ESPN Reporter shows her true inner beauty
ParticleMan said:
project37 said:
This seems like outrage for the sake of it. It's gross behavior, but what about politicians who do far worse and get away with it? How many times has our Governor spoken to constituents like this? Why does that get a pass, yet everyone is demanding that a private sector employee lose her job for being a jerk?
Everyone will forget about it by Monday, anyway.
I don't think the Governor gets a pass from most people here. But yes, this will be forgotten in a few days. And we'll still have Governor Blowhard.
Most people here, sure. But it doesn't seem to stick as far as media coverage goes. Instead it's "he's something else, huh?"
j_r said:
Maybe think of it this way: What is the outcome that is wanted here? Schadenfreude is understandable, but it isn't constructive.
You must be much more evolved than I. The idea that this woman "gets taught a lesson" is very appealing to me. And if it means losing her high profile job at ESPN for being a horrid individual, so be it.
ParticleMan said:
Just... because.
Even that tweet: "Take the high road and be nice to people." I guess being nice is taking the high road. Clueless in spite of her vast education.
Education and decency can't have a statistically significant correlation.
j_r said:
Again, I'm not defending the reporter's behavior. Making the video public was disproportionate retaliation, and reflects poorly on the person who did it. Calling for the reporter's dismissal is excessive.
Agree. The reporter's behavior was beyond the pale. But how vindictive do you have to be to call the local news station with this?
http://nypost.com/2015/04/17/espn-reporters-twitter-crucifixion-takes-a-surprising-twist/
Read the "apology" that's not really an apology. Here it is.
In an intense and stressful moment, I allowed my emotions to get the best of me and said some insulting and regrettable things. As frustrated as I was, I should always choose to be respectful and take the high road. I am so sorry for my actions and will learn from this mistake.
When you apologize for being cruel or saying mean and terrible things, for insulting someone, shouldn't you apologize to the person you hurt. Shouldn't you show some remorse. Shouldn't you show at least some concern for the person you wronged.
This was a shallow excuse, to save her job. Nothing more.
She is a tv personality. She works at the pleasure of those who watch her. It's all about likability and ratings. If no one is willing to watch her then, she is not doing her job, which is to attract viewers. I wouldn't watch her after this, would you ?
I have done some things I am not proud of, but in my entire life, I don't think I have ever been this cruel to anyone.
The NYPost article above gives the impression that the towing company is not completely innocent in this. I wonder if the entire video was given to the new or if it was an edited version?
As far as I can tell, the video, which has been heavily edited, wasn't "given to the news" but was shopped around for almost two weeks, until it was picked up by LiveLeak, a "reality" site known for shock content.
The full CC video wouldn't show cuts that highlight the reporter's words and omit most of the attendant's. There is no context for what led up to the exchange (other than that a car was towed). Based on the reporter's tweet linked below, the incident seems to have taken place on April 5, and the video didn't start to go viral until now. Many versions of the video now online are hosting advertising. I'm admittedly connecting some dots.
https://twitter.com/BrittMcHenry/status/585084036600692736
Its seems people have been raiding the "Who gives a *****" news file.
j_r said:
Why should she lose her livelihood for being inexcusably rude? Where should public shaming stop?
She is the face of the network when the camera is pointing at her. She represents them. She's not there because of her degree or experience. She is there to look good and attract viewers. She is no longer capable of fulfilling this role. If they want to keep her in an off-camera role, that is their prerogative.
j_r said:
Again, I'm not defending the reporter's behavior. Making the video public was disproportionate retaliation, and reflects poorly on the person who did it. Calling for the reporter's dismissal is excessive.
