Fox News is a disgusting organization that spewed sewage on TV from the day it went on the air. Murdoch's newspapers in Australia and Britain are sewage and then we stupidly allowed this dirt and hate monger to establish media in the US. Look at the hideous women assaulters he hired and promoted -- Ailes, Shine, O'Reilly and look at who is one of their biggest consumers of sewage and spewers of same -- the repellant female assaulter Trump.
It's a rotten organization and the rot begins at the top with Murdoch and his ugly evil family.
116
And yet he continues to appear on Sean Hannity's Fox News show.
52
Any decent female who find this alpha male behavior unaccptable should boycott advertisers on O’Reilly’s show. Put the advertisers on notice and follow thru. Money talks! It did before in South Africa.
44
Obviously, his show was worth a lot more than $32 million to Fox. In their usual right wing holier than thou thinking, they excuse the sexual harassment because he was able to reach millions of people with his rabble-rousing lies and half-truths. These are the same holier than thou right-wing Christians who voted for a man who was a twice-divorced philander who bragged about grabbing women by the genitals, barging into dressing rooms of nude teenage pageant aspirants, and treating women like excrement. Instead of shunning him, they voted him into the highest office in the land. Why shouldn't O'Reilly be on TV if he brings in the almighty dollar. Only a bunch of immoral fools don't see any problem with this.
89
$32 Million makes me wonder if there was physical assault, in which case, police ought to have been called. This is the most disturbing element to me: there are wealthy predators who can't be named due to payouts. They continue to assault women. And others have proof! But men like Ailes, Weinstein, and O'Reilly are getting away with it. They need to be arrested and tried in a court of law. If found guilty, then they need to do jail time.
60
It’s old news that Fox News has a culture of sexual harassment and misogyny. Fox News is the mouthpiece and echochamber for Trump who attacks any other media source as”fake” and unfair.
The real story is why are fair minded and conscientious Americans not boycotting Fox News.
45
Whatever happened to O'Reilly's recent book about ethics and morality aimed at children? That was a real book, actually published. Has the publisher been laughed out the business? Are stacks of unsold copies being used to feed some of our internationally renowned tire fires?
Shouldn't all of Fox News be roped off as a crime scene?
61
Bravo to the NYTimes for unearthing the facts behind O'Reilly's settlements, in this article and the one earlier this year. Journalism and public service at their very best.
56
Now read Lupita Nyong’o: Speaking Out About Harvey Weinstein to get an account of how it feels to be harassed by one of these celebrity bullies. Of course it feels pretty similar to being harassed and made to feel powerless by anyone who wishes to have power over you.
10
Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, Trump, Roger Ailes, O'Reilly.
What have these all in common? They're men. Humans are animals too and would have died out long ago if men did not make passes at women.
The hysterical self appointed PC police should visit a farm and get an education in biology. See how the bulls, boars, and roosters, act toward the cow, sows, and hens. The whole sexual harassment story is just a continuation of male bashing that has been going on since feminism went main stream in the 1960s and 1970s. Women go to great lengths (hair perfume, make up, nail polish, completely unfunctional clothes and shoes, jewelry) all for the purpose of being attractive. And then get upset when a guy responds?
9
Well, that explains why he always peddled on his show her silly books. And why she was on his show in the first place.
But c'mon ... 15 years of "non-consensual sexual relationship?" How is that even possible? Lis Weihl is a big girl and made the choice to stay in the relationship in exchange for access to powerful forum. He obviously paid her off to not air unsavory details pertaining to his sex life. Very ugly all around.
18
I cannot believe this man was left out of the cabinet.
72
Harassment or rape should not be legally settled out of court. There should be no NDA agreements. There should be no hush money or documents hushing the crimes whatsoever. Until our nation supports women, these horrific men will continue to be predators.
37
What was the name of the O'Reilly program? The Yes Spin Zone?
6
Where there's smoke there's fire. O'Reilly's actions caught up with him in terms of his job; perhaps the law will also catch up with him and put him away. Same for Weinstein. Same for Trump. Same for anyone else who takes advantage of others with aggressive and unwanted sexual advances. And, holier-than-though folks like the Murdochs are complicit and equally responsible.
26
Very proud of my friend for standing up to O'Reilly and making him pay and pay and pay.
20
O'Reilly 's warped and deviant mind will trot out outlandish and lame excuses on Monday to try and explain away his mental illness like Trump.
Blame the media first and foremost.
How dare they publish all these sexual accusations by different women and the multi-millions of dollars shelled out by Fox.
A network that provides a safe harbor for perverts to thrive who also are seen by aging viewers as champions fighting against left-wing causes.
O'Reilly is also a discredited journalist and beat his wife, and those facts can't be white washed either with a Trumpism defense - deny, deny, deny and keep casting blame.
40
This example offers proof to the thesis that to Rupert Murdoch, the first and overwhelming assessment goes to the earnings produced, instead of the character of the individual.
Thus we see why a British authority questions whether a Rupert Murdoch entity is "fit and proper" to acquire a British national treasure organization.
Perhaps it is time for more in the US to question whether Fox News is "fit and proper" enough to be trusted as a source of their news.
19
All the moral indignation, the outrage, the intelligent and sensitive comments is simply palaver. All these righteous comments are right of course, but they don't change a thing. Maybe they make the writers feel good. Nothing changes as a result of these wise comments. It would be great if somehow there could be a forum, with power, that could read all the comments, have a discussion and that take some action. So, all the wise people making comments here, what would you do to punish O'Reilly, Weinstein, Trump? Wast justice would you mete out to make things right?
2
It is a sad state when Bill O'Reilly continues to find support in the media industry. He is all that is wrong with it.
25
i really feel awful for him. woops - i meant to type 'falafel'
7
looks to me after reviewing videos and their history together like a mutually agreed set-up of fox news by both parties
4
Not true.
11
A thirty two million dollar payout is a stunningly enormous sum, even by today’s gaudy standards. He must have tied her up with handcuffs and ropes.
11
What? A right wing heterosexual male sexual predator? Can't be!! I am outraged. Still, the gullibles and the evangelicals will support them out of fear of change to the status quo.
18
I hope The Times will make as big a deal out of this as they have with Weinstein. Actively seek revelations from dozens of women who have been harassed and assaulted by O'Reilly and Ailes over a period of decades. And as with Weinstein be sure to make hay out of their right wing political affiliations. And how they were enabled by colleagues in the ultra-right culture of misogyny.
13
I NEVER watch Fox.
Thus I NEVER see advertising on Fox affiliates...by the same principal, I no longer watch Bill Cosby...
Perhaps I'm prejudiced, as a survivor of a serial pedophile, (circa '62), but, although i feel like I'm watching some kind of morbid group 'O, bestiaries in the process, it's, (cynically...), fascinating to watch all these 'conservative_xian' folks whine about gay marriage, abortion, contraception, cohabitation, takin', a knee, etc., while, apparently / allegedly....they CAN'T keep their hands / other appendages away from their coworkers!!
They DON'T seem to understand-/-accept that 'NO', in fact, means...'NO'!
9
No-a-days everybody’s crazy but O’Reilly, Trump, Weinstein, Kelly & Cosby. Clearly, it’s a man’s world...
3
I have read NYT reports on law practices in countries like Afghanistan, wherein the victim's family often would accept 'Blood' money (or similar financial settlement) to drop a case against the perpetrator of the crime. It makes me wonder - How is O'Reilly's 'Settlement' any different ? And then, Fox thinks the man is clean as a whistle post 'Settlement'. Even in Afghanistan the perpetrator and his family carry a stigma after the 'Blood' money type settlement.
5
What interests me most is the difference in treatment that is meted out to the Hollywood harasser, Weinstein, by the both liberals and conservatives (he lost his job) and the treatment meted out to harasser, O'Reilly, by conservatives (he lost his job for a very short time and then was rehired with a salary of $25M).
The conservatives were commenting like crazy about Weinstein and how he represented the liberal media and politicians. However, they did not make the same comments about their conservative darling, O'Reilly, and conservative politicians. And O'Reilly gets his job back.
Conservatives have no real respect for women. None at all. There are so many other stories of sexual harassers on the right that are similar. After all, it was the right that knowingly put a sexual harasser on the Supreme Court. The conclusion of these
stories highlights the hypocrisy of the right more than anything else.
19
What is sexual harassment.
That is the problem.
Were all of the men in Mad Men guilty of sexual harassment.
How about many of the women.
See the problem.
1
No, I don't see the problem. Sexual harassment is pretty clearly defined in the law. It's not ambiguous.
20
This news about Bill O'Reiily is very disturbing but I do miss his program on Fox News. I am in no way condoning what he did but he gave away a lot of money to charitable causes and raised millions for the Wounded Warriors project. He will be judged accordingly when he leaves this planet as will we all. It does not make his behavior any less immoral but at least it must be pointed out the little bit of good he did accomplish here on earth.
I still watch Fox as they are one of the few cable networks that report the issues from both sides of the aisle. The MSNBC and CNN networks only present a very liberal bias in their reporting which I find difficult to watch. Fox News is still highly rated and watched by many Americans. They are still doing something right in their reporting to keep their viewers.
2
Could someone suggest where I might find a job, behave abominably and get fired. and then get a $25 million payout?
9
Wow, what horrific thing did O'Reilly do to her that it took $32 million bucks to shut her up?
7
Fox News is a joke. Fox is the operative word, not news. How can anyone take the channel seriously after this.
The level of corruption described is beyond the pale and hard to believe, if it had not been documented.
It shows that Fox News and perhaps media more widely is driven by money motives, not reporting the news. This is as fake news as it gets.
Sexual harassment and bullying in the workplace aside, the larger question: how did anyone, men or women tolerate a culture so lacking in professionalism? Women being used as pawns in a power game? They would get plum assignments and boat loads of money, including large settlements after the fact, in return for sexual favors?
It also begs a question why any women worth their journalistic salt would put up with a culture that valued money and power, and ratings over journalistic and personal integrity. Was the pay so great at Fox that it was worth sleeping with boss, against their own will?
But then again, take a look at any Fox News line up currently, and you see grown white men, in suits, chatting up scantily clad grown babes in high heels, with too much make up and you can’t help but wonder, why are these people dressed like that?
Maybe it’s time to put Hannity in skimpy shorts and a tank top on and Tucker Carlson in a leather outfit. That most certainly would make the news go into spin cycle!
13
On both sides, it all comes down to the mighty Dollar!
6
As Hawkeye said on MASH, "Time wounds all heels."
9
It's as if both O'Reilly and Mr. Trump get rewarded for disrespectful (and beyond) behavior regarding women. At least Mr. O'Reilly lost his job.
