|
|
#21
10-20-2004, 4:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Chris 
|
|
#22
10-21-2004, 8:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't listen to O'R or Savage, but not for reasons germain to this thread. To me it seems that there are two questions at hand:
* What happened? I.e. what did each do, if anything, in the whole mess? * Was any aspect of it, legally, sexual harassment? Her return to work for O'R suggests that the answer to the second question is, "No.", and suggests some degree of mutuality if there was anything to be mutual about. O'R's approach, avoiding direct comment and alleging extortion, suggests that some aspect of her complaint - not necessarily the sexual harassment claim - is real. His approach looks too much like WJC's dodge-and-divert tactics.
__________________
PeteS in CA The Sound of One Cricket Chirping Public opinion has most shallow eyes. - Euripides in "Medea" All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
#23
10-21-2004, 10:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Of course it goes to O'Reilly's credibility. When he does a show on sexual harassment, how believable will he be. I have watched him take an extremist position on some sexual issues. This may shed light on why that is. It seems to me like phone sex with the difference that he knew the person he was talking to. Of course his "moralist" stance seems kind of empty now.
|
|
#24
10-21-2004, 12:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Give the Liberal Richard Cohen some credit here. This woman comes off as a ditz. Wash Post
SOURCE The Nonsense Factor By Richard Cohen Thursday, October 21, 2004; Page A29 A psychotherapist years ago introduced me to the term "bear hug." I'm not sure anymore exactly how she defined it (and I don't think she originated it), but I've used it ever since to describe those situations where you are powerless to get out of someone's grip, causing anger and often rage. This, I think, helps explain the sexual harassment lawsuit leveled against Bill O'Reilly. The specifics of the lawsuit -- the actual complaint -- are all over the Internet, so I leave it to you to find the gamier allegations on your own. Suffice it to say that a woman named Andrea Mackris, who once was O'Reilly's associate producer, has accused her former boss of pressuring her to have telephone sex with him. She says O'Reilly repeatedly made these requests both in person and over the phone -- conversations she apparently recorded. She quotes O'Reilly verbatim. It's rough stuff. If the allegations are true, there is no excusing O'Reilly. He would not only be a sexual harasser but an old goat drunk with power. The picture painted by Mackris in her lawsuit is of a media figure who is so high on his fame that he thinks he is invincible. He told her he would destroy any woman who retaliated against him, she says. He is fearsome -- and Mackris says she did fear him. Still, she did not fear him so much that, after she had left O'Reilly's Fox News Channel show and gone to work at CNN, she wouldn't go to dinner with him. This happened after repeated episodes of the rawest sexual harassment, Mackris says. Yet, on April 13, 2004, "Defendant Bill O'Reilly asked Plaintiff Andrea Mackris to come watch the President's press conference on the television in his hotel room," Mackris's lawsuit says. And how did she respond? Mind you, she wasn't even working for O'Reilly at the time. She said, sure -- and went to the hotel room. "They watched the press conference without incident," the lawsuit says, and later Mackris returned to Fox and O'Reilly's show . . . for more money. In fact, in her telling of the tale, she got both a choice assignment and a salary increase because she was the object of O'Reilly's sexual fantasies. She is saying that a quid pro quo existed. It was not merely her manifest talents as a booker that won her that raise and that choice assignment. Let us dispense with the boilerplate denunciation of O'Reilly as an alleged pig and even more boilerplate about him being the all-powerful man and Mackris being the totally powerless woman. All of that could be true. It also seems true, though, that Mackris either skipped classes in common sense when she was at Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism or was playing O'Reilly like the proverbial violin. Whether Mackris was aware of her power is impossible for me to say. But I can say that she never went to Fox's human resources department to complain about O'Reilly. She never seemed to realize that by not complaining and, more specifically, by going to dinner with him, to his hotel room and then, upon returning to Fox News, accepting assignments and a salary increase not given to others, she was hardly telling O'Reilly that she found his behavior thoroughly repugnant, as she says in her lawsuit. I almost pity O'Reilly. Off camera, he must be a bit slow. Initially, I gleefully read about O'Reilly's troubles because, among other things, the man has taken my name in vain -- and inaccurately. But it was a young female television producer who suggested I write about this because, if I may paraphrase, lawsuits such as Mackris's infantilize women. They portray women totally as victims, without recourse or remedy at their disposal. It insults common sense. It rewrites nature. I can understand the rage of women subjected to the sort of sewer O'Reilly allegedly opened up on Mackris. If he did it, it is wrong -- just plain wrong. But it is also wrong for a woman to be even a bit complicit and then act as if she played no role whatsoever in the oldest game known to mankind. I can appreciate that Mackris was in an awful bear hug. But she screamed for help a bit late in the game.
