Lauer Responds

Lauer also responded to the allegations on Wednesday morning in an open letter. The Hollywood Reporter obtained the letter via a legal representative of Lauer’s and published it in full. 

“Over the past two years people have asked why I have not spoken out to defend myself more vigorously against some of the false and salacious allegations leveled at me,” he said in the letter’s opening. “It is a fair question and the answer is deeply personal.”

“But my silence has been a mistake,” he added.

He then insisted that everything that happened between him and Nevils was fully consensual.

“In a new book, it is alleged that an extramarital, but consensual, sexual encounter I have previously admitted having, was in fact an assault. It is categorically false, ignores the facts, and defies common sense,” Lauer wrote.

He said that “each act was mutual and completely consensual.” He also said that as their encounters continued, at no time “did she express in words or actions any discomfort with being there, or with our affair.”

Catch and Kill comes out on October 15.

See what others are saying: (Variety) (The Hollywood Reporter) (NBC News)

Advertisements

U.S.

Guards Charged With Falsifying Records After Allegedly Shopping Online and Falling Asleep the Night of Epstein’s Death

Published

on

  • Federal prosecutors charged guards Tova Noel and Michael Thomas with falsifying documents that said they had completed prisoner checks the night convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein died.
  • An indictment alleges that the two did not complete any rounds, and instead, both spent time online shopping and sleeping.
  • Both guards rejected a deal from prosecutors and pleaded not guilty.

Guards Charged With Falsifying Records

Federal prosecutors charged two guards on Tuesday for falsifying documents on Aug. 10, the night that sex offender Jeffrey Epstein died.

Epstein reportedly committed suicide in New York at the Metropolitan Correctional Center where he was awaiting trial on federal charges of sex trafficking minors. Shortly after his imprisonment began, Epstein reportedly tried to commit suicide and was placed on suicide watch for a week before being taken off.

Even though Epstein was no longer on suicide watch, prison officials moved his cell to within at least 15 feet of the guards’ desks to monitor him more closely.

The indictment, however, alleges that guards Tova Noel and Michael Thomas lied on signed documents to say they had carried out required half-hour rounds, when in fact they had not.

According to the charges, both were also supposed to have performed additional sets of more-detailed prisoner checks and headcounts at midnight, 3 a.m., and 5 a.m. The accusation, however, states that the guards “repeatedly failed to complete mandated counts of prisoners under their watch.”

In fact, according to the charge, the last time anyone saw Epstein alive was around 10:30 p.m. on Aug. 9 when Noel reportedly briefly walked up to and then away from the door to the tier that held Epstein. The indictment asserts that video footage showed no one else approaching Epstein’s cell for the rest of the night.

The indictment claims the two “sat at their desk” and “browsed the internet,” with Noel spending part of the night shopping for furniture while Thomas shopped for motorcycles and looked at sports news.

At one point, the indictment says both sat at their desks for two hours without moving, concluding that the guards had fallen asleep on duty.

Noel and Thomas then allegedly “repeatedly signed false certifications attesting to having conducted multiple counts of inmates when, in truth and in fact, they never conducted such accounts.”

Around 6:30 the next morning, Noel found Epstein’s body when delivering his breakfast. She then reportedly told a supervisor that they hadn’t completed their 3 a.m. and 5 a.m. rounds.

Thomas, however, said that they hadn’t done any of their rounds that night. 

“We messed up,” he said, then adding of Noel: “I messed up. She’s not to blame. We didn’t do any rounds.”

Following their Tuesday indictment, both guards were taken into custody. In federal court, they both pleaded not guilty to six different counts of record falsification after they rejected a plea deal where they would have admitted to the crime.

Shortly after their arrests, both were released on bail for $100,000 each. 

Arguments from Attorneys

During their hearing, Thomas’ attorney argued that the guards were being scapegoated.

“We feel this is a rush to judgment by the U.S. attorney’s office,” he said. “They’re going after the low man on the totem pole here.”

In a statement, U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman rejected such a conclusion and said the guards were being charged for breaking federal law.

“As alleged, the defendants had a duty to ensure the safety and security of federal inmates in their care at the Metropolitan Correctional Center [MCC],” he said. “Instead, they repeatedly failed to conduct mandated checks on inmates, and lied on official forms to hide their dereliction.”

See what others are saying: (NY1) (NBC News) (Heavy)

Advertisements
Continue Reading

U.S.

‘Meth. We’re on it’: South Dakota’s New Anti-Drug Campaign Met With Ridicule

Published

on

  • Officials in South Dakota launched an anti-meth campaign with the slogan “Meth. We’re on it,” which has been mocked and ridiculed online. 
  • Others have also called the motto “tone-deaf” to those impacted by the epidemic and have criticized the state for spending nearly $450,000 on the campaign ads.
  • However, South Dakota’s governor seems happy with the response, saying that the campaign is working because its mission is to get people talking about the issue.

South Dakota Is on Meth

South Dakota launched an anti-drug campaign on Monday with the highly criticized slogan: “Meth. We’re on it.” 