12
it's a shame that so many sexual abusers are able to hide and then prosper while practicing their vile offenses. This is an issue that American men have been avoiding for hundreds of years.
Women have been too intimidated or too embarrassed to speak out, usually too intimidated. When a woman did speak out, she was reviled as if she were the perpetrator, not he.
Now that more women are feeling empowered to speak about being sexually assaulted by a man, perhaps some real reform will occur. Sadly, it will likely affect how many rich celebrities are accused, but it will probably not assist the millions of women in everyday life who are victims.
7
Many here have expressed moral outrage against sexual harassment and assault by men in high places better than I could. I saw one idea, though, that attacks from a different, perhaps in ways more powerful perspective: Hold the businesses accountable. The idea that management and board members didn’t know about what O’Reillly, Ailes, Weinstein and others were up to is a cruel joke.
Prosecutors should examine bringing cases of misprision (allowing) of felony. Personal injury advocates could consider civil lawsuits, which, as in the case of O.J. Simpson, resulted in huge settlements even though criminal charges failed.
Owners and top management seem willing to look the other way on this stuff, hoping it won’t be made public and bring bad publicity. They might behave differently when they start to envision going to jail.
8
Sexual predation was long sanctioned by the leadership at Fox. Indeed, it was a perk for those males at the top. As long as the advertising money rolled in, anything and everything was ok, just the cost of doing a very lucrative business. The women either accepted it to keep their jobs and careers, or managed to extract settlements if they were courageous and willing to accept substantial risks to their livelihood and reputations.
Even if the settlements were kept secret, women still had to share their most private experiences with the numerous people involved in processing their legal cases. They had to re-experience their trauma, their relative powerlessness, and their sense of shame and guilt. No one should suffer that ordeal, and the reward, however large, is still insufficient compensation.
It's debatable whether NDA's involving sexual abuse and harassment settlements should be legal (I favor whatever works best for victims). But, as a matter of civil rights, corporate boards should be required to recognize the settlement and take substantial and appropriate corrective action, including sanctions for perpetrators. Federal oversight should continue to aggressively monitor corporate governance, and not be weakened by Trump's apparent efforts to pick compliant federal prosecutors.
6
Dear NYT,
I think others might have asked, but I want to say that you are muddying the waters without using clear terms here.
Please define a "nonconsensual sexual relationship" with a grown woman . I'm a grown woman who doesn't understand the difference between that and rape, the latter being a crime which should be prosecuted.
18
Am I the only one thinking there's just way too much money in corporate media? The network structure needs some disruptive technology to flatten their spread sheets. Something like Municipal WiFi; Community based broadcasting. Just set a live camera feed on a soap box in downtown Anywhere.
Why do people pay to watch Bill O' foam at the mouth?
7
I find it ludicrous that men continue to state that the slightest scent of harassment against them will get them fired. Clearly that is rarely the case even after years of egregious offenses. Even after losing cases and paying out millions O'Reilly is still employable - does that tell what kind of network Fox News is? How any women can watch this network is beyond me.
15
A PITHY COMMENT
It is all mine that “name in town!”
You may complain, or claw, or clown,
or even try to knock me down
if that’s your mission,
but factor this: I do not mind
to spin, and slam, and kick behind—
until you are indeed opined…
into submission!
from "Yea!
2
Bill O' Reilly should have run to occupy the Oval Office in the White House occupied by John F. Kennedy, William J. Clinton and Donald J. Trump.
What a dunce!
4
Is this guy really worth it? Seriously.
8
We need to put all of these sexual predators on trial, and then put them in JAIL. Women who were victimized by these disgusting creeps deserve nothing less!
15
O'Reilly is a poster child for Fox. It's a festering sump of felons, liars. hypocrites, misogynists and racists. But it sells ads and that's all that matters. If enough people boycott the advertisers on O'Reilly's show, that will get the attention of the Murdochs. Lord knows nothing else will.
27
He was fired so there's no show to boycott
4
A PITHY COMMENT
It is all mine that “name in town!”
You may complain, or claw, or clown,
or even try to knock me down
if that’s your mission,
but factor this: I do not mind
to spin, and slam, and kick behind—
until you are indeed opined…
into submission!
from "Yea!"
1
Spare me. Ms Wiehl puts herself out as this smart, Harvard-educated lawyer and she silently puts up with harassment and rape for 15 years and doesn't say anything? She's willing to sell out her dignity and integrity for 32 million bucks. I have no respect for this poseur.
14
O'Reilly was willing to sell his soul for 32+ million over multiple women. She is entitled to all that and whatever else she can claw out of him. To act as though money sullies her integrity while disregarding anything O'Reilly has done is truly amazing.
15
Lacking respect for her is beside the point.
5
Fox "News" rehiring a famous sex offender! Roger Ailes is still alive in spirit.
9
32 million!!! I am sure the girls being hit are the hot girls. It isn’t fair that only hot woman get the harassment money! Guys, and woman of age, and woman of little beauty, get nothing. Sexual harassment is discriminatory.
2
Certainly...and so is Fox as those are the only kind of women they hire (attractive) so that's who O'Reilly has access to...lucky him for what Fox "provides" him.
2
Patriarchy is alive and well. And it refuses to be dismantled. Is it a human problem or a male problem? Would women do so poorly if they were in charge of the world? Wars, famine, environmental degradation, rape and murder... Something went terribly wrong when males took over thousands of years ago.
10
Just don’t watch him
2
anyone who can give you $32 M to shut up, could easily spend $10 M to ruin your life.
pretty scary
15
Why is it that a man without millions to pay out to a victim is a rapist, while a man who can dip into a convenient bank account to pay hush money is merely a family man who had "non-consensual sex" (aka "rape") with his victim?
Is this yet another example of how money buys you a get-out-of-jail-free card?
24
Yes Allison, yes it is.
8
In an unending stream of stories and op-eds about powerful serial sexual predators in the workplace using their power in which sexual favors would be rewarded with career advancement, one story has so far received minimal attention. The New York Post recently ran a piece in which the actor, Corey Feldman, told of how he and his late friend, Corey Haim were child actors who, Mr. Feldman said, were victims of predatory pedophiles. Further, Mr. Feldman has said that pedophilia is rampant in the entertainment industry. Mr. Feldman had made these same accusation years ago, most notably on TV on "The View" where he had an exchange with Barbara Walters.
Having exposed Bill O'Reilly, Roger Ailes and Harvey Weinstein and opening the door to a national cultural cancer in the American workplace well beyond Hollywood, it seems that Mr. Feldman's pleas for attention to what is an even more serious crisis that comes on the heels of the pedophilia scandal in the Catholic Church (It is painful to mention the Church as I am an admirer of the faith if not always the faithful) is not receiving the attention that its seriousness mandates. I hope the New York Times has or will launch an investigation into what seems like an epidemic in pedophilia that knows no boundaries.
8
Oh the terrible persecution of the innocent! Of course showing up in court and proving the nine yards of horse menudo you are trying to sell would help your case, but what about "your family?" Right. That is as lame and transparent an excuse ever offered by somebody as guilty as sin. Believe me, the family knows about it and will be hearing about it forever.
8
I'm looking forward to the fair and balanced coverage of this story on Faux.
And I'm equally certain that CNN in order to be 'fair' and show bothsidism - will figure a way to tie the O'Reilly story to the Clintons. Just watch
4
Just watch for all the "whatabout" comments to deflect his behavior or the appropriate consequences.
1
There was always something "off" about O'Reilly. Smug and self-adoring, his wattles flapping, he distorted and lied on his show with casual impunity, his superior attitude a cover for his depravity.
But the real sickness here is Fox News, the Enabler. A network that lies about virtually everything - watching it even briefly can make your jaw drop at the sheer volume of venom and distortion their hosts cram into every segment - one wonders how they have lasted so long. But then you remember that there is an small but potent audience eager for this slop, and Mr. Murdock is happy to exploit it. Sean Hannity, puffed up and bloated in his too-tight suits, it seems to me, will be the next one on the chopping block.
19
Y'gotta wonder, was the non-consensual sex, continuous innuendo, forced unwanted attention really worth all that hush money? Not to normal folks, surely, but to ultra-rich industry rock stars, for whom millions is nothing and power over others is everything, I guess it makes sense. Until it doesn't, when the chickens come home to roost, and their lives, and those of their persevering loved ones, are ruined by their cynical hubris.
1
Mr. Murdoch, the Buck stops with you. Clean house. Lincoln said that a hypocrite is a man who murdered both his parents and then pleaded for mercy on the grounds that he was an orphan.
11
We already knew all that we needed to know about O'Reilly. What this article reveals is that Rupert Murdock and his sons, who own and control the Fox Networks, are precisely the types of immigrants that should be rounded up, stripped of their citizenship, and sent back to their native countries. They and their businesses are degrading our country and this O'Reilly example is only one of many that the New York Times has documented.
10
To me the real question is why did the Today show give this guy free advertising time for his new book? The man clearly functioned as a sexual predator despite his transparent claims of a witch hunt. Giving him air time only implies there is doing about the claims against him, no one pays our the kind of money involved to hush up an empty claim.
7
Another perfect example of rich people can get away with anything.
Just pay people for your personal crimes, flaws, failures and perversions.
The rest of us, we go to jail.
9
Great reporting.
This is what real journalism is about.
5
This story underlines a fact about for-profit business that few Americans understand. For-profit corporations are inherently amoral. They exist for no other reason than to make money for stockholders, and to streamline the process for marrying investment capital with business opportunity. This is the heart of our capitalist economic engine that has given Americans the highest sustained standard of living in history, and is thus a good thing for Americans, but unregulated, it provides zero motivation for ethical behavior on the institutional level, no matter how well-meaning individuals may be.
Unregulated, this system encourages executive decision-making that benefits the powerful at the expense of our social fabric, our environment and the security of the vulnerable among us.
In the case of sexual abuses, there are many regulatory paths that would improve things. One example would be to ensure access to the courts for victims by the elimination of mandatory arbitration clauses.
A GOP congress and president will never take these steps, and in fact, has eroded existing protections. If the American people want to curtain sexual domination by the powerful, only a Democratic government will do it.
16
The truth of OReilly's conduct lies in the fact that his/Fox's lawyers demanded destruction of all evidence (text messages, emails, etc) as part of the deal. If he did nothing, why destroy everything that proves he did?
As for the Murdochs, they remind me of the Bond villain in Tomorrow Never Dies, one of the more boring yet realistic villains as a media mogul seeking to influence every person on the Earth through his twisted news broadcasts. THE thing that made the Murdoch media dynasty dump Bill O was not the easily affordable continuing payments to women in the million$, the fact that his continued presence as faceman put a hiccup in their quest to acquire an overseas media conglomerate as part of their quest for global media domination.