|
|
#26
10-22-2004, 8:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
O'R lost me years ago with the populism stuff. Nevertheless, I won't be tuning in his program to find advice on improving my marriage.
__________________
PeteS in CA The Sound of One Cricket Chirping Public opinion has most shallow eyes. - Euripides in "Medea" All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
#27
10-24-2004, 3:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The NY Post is obviously spinning for O'Reilly. Both are owned by Rupert Murdoch. NY Post
HOW 'BUDDIES' ANDREA & BILL ENTERED THEIR TAILSPIN ZONE By HEATHER GILMORE SOURCE October 24, 2004 -- When Andrea Mackris was dumped by her fiancé in early 2002, her boss, cable-TV host Bill O'Reilly, took her out to dinner. No longer supported by her lawyer partner of eight years, Daniel Slatopolski, the hard-working and aggressive career woman needed a shoulder to cry on — and more money. "That was the real turning point for Andrea, she was really together before she got dumped, but her life was now falling apart," said one of Mackris' former co-workers and girlfriend of several years. "Bill was the only brick in her world — he grounded her — they had a close and special relationship." More than two years later, Mackris is locked in a bitter legal fight with O'Reilly, accusing him of sexual harassment in a sensational $60 million lawsuit. O'Reilly, the acid-tongued host of Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor," has claimed in his own suit that the associate producer is attempting to blackmail him. Former colleagues and close pals to Mackris, 33, say her suit is the culmination of several turbulent years, triggered by her breakup with her longtime boyfriend. She moved to New York from St. Louis in the late 1990s with Slatopolski — the first serious boyfriend she ever had, one pal said. He said the pair met while she was an undergrad at the University of Missouri and Slatopolski had just graduated from the university's law school. Mackris, who later graduated from Columbia's journalism school, has told pals the happiest day of her life was in early January 2000, when Slatopolski proposed, down on one knee and with a huge ring in his hand, at the trendy Nobu restaurant in TriBeCa. But the breakup two years later — characterized by one source as simply a case of two friends falling out of love — left her feeling isolated and lonely. "She never expected at the age of 31 to be single again and having to start over," one friend said. To ease the pain of the breakup, Mackris devoted herself to her work, driving herself harder and aiming higher. Her work relationship with O'Reilly, for whom she started working as an associate producer in April 2000, also grew as she gained more experience. But without Slatopolski in her life to help share the expenses of Manhattan living, bills started mounting up on Mackris. Soon after the breakup, she approached Fox Vice President Bill Shine for a raise, saying she would "no longer be able to afford to work" at Fox on her $56,000 salary, court papers say. "When she lived with Daniel, she always had the finest products, the best clothes . . . but when she went out on her own, she became aware of bills," another former work colleague said. Her college loans had been deferred and they were due, the former colleague said. Over dinner with O'Reilly, the host offered her a $9,000 raise — and a slew of advice, such as avoiding her ex-fiancé and to "attend charity events and meet men with credentials," Mackris said in her court papers. It was the first of many after-work meetings, in which O'Reilly spoke openly about his sexual exploits and made suggestive comments to her, she claims. In January of this year, the former colleague said Mackris asked her to put in a good word for her at the "Paula Zahn Now" show