According to state records, South Dakota’s Department of Social Services paid a Minneapolis ad agency $448,914 for the campaign, which includes billboards, commercials, and social media photos that aim to raise awareness about the state’s growing meth epidemic

“South Dakota has a problem,” said a message on the campaign’s website, onmeth.com. “There isn’t a single solution because meth is widespread. But we can approach it from different angles, so it doesn’t take over counties, towns, neighborhoods. Let’s work together. Meth. We’re on it.”

As you might have seen all over social media by now, photos for the initiative include South Dakotans of various ages alongside the motto.

 A video for the campaign also features different South Dakotans saying “I’m on meth.”

State’s Meth Epidemic 

Drug addiction is actually a serious problem in the state. When announcing the initiative, officials said that in 2019, 83% of the state’s court admissions were specifically related to meth. On top of that, twice as many 12- to 17-year-olds reported using meth compared to the national average, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. 

The issue was one the Republican Governor Kristi Noem, the state’s first female governor, has promised to focus on. In the past, groups like the American Civil Liberties Union have criticized the state for relying heaving on the incarceration of drug users instead of investing in treatment. 

Last summer, the state asked companies to pitch them ideas for an aggressive marketing campaign to bring awareness to the meth epidemic, with the Minneapolis firm Broadhead winning the project and grabbing Noem’s attention.

According to a news release for the initiative, officials plan to combat the issue from a law enforcement standpoint by implementing meth task forces in areas known for the majority of the state’s arrests. 

Additionally, Gov. Noem requested more than $1 million in funding to support meth treatment services. The campaign’s website, onmeth.com, also promises to connect residents to preventative and treatment resources. 

Slogan Criticism 

Still, some people couldn’t get past the slogan. Though it was met with a slew of jokes, some also called the ad tone-deaf to the pain and devastation the epidemic has caused. Others fear that laughing at the issue could bring shame to those struggling with addiction. Meanwhile, many criticized the state for spending so much on the ads.

Bill Pearce, assistant dean at the University of California at Berkeley’s Haas School of Business, told The Washington Post that any sincere messaging by the governor was lost by an ad campaign that embodies “poor strategy and poor execution.”

“I can’t imagine this is what they intended to do; any good marketer would look at this and say: ‘Yeah, let’s not do that,’ ” Pearce told the paper. “I’m sure South Dakota residents don’t like being laughed at. That’s what’s happening right now.”

State Officials Double Down

However, it appears that officials are happy with the reactions they are getting online. In fact, state officials are suggesting that the motto was intentionally designed to be provocative. 

In a statement to The New York Times Monday night, Laurie Gill, the state’s secretary for the Department of Social Services said Governor Noem “wanted to do it in a way that got the attention of citizens.”

“We are looking for a way that would cause the citizens to stop, pay attention and understand that we do have a meth issue and that there are resources available.”

She added, “That was the tone going into it, looking for something that would be edgy and that would be able to cut through clutter in advertising and social media.”

“It’s sort of an irony between healthy South Dakotans, that probably very much aren’t meth users, saying ‘Meth. We’re on it.’ The point is everybody is affected by meth. You don’t have to be a user to be affected by meth. Everybody is.”

According to state records, the contract with the ad agency, signed in September, called for approximately $1.4 million to be spent on the campaign. According to Gill, the campaign was slated to run through May and the state could spend less than the total $1.4 million if it wanted to cut back on the campaign. But so far, officials are pleased with the response.

Governor Noem tweeted Monday, “the whole point of the campaign is to raise awareness. So I think that’s working.”

In a separate statement sent to media outlets, she called the initiative “a bold, innovative effort like the nation has never before seen.”

She then went on to make comments similar to her initial tweet saying, “South Dakota’s anti-meth campaign launch is sparking conversations around the state and the country. The mission of the campaign is to raise awareness — to get people talking about how they can be part of the solution and not just the problem. It is working.”

Some aren’t buying it. Professor Pearce told The Washington Post,  “There’s another trope that goes, ‘When they’re running you out of town, pick up a baton and pretend you’re leading the parade,’ ” he said. “That’s what this feels like.”

But others think the campaign is doing its job. 

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (Fox News)

Advertisements
Continue Reading

U.S.

Journalists Say Northwestern School Paper Should Not Have Apologized for Protest Coverage

Published

on

  • A Northwestern student paper apologized after activists critiqued it for covering a public protest.
  • Critics specifically focused on a reporter who tweeted photos from the protest, and other reporters using the school’s directory to contact sources.
  • Several outlets and journalists have spoken up saying student reporters should not have apologized for doing their jobs, as they were just doing what was required to cover the protest.
  • The Dean of Northwestern’s Journalism School has also defended the student reporters, saying they were following ethical standards and should not have to apologize for that.

Northwestern Paper Publishes Apology

Reporters are speaking out after a Northwestern University student newspaper apologized for how it covered a recent public protest. 