14
Last time I checked, DJT has not settled with anyone making these type of allegations. He was a private citizen, not a movie producer, TV exec or on-air TV personality. Harvey, Roger, and Bill all cut a lot of checks. All of these women including Bill Cosby's accusers all had careers to worry about, which is not the case with DJT, so there was no reason to be silent.
3
It is very important that information about sexual harassment in all social spheres is made public, followed by educational campaigns to try to limit this behavior. The NYT reporting has been important. Are there any plans to reveal any sexual harassment within the company's own ranks? Is it possible there is no need?
4
Bill Clinton settled with a number of women who brought sexual harassment claims against him, yet he still ran for president and won. What does that say about him, and the people who voted for him? One set of rules for Democrats, liberals and progressives, and another set for conservatives and Republicans.
4
There are more commonly recognized terms for the alleged "non-consensual sexual relationships", and they usually come with significant felony jail time. If true, that allegation might explain the $32 million - market price for a stay out of jail card.
10
Two years’ salary is an enormous settlement to pay if your “conscience is clear,” and you didn’t feel like sitting in a courtroom for a year and a half.
Mr. O’Reilly, we weren’t born yesterday.
12
No amount of money is enough to compensate victims of the heinous crime of sexual assault. O'Reilly still has his mega wealth and freedom. He deserves neither.
7
O’Reilly, like Trump and his cronies, is a case study in arrogance. Despite the overwhelming facts and evidence against him, he refuses to admit guilt or apologize for his behavior. Instead, in an endless pursuit of money, fame, and a soapbox, O’Reilly doubles down on his chauvinism by arguing he settled out of court simply to protect his kids from a court battle that to his mind is really nothing more than a political motivated witch hunt. Boo hoo.
The fact that O’Reilly is willfully blind to his own demeaning actions further underscores his hubris on the matter. Funny too how easy it is for “strong” males like O’Reilly to suddenly become the victim when they feel attacked. At the end of the day, it’s laughable to look to O’Reilly or FoxNews b/c of the content or quality of their character. We therefore shouldn’t hold our breath for them to lead the way on improving a culture that more fully accepts responsibility for wrong-doing, respects all women, and has a no tolerance policy for sexual harassment in all aspects of life, not just in the workplace.
6
As usual O'Reilly is going by the standard conservative playbook when confronted with bad behavior and poor decisions...play the victim.
I recall he did the same thing many years ago when an intern who was no older than his daughter complained that he had repeatedly tried to proposition her. He said it was a smear campaign orchestrated by the left because he was such a massive star. He claimed it was all lies.
Then his accuser said she had saved lurid and disgusting voice mail messages he had left her and within a week there was a settlement.
So Bill if you've done none of these things then why not release this former accuser from the confidentiality agreement you made her sign as part of the settlement and let her play the tapes for all to hear. That should prove once and for all who is telling the truth.
15
Just like the egregious behavior by corporate leaders who do not go to jail for ruining companies and destroying lives, think Lehman Bros., Wells Fargo, until some of these guys go to jail, this behavior will continue. It is too easy for them to write a check. They deserve to be punished while serving as a deterrent to others.
5
I hope this impacts the Murdoch’s ability to acquire Sky in Britain.
6
I am not ashamed to admit that I like to read the NYT and watch Fox News to gain perspective from both sides of the aisle. To this end, I did watch O'Reilly, regularly. In part, I loved the content added on air by the appearances of Megyn Kelly and Lis Wiehl, specifically on his show. So... O'Reilly's self destruction was highly disappointing.
Unlike some of my friends on the other side of the aisle, I offer no defense for this sort of behavior. from the Right. Roger Ailes was and should have been shown the door. O'Reilly was and should have been shown the door. Eric Bolling was and should have been shown the door. And on the bigger, national political stage, Candidate Donald Trump was fully exposed for his bad behavior. No one will trust any of these guys around female employees, every again.
What frustrates me about the Left is that they still give excuses designed to defend Bill Clinton. Mrs. Clinton and even former President Obama have not really distanced themselves from Harvey Weinstein as much as they should. The big question remains... why don't they?
4
There are plenty of decent, factual, ethical conservative news sources out there, and so exactly ZERO reasons to watch Faux News.
4
These sexual predator articles are the most important "news" of the day because the Robber Barons who have gotten control of OUR governments and hard-earned taxpayer money, OUR consumer choices, OUR communication vehicles, OUR retirement money, OUR educational system, OUR environment and are trying to get complete control of OUR lives are trying to take us back to the 5th/15th centuries of aggressive, destructive men repeating HIStory and "putting women in their place".
Women and socially conscious men must continue to shout out our disapproval and Socially Conscious Women around the world must step up and take one-half the power to rewrite HIStory from this day forward. The behavior of these inherited and Robber Baron wealth men - and women who empower them - must end. NOW!
21
Droit du seigneur obviously still abides in some US corporations.
6
Mr. Bolger, I wasn't familiar with that phrase so looked it up. According to Wikipedia,
"Droit du seigneur refers to a supposed legal right in medieval Europe, and elsewhere, allowing feudal lords to have sexual relations with subordinate women..."
Chilling and WAY past time to go.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_du_seigneur
3
It's very easy to understand why there is so much of this abuse of women going on. Any man who has woman working for him, depending on him for her salary and living, is in a position to take advantage of her. I've heard and read of that matter all my life and in all walks of life; my wife complained of her boss when young and a secretary. A friend who worked as manager in an office on Wall Street often spoke of other managers, almost all married, who had their secretaries submit to them, either willingly or unwillingly. Not enough is made of such a situation, in offices and any business where women are employed, so little is done to resolve it. Perhaps policy everywhere to make predators responsible for their crime by having it spoken of as such and a monitor appointed to oversee such matters in all businesses would be appropriate. A step of such a kind should be taken.
18
It is amazing to me how many people deem it safe to do business with people who cheat on their most intimate partner in life.
4
Just when you think you've seen everything, another mind numbing story hits the page. Taking the 32 million seems kind of sick too. Bill O'Reilly thinks he is protecting his children from what... they will make their opinions about him in some point in their lives, and I doubt he can pay them off.
15
Bill O'Lielly, who is second only to our Liar-in-chief in playing the politically persecuted victim, will continue to dissemble, blaming evil, dark Leftist organizations and media for another "smear." However, this lying narcissist has repeatedly been exposed as a sexual predator, as well as a lukewarm white nationalist and occasional misogynist.
Judges need to modify the unconscionable practice of allowing wealthy predators to protect themselves with civil nondisclosure agreements. At the very least, judges should declare these agreements void whenever the public interest in knowing the facts of a case outweighs the privacy interests of the parties.
I would abolish NDAs completely in these types of cases. Why should alleged victims be allowed to profit for holding their tongues? Why should wealthy, powerful (mostly) men, like Ailes, O'Lielly and Weinstein, be able to repeatedly harass and abuse their victims, and then buy their way out of public shame (and knowledge) for their outrageously shameful behavior?
Our civil justice system is almost as sick as these predacious men.
28
A whole lot goes on in US courts that would not pass a laugh test without enforced confidentiality.
5
They really do form a ketchup stigmata cast of presumptuous screwballs being wined and dined as scapegoats for people who blame their troubles on divine wrath at public policy.
3
it's not called "non consensual sex" NYT, it's called RAPE.
42
It is bullying, demeaning, and disgusting, but not rape without attempted penetration.
2
This continuing story is a primer into the mental illness of a serial sexual predator with financial means.
30
The more money you have, the saner you are by definition in this land that values everything in $.
4
That hardly redeems OReilly or Weinstein ,who were patronized by different business entities for their own commercial reasons .
9
O'Reilly is a real family man, just like Trump, Ailes, and Weinstein.
Such integrity! Such honor! Such contributions to the world.
15
If Murdoch is concerned about his legacy, rest assured, this travesty will crown it.
14
Bought and paid for injustice!
Serial criminal acts paid out. One payout leading to another.
On to the next victim.
$32 million. The equivalent of 640 average annual family incomes.
The rich inherited America. The poor pay.
23
Went you pay $32mil the reason should be made public..... he is silencing her and Fox allowed it but only this one time... he is a monster and they enabled him..frightening
11
Lawyers insist that people won't negotiate settlements at all unless they are kept secret.
Sorry Bill. Nobody writes a check for 32 million to settle a case just to make it go away. We know you're rich, but you ain't that rich. Anybody who buys your story, i just feel sorry for them.
29
What about the women who have filed similar complaints about Donald Trump? If the media and justice system had not ignored those claims, we would not have that man sitting in the Oval Office. He admitted serial assaults and sexual harassment. He bragged about it. We have credible claims by sympathetic victims and... nothing.
I don't suppose Robert Mueller is investigating any of that.
32
Robert Mueller isn't Kenneth Starr. He's not likely to expand the investigation of Russian interference with the election into an investigation of everything.
1
O'Reilly is back? Not so hard to understand in view of Trump groping and bragging about it. Apparently there are no crimes anymore.
21
O’Reilly is at the forefront of Republican family values.
I write this while holding my nose.
13
I'm not wealthy and I'm not a lawyer. That being said, I think if this woman truly wanted justice, she would have taken this to trial instead of taking money. Because of her taking the money instead of going to court, rich men will still harass women and get out of trouble by giving them money.
9
so now it's her fault ?
6
Sexual harassment is the normal mode of operation for Fox News, just like peddling fake news and doing Trump official propaganda is. They are disgrace for an institution in a democratic world in so many ways! Viewers and advertisers should boycott them (and the rest of Fox companies) until they profoundly and demonstrably change ways.
9
O'Reilly says he is innocent but pays a settlement of $32 million. He must think we are as dense as Fox viewers.
34
Shameful ... and I say this as a earlier fan of his show.
7
Are the people who tried to drag Hillary Clinton into the Harvey Weinstein sexual harassment issue, still going to support Fox with their viewership? Isn't it time we stopped rewarding the predators?
14
I’d certainly pay someone $32 million if I’d done nothing wrong just to spare my family. Doesn’t O’Reilly understand how ludicrous his stated position is. Doesn’t he worry about his kids thinking he’s a moron for paying that amount of money if he’d done nothing wrong. No wonder Trump voters love O’Reilly, they been buying the same garbage from O’Reilly for years.
17
O’Reilly, Alies, Weinstein, Cosby and don’t forget the self proclaimed female genital grabber.
Only difference is the genital grabber was awarded the presidency thanks to the electoral college.
Popular vote, not so much.