on CNN, saying her then-$73,000 salary at "The O'Reilly Factor" did not match her lifestyle, including rent on her Upper West Side apartment. Mackris took a job at CNN for just more than $90,000, but struggled to fit in. One CNN insider described her as "extremely high maintenance," while an acquaintance said, "She couldn't cope from Day One. Everything was high drama, and I never understood that. "Every night, she would call me crying. I'd say, 'Andrea, you've got to calm down!' " Within six months, Mackris was back at "The O'Reilly Factor," telling colleagues and friends she was happy to be "back home." A source told Page Six that Mackris was now $99,000 in the red, thanks to credit-card bills and student loans. She said in her legal papers that she agreed to return to Fox only if O'Reilly "no longer engaged in inappropriate conduct." The acquaintance, who finished at CNN just before Mackris started, said they were drinking at the Upper West Side restaurant Northwest after Mackris returned to Fox, when she confessed about a sexually explicit phone call made by O'Reilly to her home. "She said the phone call was brief . . . but she told me she was taking notes for the future." O'Reilly claims in his lawsuit that Mackris was trying to "extort millions" from him and Fox, which is owned by the same parent company as The Post. But a friend from Mackris' St. Louis days said, "I talked to her after she receive one of those calls from O'Reilly, and she said she was very upset." "I asked her, 'Why didn't you just hang up?' and she said, 'You don't hang up on Bill O'Reilly. If you did, you would be thrown out through the door and on your ear.' " But Mackris appeared to be enjoying her return to Fox just three weeks before first threatening the legal action, O'Reilly's suit says. When asked by a friend, "How are things?" Mackris replied in an e-mail, "To answer your question things are: wonderful . . . I'm home and I'll never leave again."
|
|
#28
10-25-2004, 8:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Olbermann Offers $99,000 For O'Reilly Sex Tapes
Keith Olbermann is offering Andrea Mackris $99,000. "If she really wants to fight this, and only needs seed money to keep the legal challenge going, I'm willing to stand up and help her -- and help history," he writes. "I'll pay off her $99,000 in debts." He wants a copy of the tapes, of course. "I've got a check for $99,000 here as a plea from the future," he concludes. "Save the tapes! Save the tapes! Save the tapes!" Source: http://mediabistro.com/tvnewser/
|
|
#29
10-28-2004, 5:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Settled
Drat-Now we will never know the juicy details. Yahoo http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/041028/286128_1.html Press Release Source: Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Statement from Ronald Green, Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. Thursday October 28, 6:41 pm ET NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 28, 2004--The Parties regret that this matter has caused tremendous pain, and they have agreed to settle. All cases and claims have been withdrawn and all Parties have agreed that there was no wrongdoing whatsoever by Mr. O'Reilly, Ms. Mackris, or Ms. Mackris' counsel, Benedict P. Morelli & Associates. We now withdraw any assertion that any extortion by Ms. Mackris, Mr. Morelli, or Morelli & Associates occurred. Out of respect for their families and privacy, all Parties and their representatives have agreed that all information relating to the cases shall remain confidential. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact: John Pope, 212-351-4641 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Epstein Becker & Green, P.C.
|
|
#34
10-29-2004, 10:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
NOW, $HUT UP!
NOW, $HUT UP!