Wow, I don't agree with you at all. The reporter was not just rude. Rudeness would be not looking the clerk in the eye, talking on the phone during the transaction, throwing the money at her . . . that sort of thing. Anyone—even people of good character— can display rudeness. This woman was more than rude. She was downright evil. The clerk had nothing to do with the reporter's car getting towed. Yet the reporter felt like she had to put down the clerk to offset the anger and lack of control she felt when her car was towed and she had to go to what was likely a sketchy neighborhood to retrieve it. She displayed zero emotional intelligence, zero character, and zero equanimity. She also didn't seem to understand the potential consequences when she was told she was being videotaped. I wouldn't want someone like that working in my newsroom.
j_r said:
The full CC video wouldn't show cuts that highlight the reporter's words and omit most of the attendant's. There is no context for what led up to the exchange (other than that a car was towed). Based on the reporter's tweet linked below, the incident seems to have taken place on April 5, and the video didn't start to go viral until now. Many versions of the video now online are hosting advertising. I'm admittedly connecting some dots.
I think you are probably stretching it quite a bit. For one thing, it's the web sites that buy advertising space, so I think you are making that connection entirely incorrectly. A site can opt to pick up the video hoping to attract viewers, but that really isn't linked with ads that appear on the same site. People don't buy or sell ads to go with specific stories; more likely, those ads are there because of the demographics of people who like to watch those videos, based on the statistics the site compiles for its advertisers.
The reporter's true inner beauty does show up to me to be mean, nasty insecure and it's you not me. I must be watching too many Frasier reruns. I still have hope that the rest of us will not completely condemn her. It may very well be her defense mechanism. I also hope she outgrows it.
PeggyC said:
I think you are probably stretching it quite a bit. For one thing, it's the web sites that buy advertising space, so I think you are making that connection entirely incorrectly. A site can opt to pick up the video hoping to attract viewers, but that really isn't linked with ads that appear on the same site. People don't buy or sell ads to go with specific stories; more likely, those ads are there because of the demographics of people who like to watch those videos, based on the statistics the site compiles for its advertisers.
She makes so interesting points. My son said that Britt is , at least to him, lovely soft spoken and sweet. The video was heavily edited and even the towing company doesn't want her to lose her job.I'm not defending her bad behavior but trying to understand it.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/17/opinions/drexler-espn-reporter-britt-mchenry/
what's also troubling is how quickly and gleefully the rest of us issued blame on McHenry without fully knowing -- or, it seems, caring about -- the other side of the story.
j_r said:
What I'm asking is, what is the appropriate punishment here, and who should mete it out? Without defending the reporter's behavior I submit that the attendant who made the video public behaved badly. (
She was TOLD that she was being taped. AND she is so much more educated (and attractive, too)... I think your sympathies are misplaced
Well, it's legit to ask who benefited, but you implied that the attendant had been shopping it around to try to sell to the highest bidder. That cannot be the case unless I'm missing a LOT in your explanation. Do you know for a fact that the attendant got any money for it? I'm not saying it's impossible, but where's the evidence?
I'm not trying to be mean, and I don't want the woman pilloried (or even fired, necessarily), but I think you're working too hard to defend her.
What "other side of the story" can there be when someone publicly denigrates a cashier for having no teeth, being overweight, and working a low-wage job?
No, we don't, but wouldn't you expect that maybe by this time the reporter would have responded somehow to explain herself? Or has she, and I missed it? That is always possible...
True, but I can think of several reasons why she might not (desire to let it die, ESPN desire to let it die, no desire to get into a tit-for-tat, lawyer advice, lawyers planning next steps, etc, etc).
I thought about the possibility that her employer and their legal department might have told her to shut up. But we'll never know. Maybe they are waiting to see if it will die down of its own accord.
Respond to the folks who are criticizing her. Respond to the video, possibly to say, "Hey, that's not right! Here's why..."
Rentals
-
Huge Brand New construction Apartment in 2 family home with 4 bedrooms 3 bathrooms
4 Bd | 3Full Ba
$4,500
For Sale
-
REVO luggage $100
More info
I don't think the Governor gets a pass from most people here. But yes, this will be forgotten in a few days. And we'll still have Governor Blowhard.