20
Many of us would’ve voted for trump here in NY State if it wasn’t a guaranteed blue.
Don’t be so sure the popular vote is accurate.
3
This from the people who crowed Weinstein being a Democrat. Some nerve.
8
It's really not necessary to tell us it was "gay pornography" - the descriptor is not news. And being specific about the type of porn comes off as homophobia by the Times to a gay man like me. It wasn't just sexual material and it wasn't just porn.... it was GAY porn.
Please respect all segments of your readership.
13
See your point, however, the specifics also expose O’Reilly’s homophobia and hence germane here.
5
Sounds like an ongoing criminal enterprise, eh RICO?
11
My theory about these men---Weinstein, O'Reilly, I guess Fox news in general---is with their sex predator problem they also construct over the years a psychological firewall against any suggestion they have a problem. I should add, who marries this type of guy?
11
O'Reilly, Ailes, Weinstein. Horrible people. None of them, however, has the power to blow up the world. Only our Predator In Chief can do that. When will he be held to account?
14
These are the supposed "Masters of the universe"? Predatory, corrupt men who will do anything for power/money. They want to destroy the world because they haven't figured out how to live with others. Fools, all.
The real question is whether WE THE PEOPLE - average people around the world - will let them continue on their path to worldwide destruction through wealth inequality and war.
Judging from #MeToo and other grassroots uprisings by women and socially conscious men I'd say NO. NOW is the time to stop them. WE must keep protesting and speaking up to preserve/restore the true democracy that makes America great.
It is not the Robber Barons who have gotten control of OUR governments and lives.
6
If I were to compose a joke it would start like this... "Bill O'Reilly, Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby walk into a bar..."
6
Don't trust Bills.
3
As I recall, the young woman involved with Clinton traveled across country to get an internship with the intention of a sexual relationship with the President. She was not an innocent girl; she knew what she wanted, and went for it. That does not excuse Clinton; however, he is not in the same class as a bullying predator, O'Reilly, or a man who drugged girls and then assaulted them. Finally, neither O'Reilly or Cosby has done anything to improve the lives of others. The Clinton Foundation has done that; Clinton personally has joined with other Presidents to visit stricken countries and offer aid. Clinton took Reagan's recession and turned it around, leaving a full treasury and jobs for "W" to loot and squander on a war for oil and tax cuts for his rich friends.
6
The kremlin and Paula-Putina has large pocket book to pay out all their million of dollar for old Bill boy.
1
Duh - why is this man in jail?
People being paid for being predators belong in jail and loose money, hypcrites.
2
O'Reilly's new book, Killing England, is #1 on the Times Nonfiction Best Sellers List. The self-righteous Times isn't too outraged at O'Reilly to forego the "affiliate commission" it earns if you buy Killing England from the Times' website. Shoot, maybe this piece was just another advertisement for one of The Times biggest sources of income. Trump being the other one that comes to mind. Ka-ching. Ka-ching.
8
Totally agree.
1
I wish the NYTimes would call "non-consensual sexual relations" what it is: rape. And stop conflating rape with sex -- it is violence.
15
Thank you! Non-consensual sex is a cowardly euphemism for what it really is, rape.
9
geez....just honest misunderstandings between poor old bill and every third or fourth woman he met.
and bill, the best father in the world, only wanted to save his kids from knowing how disgusting their father is.
just the price of doing bidness for fox.
6
I guess it pays to be a sleaze ball. Very sad state of affairs
5
yet we have half the women flocking to watch Faux Newz. Why? I guess they like men need to have their hate and prejudice reinforced.
4
That O'Reilly would use his children as human shields to protect himself publicly from his own despicable sexual misconduct says all there is to say about this pathetic, twisted excuse for a man.
18
What exactly is a “non-consensual sexual relationship” so if I’m understanding this correctly Bill O’Reilly is a rapist?
22
Watch you won't hear one peep about Billy O's predatory assaults on women from Republicans .... nada, nil, zilch, zippo. But they'll continue to flock to Faux News. The Murdoch family and every politician and political pundit appearing on it...are complicit
5
Bill O'Reilly - WHAT A GUY!! BTW, this story does not include the fact that he was regularly beating his wife, in front of his children!
8
I hope this is the blow that torpedoes the Murdochs’ bid to by Sky News in the U.K.
Maybe then they can reconsider the cost of doing business providing cover and subsidizing sexual harassers and predators.
11
What does this tell us about Fox News? Ethical? Reliable? A "news" network?
5
The hurricane appeal tonight, with all living former presidents on stage, raised $31m.
Bill O'Reilly paid $32m for just one of many sexual harassment settlements.
10
Isn't it just wonderful how we choose to shower rich pigs with even more riches no matter how disgusting their behavior?
Certainly a role model for all those strivers out there.
5
I’d love to know how much Bill Clinton paid out.
2
What does the presence of Trump, O'Reilly Weinstein tell us about our country?
5
Has anyon put him on the sex offender registry list yet?
10
A quibble regarding the reporting early on in this article. You write:
gay pornography and other sexually explicit material
Later, you clarify that O'Reilly forwarded email he had received to Ms. Weihl in her capacity as a lawyer, a point she apparently confirms.
Two problems with this aspect of your reporting: (1) you do not make it clear whether the forwarding of these emails was considered harassment by Ms. Wiehl; and (2) it is unclear why you characterize the pornography as "gay" and also how that material differs with "other explicit material." The problem with the ambiguity here is that it seems merely salacious -- and not factual reporting. At the same time, the characterization of the pornography as "gay" seems to attribute a quality to the material as "different" or perhaps worse than standard (straight?) pornography. Just what DOES this mean? Men? Women? Why has this been reported this way? Does it reflect on or more biases of the reporter? -- against Mr. O'Reilly, or that "gay" pornography is somehow fundamentally different than other kinds?
8
$32 million. Not $32 thousand. Not even $32 hundred. Interesting what money can buy.
10
So we’re clear: “nonconsensual sexual relationship” is the definition of rape. Let’s call it what it is.
10
We see that O'Reilly continues to deny his culpability right down to the present while at the same time, in order to get paid, the victim is required to keep her mouth shut and destroy any and all evidence of the O'Reilly's crime. Clearly the settlement terms were heavily skewed in favor of the perpetrator, O'Reilly, and Faux News.
Weihl should be allowed to publicly defend herself in the face of continuing denials by O'Reilly. Alas, the deal is cut. The Big Lie tactic persists.
All the while, Faux News, a television network which trades on endless accusations of the immorality of its political opponents, pays off anyone victimized by its money generating "talent." I can understand the old man's ossified and cynical attitude but I had hoped for more from the next generation, particularly in the wake of the Rabeccah Brooks scandal in London.
These kinds of people, the Murdochs, the Sinclairs, and other, smaller news companies are dominating the way the public gets its information. We see—and have always known—how morally tainted they all are, both as sources and as anything resembling "fair and balanced" news dissemination operations. They all seem to buy their way out of every jam they get themselves into.
6
To settle a single sexual harassment case for $32 million is almost unheard of. I wonder what the fact pattern is? It can't be good.
8
I think it is called rape. It tends to dent a "brand".
13
Sex violence, and scandal sells. The whole culture surrounding entertainment must be examined, analyzed, and exposed. The light needs to shine on this dark morality.
1
It is astounding that in this day and age, women do not have equal value as men in the workplace, that a man can act with impunity, towards coworkers and never really be called out on it, unless it gets exposed of course. Women in the workplace still earn an average of 25% less then men, for the same work, or for work that they are far more experienced at and higher educated. This inequity breeds this treatment and it has to stop! It is about power and control, which men must collectively feel threatened by, since they allow it to happen over and over again and the "not-all-men" group conveniently look the other way. Enough. We are not leaving the workforce. We will not allow you destroy us. We are here; get used to it.
9
Perhaps it is all tied together? Women as a whole are paid 25% less to cover the eventual huge sums paid out by companies for sexual harassment cases brought against them? How ingenious to get women to pay for the damages won against these men!
2
Payouts and payoffs should be illegal. Everything prosecuted and to court. Then there would be no more targets and no more shakedown artists.
8
It seems there is no justice simply because influential companies and money can twist the whole justice system. Supposedly victims can be bought and silenced. Alleged aggressor can emerge or reborn like a phoenix. There is no right or wrong, just how much. No wonder we are losing grounds to China and alike to attract business all over the world.
2
This is no surprise. Companies, from Fox News to Miramax, will NEVER kick out a senior exec unless his crimes are made public.
5
Do as I say, not as I do.
2
$32 million because he made lewd comments and indecent suggestions? That is way, way out of proportion to the harm done. It only redistributes wealth from one undeserving possessor to another.
4
“Why Not Him?” Would make a great bumper sticker,
2
I'm a retired litigator, and my spouse is a nationally known big-firm litigator in active practice who has spent decades negotiating settlements of all sorts on behalf of major corporations facing potential liability.
We are sitting over breakfast reeling at the $32 million settlement amount here.
Virtually invariably, there is a very tight nexus between: (1) the settlement amount on the one hand, and (2) the egregiousness and provability of the wrongdoing on the other. Major corporations have sophisticated advisors, and they are not in the habit of handing out big cash for trivial reasons.
All of which makes one wonder: What in the world kind of conduct occurred here?
66
O'REILLY Has not been convicted of crimes such as assault, rape, sexual harassment etc. because of the statute of limitations. Otherwise he'd have been sent to rot in jail, where he belongs. I deplore the decision of the Murdochs to revive the Rasputin of the radio, O'Reilly, whose malign, malignant influence serves to poison the body politic of the US. O'Reilly may have reached a civil agreement with the survivors of his sexual predation, but is, at bottom, an unconvictable criminal due to the statute of limitations. In fact, I believe that the statue of limitations should be revokable in cases of sexual abuse, since there is a clearly established pattern of a delay of many years, sometimes decades, before survivors of sexual abuse decide that they can suffer in silence no longer. The Murdochs are not alone in enabling a vile, violent sexual predator. The voters in the electoral college failed to act in a way that was ethical, leave alone basically decent, since a number of women, around 14, had come forward during the campaign of 2016 with allegations that they had been sexually assaulted by Trump, some over 30 years ago. There is powerful evidence that Trump, indeed, regularly perpetrated sexual assault, if not rape, which he clearly admitted to in his video with Billy Bush. Beyond admission to past crimes, Trump bragged gleefully about his "magnetic" influence on women. I an enraged that the electors saw fit to enable such a swinish creature to be president.
32
A story about sexual harassment and O'Reilly and don't you know here on the NYT comments page Trump and the election become the story.
3
You don't get to change rules of law just because your candidate ran a lousy campaign.