By DAREH GREGORIAN October 29, 2004 -- TV talk-show host Bill O'Reilly and accuser Andrea Mackris buried the hatchet last night, settling their dueling extortion and sexual-harassment lawsuits. Financial terms weren't disclosed, but it's believed O'Reilly — and O'Reilly alone — paid multimillions of dollars. "This matter has caused enormous pain but I had to protect my family and I did," the married father of two said at the top of last night's "O'Reilly Factor," his Fox News Channel show on which he's known for telling guests to "shut up." "This brutal ordeal is now officially over, and I will never speak of it again." Outside her Manhattan apartment, a relieved Mackris said, "I'm glad it's over." As for charges that she and her lawyer tried to extort O'Reilly and his bosses out of $60 million, and that he harassed her with bizarre phone conversations about vibrators and rubbing her naked body with a loofah, O'Reilly's lawyer said no harm, no foul. "All parties have agreed that there was no wrongdoing whatsoever by Mr. O'Reilly, Ms. Mackris, or Ms. Mackris' counsel, Benedict P. Morelli & Associates," the lawyer, Ron Green, said in a statement. "Out of respect for their families and privacy," the deal will stay confidential, he said. A likely condition of the settlement is that any audiotapes Mackris may have of the O'Reilly o'raunchiness never see the light of day. Lawyer Suzanne Bracker, who's not involved with the case, said the deal likely includes a clause that if Mackris releases any tapes "she would have to pay back what ever money she gets," as well as other penalties. While her harassment case against O'Reilly was weak and the tapes could exonerate the lively loudmouth from charges he did anything illegal, the p.r. value of suppressing them probably resulted in her getting a multimillion dollar deal, Bracker said. "She must have gotten a lot of money," she said. The settlement statement did not mention the Fox News Channel, which had filed suit with O'Reilly against Mackris and was named as a defendant with O'Reilly by Mackris. That means the network was likely not involved in the deal. A spokeswoman for Fox declined comment. It's unclear whether Mackris, who worked as a producer for O'Reilly, will remain with Fox, which, like The Post, is owned by News Corp. Mackris, 33, first went to work for O'Reilly, 55, in May 2002. Her suit said he started making off-color remarks to her almost immediately, and they got worse when she went back to work for him after a brief stint at CNN earlier this year. "You would basically be in the shower and then I would come in and I'd join you and you would have your back to me and I would take that little loofah thing and kinda' soap up your back . . . rub it all over you," her suit quotes him as saying in one after-hours phone call. During last night's show, O'Reilly said the case has "made me the object of media scorn from coast to coast," and thanked viewers for their support. "All I can say to you is please do not believe everything you hear and read," he said. Source: http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/31330.htm
|
|
#35
10-30-2004, 1:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
NY's latest millionaire. NY Post
THE O'SMILEY FACTOR By DAREH GREGORIAN October 30, 2004 -- Fresh off settling her loofah-licious sex-harassment lawsuit with TV talker Bill O'Reilly, New York's newest multimillionaire really splurged yesterday — buying a large coffee at Starbucks. A happy-looking Andrea Mackris, 33, treated herself to the $3 cup of joe yesterday even though she's just joined the ranks of the unemployed. A Fox News Channel spokesman said yesterday Mackris "is no longer employed by Fox News." The very early retirement announcement came one day after Mackris and O'Reilly worked out a multimillion big-bucks deal to end their dueling harassment and extortion suits. Mackris made $73,000 a year from FNC for her work on O'Reilly's hit TV news-talk show, as well as $20,000 a year from Westwood One for her work on his radio show. Mackris went to work for O'Reilly and the network in May 2002. In a sensational — and now-defunct — lawsuit, the producer said the "O'Reilly Factor" host harassed her with off-color remarks, including comments about soaping her with a loofah. She said the obnoxiousness began after she went back to work for him this past July following a brief stint at CNN. Instead of filing a harassment complaint with her bosses, Mackris and her lawyer threatened to sue the network for $600 million unless they ponied up $60 million, leading to the suits — and then Thursday's peace deal. The details are secret. Mackris, who's believed to have gotten millions directly from O'Reilly in the settlement, looked relaxed when she emerged from her Upper West Side apartment yesterday. Dressed in black pants and a black shirt and sporting a cheering pink jacket, Mackris, who O'Reilly's side had contended was $100,000 in debt, picked up her pricey pick-me-up before hailing a cab. Money can't buy everything, however — she had to wait several minutes for a taxi as news photographers and TV cameras captured her every move. Mackris — who said she's considering a vacation but doesn't know where to go — was giggling at the attention, and said she's "not used to" it.
|
|
#37
10-30-2004, 4:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
What a coward and a con. He get's up on his radio show saying he was taking a stand when this stuff first started, and look how it has turned out.
Loser with a capital L. I think it's time David gets a new alias with O'Reilly on it.
|
Linear Mode