When former Attorney General Jeff Sessions spoke at the school’s campus on November 5, The Daily Northwestern sent reporters to cover his speech, as well as the protests surrounding it.

According to The New York Times, protesters were pushing through the back of the building. Police tried to stop them from entering but ultimately failed. This series of events was documented by one of the reporters, Colin Boyle, who is a photographer for The Daily. 

Some of the activists attending the protest disagreed with the paper’s coverage of the events, particularly the photography. Boyle posted his photos to Twitter in a move some found to be inappropriate. One student depicted in the photos referred to it as “trauma porn.”

After facing this backlash from protesters, The Daily published an editorial on Sunday largely apologizing for their coverage. 

“We recognize that we contributed to the harm students experienced, and we wanted to apologize for and address the mistakes that we made that night — along with how we plan to move forward,” the piece, signed by eight editors said. 

They also noted that some saw the photos taken to be “retraumatizing and invasive.”

“Those photos have since been taken down,” the editorial continued. “On one hand, as the paper of record for Northwestern, we want to ensure students, administrators and alumni understand the gravity of the events that took place Tuesday night. However, we decided to prioritize the trust and safety of students who were photographed.”

The piece also addressed student reporters using the student directory to contact sources for the article. They said they would no longer continue this practice because it is an “invasion of privacy” and promised to find a new way to reach out to sources. 

“Going forward, we are working on setting guidelines for source outreach, social media and covering marginalized groups,” the piece said.

Reporters Speak Out

This editorial ended up getting attention on both a local and national level. News outlets and journalists alike made comments saying that the student paper should not have published this piece because the student journalists were just doing their job.

“The Daily is apologizing for posting photographs of protesters at a public demonstration. In what world is that “invasive?” the Chicago Sun-Timeseditorial board said. “The real concern, for anybody who cares about the state of our free society, should be quite the opposite. The real concern should be the frequent efforts by government to keep journalists and protesters far apart to tamp down voices of dissent.”

They also defended students using the directory as a method to contact sources. 

“Requesting an interview, via text or any other polite means, is not an ‘invasion of privacy.’ Not even in the world of campus safe spaces,” the piece continued. “It’s a request for an interview, to which anybody can say no.”

Guy Benson, a Fox News contributor who got his degree from Northwestern spoke about the piece on a Wednesday segment of Fox and Friends. 

“It was sort of grovelingly apologetic for doing the sin of journalism,” he said. “They committed journalism by asking questions of students, contacting students for comment, publishing on the record quotes from people, and taking photographs of a public protest from a public event. And that is all just totally proper.” 

A Huffington Post news editor, Saba Hamedy, approached the situation from a sympathetic angle, calling it a learning opportunity.

Dean Responds

The Dean of Northwestern’s Medill School of Journalism, Charles Whitaker, published a statement of his own, defending the student’s right to report on the world around them and condemning others for pressuring them into apologizing for doing so.

“The coverage by The Daily Northwestern of the protests stemming from the recent appearance on campus by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was in no way beyond the bounds of fair, responsible journalism,” he wrote. “I am deeply troubled by the vicious bullying and badgering that the students responsible for that coverage have endured for the ‘sin’ of doing journalism.”

“It is naïve, not to mention wrong-headed, to declare, as many of our student activists have, that The Daily staff and other student journalists had somehow violated the personal space of the protestors by reporting on the proceedings, which were conducted in the open and were designed, ostensibly, to garner attention,” he continued.

As for The Daily’s editorial itself, he called it “heartfelt, though not well-considered.” 

“I understand why The Daily editors felt the need to issue their mea culpa. They were beat into submission by the vitriol and relentless public shaming they have been subjected to since the Sessions stories appeared,” he said. “I think it is a testament to their sensitivity and sense of community responsibility that they convinced themselves that an apology would effect a measure of community healing.”

The Other Side of the Aisle

Though, not everyone thought the apology was out of line. Some did think The Daily needed to address what happened. 

One student said this showed that journalists often “don’t care about people, they care about stories and headlines.”

Reporter Karen Kho pointed out that many reporters were getting upset about this industry-related situation, but don’t speak as much about other problems in the field of journalism, “such the lack of diversity in their newsrooms, declines in public trust, or how reporting can further hurt underrepresented communities.”

Others also pointed out the school’s history when it comes to protests.

What the Students Involved Are Saying

Some of the student journalists involved in the story also spoke about the events. 

Troy Closson, the paper’s editor in chief, published a Twitter thread partially justifying the editorial but also acknowledging over-correction.

He added that balancing this role with the knowledge that the paper has historically not treated students of color well has been a challenge. Closson said he appreciates people raising their voices about their coverage and said the staff is learning to navigate the space of being student journalists. 

Boyle spoke to The Washington Post about what was going through his mind as he took photos at the protests.

“These are my peers, these are people that I might have class with,” he told the paper. “If something happened, God forbid, I was the only camera that was non-police-owned in that area, to my knowledge.”

On Twitter, he said that he has reflected a lot on what it means to be a journalist. 

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (Chicago Tribune)

Advertisements
Continue Reading