3
Electors vote according to the rules of the Electoral College. There were a couple who refused to vote, and left. The States which gave Trump the EC votes he needed voted as they were obliged to do. We can end this farce if we elect a Congress willing to revisit the EC, a remnant from Reconstruction after the Civil War. The South was brought into the Union with a gift of votes dependent on slave count, 3/5 of a person for each slave. The individual States did not have enough white population to warrant their EC votes. The Northern industrialists needed cotton from the Southern plantations. That is why the South can still dominate national elections with their EC votes. If we join other Western democratic countries, we will move to a national vote count, no individual EC votes necessary. A straight forward vote count, nationally. If we had that, Clinton would be President with 3M more votes than Trump. Now we have a grifter who has brought chaos to the WH, nepotism to the State Dept., hidden tax records which would show a large loan from Russian oligarchs, and a threat to an established Agreement with a nuclear armed Iran. Among other things. Trump's supporters expected a booming economy with jobs for unemployed factory workers. What they got was the continuing economy from Obama's administration.
2
What in the world does Bill O'Reilly, Limbaugh, or any of their ilk have, that is worth 32 million dollars? We definitely have our priorities wrong in this country.
22
It's not about sex for these guys.
It's about power, control, entitlement, and domination. Followed up w self-protection, intimidation, and negotiated secrecy. Further inflating their sense of entitlement -- and thus fueling a self-reinforcing cycle that subsequently pulls more victims into its vortex. Rinse, repeat.
Until finally, too many victims, claims, and evidence pile up to allow them to keep their hideous and predatory behavior under wraps, at which point they lash out, blame anyone but themselves, and narcissistically claim victimhood. If finally deposed, they exhibit a level of self pity completely out of proportion to the victims and wreckage left in their wake.
It's hard to put these guys in jail. But an enlightened and fed-up public can deny them the right to continue to be their old public personas, with all the entitlements those personas previously enjoyed. Prison or not, Cosby no longer gets to be "Cosby". O'Reilly no longer gets to be "O'Reilly". Harvey no longer gets to be "Harvey".
They will be shunned as pariahs. They are still quite wealthy, but will have to go away. They will be exiled to their mansions, cut off from the adulation and levers of power they crave. Any reinventions, book tours, press tours, etc will be meet with protest and counter-argument. Once everyone finally has had enough, they will be met with a shrug of indifference, will be ignored, and forced to slump off in ignominy. Obit written.
Think post-acquittal OJ Simpson
28
These ladies saw one get a payout and lined up. Simple as that.
Never settle!
3
What is a nonconsensual sexual relationship? Never heard that term before. I am only aware of the legal term of criminal sexual conduct, in varying degrees. When the NYT uses a euphemism to describe criminal activity, it is further minimizing the conduct of OReilly.
22
O’Reilly claims he never mistreated anyone even after several legal settlements clearly told him his actions were grossly inappropriate. If he was so concerned about sparing his children the publicity, he should have stopped his actions. No mention of wives, who must feel pretty humiliated also, but maybe nice settlements soothes their bruised egos.
7
It looks like Fox News contained a ring of sexual predators operating within 21st Century Fox. I wonder if Corporate knew, when it found out and why it swept it under the rug for so long. The mud continues to come out.
11
Typical Trumpist behavior: ..and we can prove it with shocking information, but I’m not going to sit here in a courtroom for a year and a half and let my kids get beaten up every single day of their lives by a tabloid press that would sit there, and you know it.”
For years O'Reilly fed this tabloid press with lies and inflammatory "news." Seems a fitting end to his "career."
26
he sure loves his family
1
$32 million. I'd bet there was physical damage beyond "just" rape, which is painful enough and does its own horrendous harm, behind that payout. Damage he clearly admitted causing. Of course, he has a record of vicious physical attacks on women...
15
Wow! 32 MILLION!! he did something a lot more serious than just harassment of this poor woman. also where is this shown Fox's accounting and p&l?
10
The SEC and FCC are going to have their hands full with this.
Shareholder suits and claims of fraud in the air.
Questions on license renewal being in the public interest.
Kiss SKY tv goodbye.
Can't be good for share value.
Shortly there will be a Republican colony on the Black Sea with no threat of extradition.
10
Settlements and pay-offs...
How about if we actually tried sending these people to jail for their crimes? A novel thought.
10
Because they wouldn’t make it to a court of law. Shakedown artists.
2
My criticism is beyond Bill O'Reilly. What about Fox News extending a contract to O'Reilly after such a huge record payout for sexual harassment? What about the royal Fox audience that professes to family values, etc. etc. etc? They still watch Fox News despite its support of immorality.
19
Hah! I love it. He messed with a Harvard trained attorney. Get her on the speaking circuit to teach all of us how to document and report harassment. Over time, it will become too expensive for companies to hire and promote predators. Sadly, Its the only way to stop it.
13
Curious how we have recently seen a huge increase in the number of sexual harassment claims against powerful and prominent media figures...and of course they are wealthy, very wealthy. The pattern is always the same; one person makes a claim and soon thereafter dozens more come out of the woodwork with allegations of incidents from years, or even decades before. There is never any real documented or "smoking gun" type of proof, always "he said, she said", nobody ever goes to jail, and somebody always gets paid off with a big number. Even the statements from both sides are similar; " My dignity was violated - I have recurring nightmares - Oh the mental anguish I've endured". And from the other side; "I didn't want to put my family through an ordeal - It was easier to pay than to litigate". I'm not from the big money world, but it sure looks to me like somebody's taking a shot at a big fat target.
3
There isn't jail time in losing a civil suit.
1
"Never any documented proof?" You mean like all of the text messages, emails and other communications Fox's settlement terms required the complainant to destroy as they generously rushed to hand her $32 million for her meritless, unsubstantiated claim?
Reading the comments here, it's so clear that individuals see what they want to see in stories like these, facts be damned.
7
O'Reilly and Weinstein, sexual predators. O'Reilly was a bully like Weinstein. Thier bullying and the sexually predatory behavior go hand in glove. Everyone was fodder for their type of behavior. Don't like something? Unhappy? Bad day? Yell, belittle, snark, criticize, needle....Want something? Cajole, manipulate, corner, make inappropriate comments , physically assault, chase them around, and satisfy you're urges that way. Everyone was a potential victims to these two fiends. The amounts of money paid out don't concern me as much as the fact they are gone. The broader question is who knew, who covered it up and what they got for doing so?
8
Has anyone done the math on this thing? O'Reilly signed a contract for 25 million a year for 4 years. What is his net after paying the settlement, his lawyer fees, his fees to his agent and his federal and state taxes? 100 should be 90 million after he pays his agent. His taxes should be roughly 40-45 percent him with 50-55 million. Then his lawyer fees for defending him and negotiating the settlement. I don't know, maybe we are down to 50 million. Then the settlement for 32 million. That leaves O'Reilly with 18 million. Enough to live on but 80 percent less than he earned. He does have other sources of income. The good news is he is social security and medicare eligible.
7
I wouldn't be surprised if O'Reilly got that 32 million because Fox knows he knows all their dirty secrets. That money was shut your mouth money.
8
And every sponsor of Fox News is complicit because somebody is paying for these settlements.
19
Why does Donald Trump stand above these losers. He is the same thing. He even admitted it in public. He needs taken down too.
20
Those repeat sex offenders like to band together, don't they? Makes perfect sense that a media corporation that supports a repeat sex offender as President would breed them among its employees, attempt to hide their offenses, and then keep them on anyway.
At least the Democrats and Hollywood immediately disowned Weinstein. The Republicans don't seem to have any trouble with rewarding chronic sex offenders.
20
Like Bill Clinton.
2
No sexual predator...even after they have settled a lawsuit..should be allowed back into their position of power. Deplorable.
20
All that money and all you have to be is a dirty old man.
In the meanwhile, for women to earn their money, they need to be sexually bullied by the likes of O'Reilly et al, harassed, groped, and even raped?
This is 2017. Will it ever change? Or do we just think we're better than countries who just started to allow women driving privileges?
22
Fox News: Fair and Balanced? NOT. How about Fox News: Partial to Sexual Predators and Totally Unbalanced.
17
Clearly the majority of Americans can see that O’ Reilly is a fraud. His claims of innocence are false but what concerns me is that he continues to have a voice that reaches out and influences people with his when he should be shunned. Does this man have any corporate sponsors? He has the moral backbone of a earthworm.
18
who else? every public company should be made to publish these payouts as a part of their filings. as cold as it seems, this behavior impacts my investments and I need to know. I will take my money somewhere else.
11
Kind of funny how much he sounds like the two-year-old in the Oval Office.
15
I’m having a hard time squaring these enormous financial settlements with iron-clad non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions with the #MeToo movement. As I understand it MeToo is designed to expose and hence stop this kind of predatory conduct. But what are these settlements about?
If, God forbid, your child is raped by a serial child predator, is it morally acceptable to take cash, keep your mouth shut and move on, letting him continue his nefarious pursuits? I would hope not. On the other end of the moral spectrum, if the other party to a contract breaches, of course you accept monetary damages in exchange at least in part perhaps for silence and move on.
We don’t really care enough to stop someone who is a serial contract breaker from continuing in this vein, but we must care enough to stop the serial child rapist from ever doing it again. Are the women who accept these large settlements like a parent whose child was raped and took cash for silence or like a party to a contract broken by the other side? Where on that spectrum is workplace sexual harassment?
3
Sound like legitimate queries to me and I am a woman. They are being made offers they can’t refuse in lieu of making such conduct public. Who can afford to go up against a behemoth such as 21st Century Fox? When big money is involved it’s a “protect the perpetrator and his employer at all costs” reaction. Morality gets put on the shelf by both sides.
2
completely disgusting. where are we, country?
7
And is anyone surprised by this?
It's about power, not sex.
6
Power, class, race, gender and money...five ring circus
3
Work 15 years at FOX and get a 32 million lump sum retirement I am in the wrong business. Sounds like a consensual affair.
4
Fox doesn’t pay for consensual affairs.
10
Sean, that's an interesting theory. Fox needs to hire an advisor along your lines so that it will, in the future, avoid making mistakes like handing over $32 million dollars to complainants in meritless cases involving consensual affairs between colleagues.
As a sidenote, however, the lawyer in me can't help wondering what was in all of those text messages, emails and other communications that were required to be destroyed as part of the settlement....
8
If there was no merit to Weihl's accusations, why was she paid $32 Million dollars? And it is hard to believe that O'Reilly's children did not know, given the mounting publicity. He is a Neanderthal as is Roger Ailes, Rupert Murdoch and the rest of them, not to mention they are criminals that will never be brought to justice, because they have enough money to buy their way out of trouble.
7
I had the same question as your first. Did she agree to state the accusations had no merit AFTER she was offered the $32M? If so, she's as guilty as O'Reilly, no? Maybe another knowledgeable commenter can explain...
2
According to numerous published accounts, Bill O'Reilly's older child, a teen girl, went to court to try to avoid visitation with him. Published reports recounted allegations that the girl had been traumatized by witnessing O'Reilly's alleged abuse of her mother, including pulling the mother down a staircase by her hair.
It may be that Bill O'Reilly should in fact be concerned about protecting his family – – but from whom?
10
Bill O'Reilly of FOX NEWS fearing the "tabloid press." That's rich!
19
Six versus sixty. Bill O'Reilly is accused of sexually harassing six women and Harvey Weinstein is accused of sexually harassing sixty women. Mr. O'Reilly paid each of his six victims millions whereas Harvey Weinstein paid his eight victims between $70,000 and $150,000. It appears Mr. O'Reilly's abuses occurred for 15 years and Mr. Weinstein's for 30 years. I thought this was an interesting observation. I am sure it is not over for Mr. Weinstein and he will be paying out much more by the time the story is completed.
The New York Times is to be given much praise for bringing both stories to light. Mr. O'Reilly and Mr. Weinstein are polar opposites politically with the former being an Independent conservative (Republican) and the latter a liberal Democrat. This proves that sexual abuse is not confined to just one political party. When the story first broke about the O'Reilly abuse the liberals were so quick to condemn the conservatives. We now know it occurs within the Democratic and Republican spectrums and no party affiliation is totally innocent.
Hopefully these revelations and public shaming will deter others from behaving in this despicable behavior towards women. We can only hope these stories will have a positive impact on society and the lessons to be learned are many. You do not get away with doing evil things in this world and you will eventually get caught.
6
We have known this for a long time. There is no political party exemption from human nature; nor is there a gender exemption from human nature. Power corrupts; and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
3
Reading the Murdoch owned NY Post today (online version), and nary a whiff of this story. How a $32M sexual harassment case with a single victim doesn’t make headlines e news around the world is shocking. “Fake news” by omission, I guess.
19
Just like Harvey Weinstein, but with the Fox propaganda machine protecting him.
If you think it's scary being blackballed in Hollywood, imagine what it's like to have the most watched network in cable news smearing your name with lies every day.
5
All these cases of women suing famous personalities in recent times Cosby, Weinstein, O'Reilly have several things in common: men with power, men with money, men whom are bully's, men who are straight out liars, men with no shame for themselves or their loved ones, men whom are sexual predators. But like such men whom have power and money none have served prison time. In the ordinary life of such predators without power or money they do go to prison and are forever branded a sexual predator with no hope for redemption. The Cosby's, the Weinstein's and O'Reilly's can hire high powered attorneys and pay out big settlements in lieu of going to prison. In O'Reilly's case he was rewarded with a new and higher paying contract by the Fox News Corporation. In my laymen's understanding all are supposed to treated equally under the eyes of the law in this country. I guess Lady Justice really is blind.
11
Wow, Lachlan and James Murdoch, bad judgment on your part, don't you think? Now, all of us know what you do, what you permit others to do to women, in order to make money. You were supposed to be the more liberal and tolerable Murdochs. It appears not. Everyone is focused on O'Reilly and people like him as the villain. But they are not the most important problem. It's you, their bosses who know what they do and permit them to do it in the interest of protecting your 'bottom line". Shame on you.
17
O'Reilly, Weinstein, Trump, Aisles, Clinton, the Kennedy brothers. And countless millions more cunning, cruel, predatory and ruthless humans (largely male but also female).
If the malignant narcissist or psychopath has a brain that on MRI has an amygdala that appears not to be fully developed and fully functional, then does the psychopath have a congenital mental disability that thereby excuses his or her antisocial behaviour?
No matter. How much does the past, current and future successes of the human race depend upon the ruthless predatory drive of the male and female psychopaths who lead the pack?
No matter. If at least one per cent of male humans, and half a percent of human females (according to Canadian forensic psychologist Robert Hare) are born with an incompletely developed amygdala, which means they will grow up callous and unemotional (CU), have no conscience, have little fear of punishment, are bored easily, seek out thrills, and prey on others, then what does this mean for the future of our species?
No matter. If very expensive behavioural modification programs that try to target young children with CU anti-social behaviour merely teach such children how better to dissimulate and conceal their predatory behaviour under a charming and calculated exterior, then what is the point of such interventions?
5
Who ultimately paid? Why consumers who bought products advertised on The Fox Network. Make conscious decisions when watching TV or shopping and turn off their oxygen.
9
Fox News renewed O'Reilly's contract after settling sexual harassment cases on behalf of Bill O'Reilly and now has the nerve to criticize NBC for not aggressively pursuing the Weinstein case. What a bunch of mendacious hypocrites over at Fox.
19
Exactly!!
What a euphemism! "Non-consensual sexual relationship" is rape.... Most people go to jail for that. Rich people settle. Disgusting.
18
The network that destroyed truth in journalism now should
let their gullible viewers know that the whole thing was just
a greedy front.
Fox and its stars of shame should shutter themselves,
including their star guest, the serial abuser, one Donald J. Trump.
10
They should publish the names of the lawyers who negotiated the $32 million settlements! Wow! That kind of settlement should be a deterrant.
2
Nonconsensual sexual relationship? I assume that means the repeated perpetration of something like rape. A 32 million dollar settlement? Mr. O'Reilly must have been guilty of criminal wrongdoing.
O'Reilly. Advocate for conservative values.
9
FOX news cannot operate without a license from the federal government through the FCC: O'Reilly settled a claim for $32M, and then a few months later FOX issued him a contract for $25M with a clause that allows them to terminate the contract if any other sexual harassment claims became known. FOX knew of O'Reilly's abominable behavior toward female employees- So, why does the federal government not TERMINATE FOX News? That is the only just result in this sordid, abusive mess that is FOX News.
6
I don't figure Battling Bill as the type who would just roll over and just fork over $32 million without a fierce fight. Thats a giganormous amount of money, even to a wealthy man like him. It would go against every fiber in his body to fork over a sum like that. Unless, of course, he knew he was dead guilty......
10
Recall Ms. Carlson had audio-taped Mr. Ailes for evidence of sexual harassment. Ms. Weihl must have something similarly damaging. A $32M settlement for a single individual is mind boggling.
2
Weinstein paid in the six figures to his victims. Kobe Bryant paid 2m. What could Oreilly have done that was worth 32M?
10
Boycott any and every company that attempts to advertise on his show. Americans only seem to care about the bottom line, so get them where it hurts. The systemic, violent and pervasive misogyny on display at Fox News should be a national shame. Fox viewers however just love all of the racism, xenophobia, and outright stupidity of the “newscasters” and pundits. The men are dangerous and predatory towards women, while the women are dangerous and predatory towards people of color. O’Reilly should be publicly shunned while that rot should follow folks like Meghan Kelly around for a long time.
17
Fox News has jumped the shark. May as well read The National Enquirer. Both have no core moral compass. My husband watches their programming and is 71 with diagnosed early dementia. He believes everything they spew. That is their demographic and not sustainable. The younger generation knows FOX is one big paid political advertisement.
19
I'm sorry for your loss, Lynn.
If it looks like a Fox, it probably is a Fox!
The "Foxes" are guarding the hen house.
7
O’Reilly is a dirt bag. And for how many decades did Hollywood know about Weinstein? And how many people in moralistic Hollywood continue to allow other Weinstein-types to exist today? Not yesterday, but today, right now this very minute as you read this comment? Right now, it is going on in Hollywood, more than any other industry. So, yes, let’s focus for a little while on Fox, they deserve it, but it is not an entire holier-than-thou industry, like Hollywood.
3
All one has to do is look at the shows on Fox News right now, and you can completely understand their corporate culture. Shows like "Outnumbered", and "Fox and Friends" look like thinly veiled infomercials for Victoria's Secret that are so ludicrously underdressed and overprimped, they make Stepford Wives look like a Feminist march.
This is the mind of Ailes himself, festering, rancid, and rotting, all for more eyeballs. He singlehandedly destroyed the credibility of network news, and they are not intending on stopping. Fox News is humanity at its worst.
17
I’m all in favor of the #metoo movement. There’s never a bad time to highlight and speak out against sexual harassment.
But seriously, where was the outrage over this?
O’Reilly, Ailes, Trump? Where was the outrage?
9
This isn't about sex. It isn't about money. It's about power. O'Reilly continued to harass (& God knows what else) women because it made him feel powerful to demean and belittle them. He promotes his 'books' because the notoriety feeds his ego. This is a sick man not unlike Weinstein and trump and others & it's astounding that so many of them achieve positions of power & amass personal fortunes but it's never enough. In O'Reilly's case his behavior impugns any argument he may have made regarding his divorce and custody.
19
Ratings. If people WATCH you in America, you can get away with anything.
9
It's really quite simple, America celebrates the subjugation, harassment and assault of women. You don't even need to read the article. $25 million per year! He better have some new schools and hospitals in mind.
9
There's something going on here, isn't there, Mr. Jones? There is so much wrong going on here, one really doesn't no where to begin. But, the most overlooked is the fact that Mr. O'Riely received $25 million payout to leave the network... and then he made the talk show rounds. Who says crime doesn't pay? That is the message getting out loud and clear.
23
Speculating here, In my opinion: When you pay $32M in settlements you clearly are not paying to keep your job or to stay out of the news; you are paying to stay out of jail. I think that if one could delve into what really happened to warrant such large hush money payments it would turn out to be rape and assault.
Rape and sexual assault should trump any non-disclosures and these women should be absolved of their need to stay silent so that justice can be done.
The term Sexual harrassment with high rollers like this is a euphemism for rape. Sexual harrassment for the everyday bores in the workplace is dirty jokes, innuendo and embarrassment, nasty stuff surely but not close to physical assault. O'Reilly needs to be investigated for sex crimes.
21
A "non-consensual sexual relationship", and a $32 Million payout. What did this righteous family values guy really do?
21
Interesting to watch as issues like this are settled with larger and larger sums. I wonder what Monica might have gotten today from Bill Clinton and what would be done to him if he were president. Also curious what the lawyers took out of the payment. One third or an hourly fee? So if clever attorneys can find even the slightest chance of a big win, we all can expect more of this in the years to come. Advice to men in positions of power and near beautiful woman ....no personal emails, texts, dinners, presents, etc. and wear a secret recording device if just the two of you must be together alone. It might save you a huge dollar settlement and your career. Entrapment is not a new game just invented and it does seem the money obtainable from winning is eye popping.
1
How about this advice for those men in power. Behave like gentlemen. Wasn’t that easy?
3
What is our responsibility as the victims?
Taking money in exchange for silence?
So predators continue harming others....
What's wrong with us?
This is all around despicable!
We will live in a safer and better world When:
this society rewards people for speaking up and not to remain silence
Laws and policies rewards and protects those who speak up
Legal services are accessible to all....
The legal system is broken
Corporate America is broken
Our values and morals are broken
Therefore, we as individuals are easily breakable
101
No surprise. Just look at our thrice married and many time philanderer in chief.
1
How do we begin to punish the corporations and their boards for a culture that protects, defends and allows such behaviors by lead executives or top personalities? It is not enough to fire the individual, or as really happens allow them to resign. The individuals are working in an environment where profits come far ahead of ethics and morality, And is O’Reilly really suffering the consequences of his actions? Hardly.
9
Reporters on this story should do more sleuthing. In my opinion, it is quite possible that Fox, and by extension, someone at the Murdochs' level gave that contract extension to "factor" in O'Reilly's 32 Million dollars settlement.
Please explore this angle.
5
Just a thought, but I think that would be illegal and call for real condemnation from the FCC.
Oh, for a $25 million payout for doing the wrong thing. Alas, I do right and worry about losing my job in the layoffs, with nary a payout in sight.
7
Do I understand correctly that it is established without doubt that Rupert Murdoch and both his sons all were aware that O'Reilly was responsible for really large payouts to hush up sexual misbehaviour and they were still okay with another big contract for O'Reilly? I remember the Watergate break-in before Nixon got re-elected - which to me was really alarming - I felt you could read between the lines. I witnessed Trump getting elected - which to me was almost unbelievable in terms of what was obvious before the fact. And if what this article says about the Murdochs is well known, why would anyone with any judgement watch a Fox news program? I guess it comes back to sharing 70% of our DNA with a slug - we're just not that smart.
13
Like about 60 million other Americans, we had no idea what the other half was like.
2
How people behave when they have great power is an an eye opener. Until recent times it seems to me that it was almost a given that one could either quit or shut up and deal with it but not much victims could do about workplace abuse. O'Reily and Wienstein thought the old rules still applied. Do those in power just need to be more careful, or will the culture change? What is realistic to expect? What do US citizens want? Trump was elected with full knowledge of his past. Clinton won two terms.
2
I was in college when Rupert Murdoch made his bold move into the media business in the USA, and I remember telling a friend then that that is the beginning of the end for civil polity in US politics.
The mad had a track record of sleaze over substance in his pursuit of profit.
6
I certainly would never besmirch a victim of harassment, sexual or otherwise. But I don't understand how they can settle...I don't care for HOW much money, if one of the conditions is secrecy. These public predators who feel they are above the law need to be prosecuted and penalized by our legal system, not allowed to buy their way out of "guilt" and proceed to be promoted to make more money with books and a society that just now is starting to show outrage about how women are treated. It is not just the O'Reillys, Trumps and Weinsteins in our society....it is our society in general. Maybe the latest scandal will shock us into changing attitudes. But I doubt it. Nothing was done about gun control when 20 babies were shot in a classroom, and already Las Vegas is fading into a memory. So truly doubt we'll see anything change on harassment and abuse of women who get further victimized when they go public.
Since when did sexual harassment, up to rape, become defined as a "nonconsensual relationship"?
We are sanitizing the words we use to name really bad things. It goes hand in hand with the alteration of reality and truth from our political leaders.
Continuing on this path is deadly, because it absolves sexual predators and mendacious politicians of some of their responsibility, as well as subduing the power of words used to commit atrocious acts.
I think we need to get real and call things what they are, not what people want them to be--in every area of public life.
We also need to regain a sense of decency--something that can't be mandated like standing for the national anthem but comes from within from the character of the person.
7
Another bully brought down. It's what usually happens. Odds are "bully in chief" will fall too. It's the human comedy, pretty predictable ending.
5
I can't imagine any reason any man would not want to defend a claim of sexually harassment if the claims were false.
A financial payout for an alleged sexual assault implies guilt.... There is no other implication, and no difference than a regulated Wall St. business paying a fine to the SEC with no admission of wrong doing.
The entire 'sexual harassment settlement business' needs an overhaul because men like O'Reilly and Weinstein were not day lighted as sexual predators. Private settlements allowed the potential for the continued abuse of unsuspecting women. Women remained in danger because of private sexual abuse settlements.
8
$32 million? Why so much? The harassment was that horrific! More likely it was closer to extortion. O'Reilly and Fox were desperate to renew the contract. The matter had to be settled before Fox could renew. Fox could have no involvement in the settlement to protect the Skye bid. The result: the victim gets a record settlement, O'Reilly gets a record contract to flow his cost of settling through to Fox, the Murdochs carry on with Skye, the O'Reilly show carries on with Fox. The victim and her counsel read the situation perfectly and squeezed it for every drop.
2
The problem of sexual harassment goes far beyond the high profile public cases. Whenever this issue comes up in a group, most women reveal they have experienced sexual harassment. Unless we admit there is rampant misogyny in our society and attempt to address the root causes, then these men will continue to demean women.
5
The media owners are going beyond any known ethics.The justice department should monitor all such contracts and negotiations and block them for public good and setting up good future traditions. Whatever is happening in Reilly's case is very disturbing.
3
When will the media and the public, hold Rupert Murdoch responsible for allowing, even enabling Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly and others to sexually harass women at will, without consequences, to say nothing of the fact that he has destroyed our democracy by providing a safe haven for bigots, sexists and liars, for decades.
97
BUT part of the harassment charge that cost FOX $132 million was that this ultra-conservative sent gay pornography.
If the gay porn doesn't help prove these conservative talk show guys fake their anger about everything that's not what they preach is traditional family values...then really, people, REALLY???
67
Murdoch family complicit in the crimes of O'Reilly.
77
Exactly. They aided and abetted the sexual harassment of untold numbers of women and let it continue because Ailes and O'Reilly were too "valuable" to fire. The Murdochs need to be held accountable, through boycotts of all Fox businesses, for starters.
62
Weinstein and O'Reilly are two nasty egomaniacs who started small, making the occasional off-color joke and then progressively expanded their bounds of indecency all the way to rape. Each time they tested new waters and suffered no consequences, they were emboldened. Shame on all the people who knew what these men were up to, and did nothing. Had one of these women been your daughter, or your sister, or your mother, would you have been just as silent?
60
Dostoevsky, the famous Russian author summed up O'Reilly, Trumps and others like the them like NO ONE ELSE CAN! This Disease is is INCURABLE! Fyodor Dostoyevsky. “Above all, don't lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love.”
66
Shakespeare had the same idea: "This above all: to thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man."
4
O'Reilly, Ailes and others like them use their money and power to take advantage of colleagues and literally grab whatever they can. Then they have the audacity to preach about family values to their many witless viewers while paying out millions to settle with injured parties. How any woman at Fox could work there, let alone put up with that asinine and harmful behavior on a regular basis, is truly beyond me. They must really do it for the love of the money.
17
The whole sleazy US right wing runs on desperation motivation.
2
I love this one.
``In response to questions about why he sent sexually explicit material to Ms. Wiehl, Mr. O’Reilly said that during his time at the network, he had been sent threatening messages almost every day, including some that had obscene material. To deal with this problem, Mr. O’Reilly said, he set up a system in which the material would be forwarded to his lawyers so they could evaluate whether he needed to take any legal action. Mr. O’Reilly said Ms. Wiehl was among those lawyers.''
Sounds like the perfect explanation from a guy who covered the war in the Falklands from 1300 miles away.
40
Just look at us. What have we become?
36
We've become nothing new. We always been like we are.
2
I have ... not O'Reilly
At least O'Reilly pays well. Weinstein is a cheap creep.
23
Or those Fox Noise women are very adept at collecting damages from millionaires. It was just business as usual at Fox Noise.
16
Me, too. Then I filed an EEOC complaint, hired a lawyer, forced the weak-spined board to conduct an investigation and demanded that that craven, sniveling coward of a narcissist apologize, before witnesses, for his disgusting behavior. He was removed as president of the organization he founded. I was lucky; I had emotional support and was not in a financially precarious position, unlike some of my colleagues whose stories of assault were horrifying and were ignored. I was just one in a very long line of women whose complaints were ignored, or, in one infamous case, botched by incompetent prosecutors in a criminal case against him. Standing up and fighting back was one of the hardest things I've done. But teaching my children, students and mentees to respect every living soul they encounter and to treat others as they would be treated has been my mission these past 15 years. Maybe, just maybe, the tide is turning.
102
It's a good thing Mr. O'Reilly never mistreated anyone. If he had, it would have REALLY cost him some serious bucks.
28
Gullible Americans create a lot of Gods in sports, TV, film, politics and then realize we have been duped by people with flawed character and credibility. What is worse is the silence of the lambs when bad things happen to them or are perceived to happen to others. Really O'Reilly , if the harassment claims were outrageous or false you should say I am not agreeing to a single penny being paid come what may. But it seem like the settlement of $32 million is small pocket change as Fox will pay O'Reilly 10 times that because they cannot afford to lose their highly rated God.
31
if there arent two dozen D&O (directors & officers) lawsuits filed before I get done reading the piece, the lawyers in this country dont have any spine. esp if the share price dropped a quarter, ie $0.25.
what a stark, easily verifiable record of misconduct and flipping of the finger to the shareholders this piece documents. oh how I wish they were in my county. $32M? ha! I smell 10x that. easy
9
Billo’s next book: “Killing My Career”
40
What's the incentive for anyone to charge these predators with crimes when they can just settle for $32 million? How about this....they go to jail and cannot assault anyone else. She's a well known attorney and would not prosecute.... what chance does anyone else have up against that corporate power...
13
FOX isn't the only enabler here. Mr. O'Reilly also generates substantial income from his best selling books.
Do with that what you will.
25
O’Reilly’s blatant, arrogant hypocrisy should make him an untouchable laughingstock and would were he not a “conservative-in-good-standing”. After all, so-called conservatives rush to protect their own, using every propaganda tool at their disposal while attacking accusers and critics.
That makes O’Reilly untouchable in another sense: immune from prosecution, trial, conviction and prison. Not socially untouchable, but untouchable by law and untouched by it. Effectively pardoned not by a governor or president but by contract law itself; by fiat blessed by government, gratis from our legislatures.
The first step in addressing this pervasive inequity, one that amounts to a license to be wantonly licentious, is to strip a malfeasance cloaking device from contract law called “non-disclosure” clauses routinely included in contracts that amount to “get out of jail free” cards. Tort settlements must include disclosure of the torts settled and their extent, opening the door to more claims, ruinous litigation the ultimate deterrent to such misbehavior. Otherwise, it will just be more-of-the-same.
The grand seigneurs at the heart of such scandals will fight this change in law and custom to the death, of course. It’s their right to lie, bully and abuse. They consider it and all kinds of personal misconduct part-&-parcel to seigneurage itself, befitting their social status and rank. They use, abuse and discard “the little people” with impunity, considering it their right.
33
The further right you go in US politics, the more paranoid and schizophrenic it gets.
No money, no justice is now....got money, no justice. It is not okay for a company and the directors to allow this behavior to go unpunished regardless of who writes the check.
To use the "protection" of your family as the rationale for the settlements takes cowardice and hypocrisy to a new level. I feel for all of the parties involved except for the perpetrator. To err is human. To not take responsibility for your actions and continue to hurt those most impacted is flat out inhumane.
14
I am waiting for Trump's tweet on this one, which he remains silent (conveniently).
17
The question begging to be answered; while Weinstein is hung out to dry all the others are only repremanded and hundreds are not outed.
Lets talk about this.
And then Lis Wiehl works with O'Reilly for 15 years? And then decides to sue?
This requires some explanation.
6
President Trump has repeatedly supported this man.
14
What hurts me is that all these women were ok with what they went through as long as they were paid a large sum.
Not one said I want to see this guy in jail, I don’t want the money
17
Glad to see you were privy to each and every complaint against O'Reilly.
Care to elucidate?
2
Right!? Victim becomes profiteer. Predator is enabled. Justice is lost...
1
Billo is just too valuable to the Kochs, Ailes, Murdochs, Adelsons and Trumps, et al. He does their dirty work with a smile. And that's why Fox continues to employ him at $2 million a month, AND pay tens of millions almost every year to settle sexual harassment cases against him. What's the mystery? He helps keep all of them in power.
19
There are no words to describe the feeling of getting this news as the fallout from Weinstein continues. And our sitting president was elected despite, and perhaps, because of his "politically incorrect" behavior extending to sexual assault. Locker room talk, indeed.
And many people wonder why so many women hesitate to come forward.
To be called liars and gold-diggers while their careers go down the toilet?
While guys like O'Reilly, Weinstein and countless others continue to make their millions, NO MATTER WHAT, and the leader of the free world getting a free pass.
29
Hmm...they renewed the contract of someone confirmed to have harassed women employees on multiple occasions and avoided consequences by paying them off...sounds really sleazy - even for Fox "News."
18
He's not worth 32 cents.
8
I'll give O'Reilly and Fox this: They do spend copiously in their sin.
6
So how many times can a man sexually harass women before it becomes TOO many? With FOX news, apparently there's no such thing. And O'Reilly is complaining about how 'what he went through is horrible, horrible'. Poor little man. He sticks it to the women around him and thinks that's acceptable...and apparently so does FOX news.
9
Typical old boys network. Why can't men like this control their urges?
4
Disgusting behavior. Part of the circus to which we now all belong.
5
Really, NY TImes? "Non-consensual sexual relationship"??? Can the writer explain what that is? Is it rape? I can't conceive of how "non-consensual sexual relationship" is not rape. If the woman did not give her consent to sex, then that is, by definition, rape. Why is the Times using euphemisms to avoid the fact that Bill O'Reilly was accused of rape. That, and only that, would explain the $32 million dollars.
33
This is a genuinely mind boggling amount of money.
Astonishing.
Given that the plaintiff wasn’t a particularly highly paid employee - ruling out a high back pay award* - there is only one possible explanation for this extraordinary sum.
Extraordinary guilt, with possible criminal implications.
*Contrast Gretchen Carlson, whose settlement was primarily about lost salary in the many millions.
29
You're not considering the other obvious reason for the extraordinarily high settlement: to keep Lis Wiehl quiet!
Just to point out the obviousl: No one pays $32MM out for unsubstantiated allegations; and in terms of doing it to 'protect his kids' - doesn't the "No Spin Zone" extend to real life? Isn't it more important to teach your kids to stand up for the truth, then teach them to run away and cover up surrender to a lie?
Of course - that only applies if the allegations were lies. If not, and given the 'non-consensual sexual relationship' allegation, seems like mr. O'reilly got off cheap.
312
$32 million is not cheap. If you mean by "cheap", in a non-criminal setting, well, there wasn't going to be a criminal case without Ms. Wiehl's cooperation.
"No one pays $32MM..."
They do if you are filthy rich and what occurred was outside the realm of a 'normal' relationship and you do not want your proclivities to come to light for reasons cited.
BOR and FNC seem to have been easy marks for big payouts. Non consensual sexual relationships don't continue on for years. Especially when your pedigree includes "Harvard lawyer" and there are many other ways to make a very decent living.
O'Reilly wants to 'protect his kids'? Ha!
His own daughter, Madeline, testified in a 2015 custody trial that she had seen her father drag her mother down the stairs by her neck. And both children said they did not want to live with him anymore. O'Reilly's wife was unanimously awarded full custody.
2
In so many ways we are a sick society. That's all I can contribute to this.
15
The only in America basket for this.
8
What exactly is a “non consensual sexual relationship? If it is not sexual assault and/or rape, then what is it? If so, is this not an illegal activity? Is not “non consensual sex” illegal?
Second, Fox News is a corporation, and they have known for more than a decade and perhaps much longer that they had an institutional problem of not just sexual harassment, but even worse, illegal behavior of a number of their employees. Yet, they not only looked the other way, but quite actively covered up “non consensual sex”. My point is that how does Fox avoid RICO? If an employer covers up the illegal activity, if not enable such behavior, is that employer not subject to RICO? If so, Fox News is an illegal entity. Like the MAFIA, or Catholic Church.
21
A perfect example of getting away with anything as long as you have a fungible following. As we needed any new examples. I would write what I think of this so-called person but most NYT readers would just say”Ditto”.
8
Maybe Bill O’Reilly should join Harvey Weinstein at rehab in Arizona. There they can go commiserate over the unfairness of such hit jobs on them and wonder why their professional and personal lives have been destroyed. The truth is everybody else knows their behavior has been unacceptable and no sane person in their lives is going to feel any measure of sympathy.
15
Yet his books continue be published by a major publishing company. Shameful.
38
Trump’s loyal base and Fox News followers will scream fake news but how did this company afford it? What kind of human does something so bad as to warrant this huge amount.? Bill O’Reilly is despicable.
25
Very telling that there's not a single word in the Wall Street Journal about O'Reilly's new contract with the Fake News Network. I assumed they'd have better sense than to rehire a known sexual predator. Remember all the snarky comments during the presidential campaign by True Blue Republicans about Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky? In their eyes O'Reilly must still be innocent then, even after paying $32 million. Funny how conservative republicans standards for ethical and decency behavior apply to everyone except themselves.
24
O'Reilly has no new contract with Fox, he was fired in April. They have no plans on bringing him back.
4
All of these fine upstanding gentlemen giving millions to women they criminally acted upon have one vital trait- a grandiose opinion of themselves. Remind you of anybody? Pathetic creatures in charge of employees, in charge of churches, in charge of countries? Not an ethical or moral one in the bunch. And yeah, there are bunches. In every industry, government, religious group.
19
I'm starting to get the sense that every woman I see on a screen had to get raped to be there. I guess I'll be sticking to print journalism from now on.
2
This is SO Fox. Network of self-righteous phonies...
15
When's the next time Hannity will have him on for a fawning interview?
8
For 32 million, he can harras me all he wants.
3
The guy who dragged his ex-wife by the hair and threw her down the stairs in front of his daughter is worried about what his kids will think about him if they hear about his alleged sexual misconduct. Give me a break Bill!!!
67
Truly disgusting. No sexual harassment claim is worth that kind of payout.
4
@steve:
I sincerely hope I am misreading your comment, and that you intended to mean that due to the large payment of $32 million, the evidence against O'Reilly must go far beyond "mere" sexual harassment.
If I'm not misreading you, then you seem to be suggesting that the victim doesn't "deserve" that much money, which is simply appalling. O'Reilly was made to pay that much because what he did goes far beyond harassment: "non consensual" sex is a euphemism for rape.
The victim deserves a rape-free work environment, and O'Reilly should consider himself lucky that he's not facing prison. In this one case of his (of six, mind you), $32 million is what the market will bear.
If we are ever to have any hope of combatting our rape culture problem, we have to stop devaluing women through thoughtless comments.
5
The Weinstein scandal growing wearisome, time to turn to Fox News and Bill O'Reilly for this week's adventure in media figure take-downs. Can't get rid of those old white men fast enough!
9
Apparently one major difference between Democratic men and Republican men who settle sexual harassment claims is at least two zeros.
Once companies and organizations have a culture which supports sexual harassment of employees by those with more power, it is difficult to cleanse the culture even if the problem employees are removed. Allowing a Murdoch purchase of Sky in the UK is dangerous. Murdoch has proven he is incapable of managing any organization to keep employees safe from harassment.
9
So does Fox now contract with him that he can continue to commit crimes? Sounds problematical to me.
3
Trump was defending Roger Ailes soon after the story broke, they are two of the same kind.
It's no coincidence that Fox News, the enabler of Ailes's predatory behavior, is also Trump's state propaganda mouthpiece.
11
There are millions of Fox viewers, evidently, who eagerly surrender and even attack the very idea of civility and decency if it suits their malign purpose. O'Reilly isn't back despite his guilt, piggishness and lack of character. He's back because of them, and because these viewers like it.
17
There are millions of Fox viewers who are decent honest people who believe in common decency. they are caring human beings, believe it or not. And no O'Reilly is not back on Fox News he was fired in April and no longer has a show.
1
There are many left wing divisive radicals here! They thrive on indicting conservatives. That's what elitists do. Bless'em one and all!
The biggest obstacle to O'Reilly's protestations of innocence is the size of the settlement -- $32 million. His wealth, his past settlements and the highly public nature of his position obviously would have played a big part in the plaintiff's demand, but $32 million? The acts, and proof of these acts, had to be overwhelmingly compelling, grotesque, etc etc., for him to pay THAT MUCH. One problem with holding people's feet to the fire...be it Weinstein or O'Reilly ... is that the complaintants too often choose the cash over publicly exposing the acts.
15
This is shameful. Fox should also have been hit with punitive damages, which would have been much higher, and prohibited from ever employing him or any other sexual harasser in the future. He and they need a lesson that violating the law - even if it's only against mere females - has real consequences. Apparently in today's administration any man with enough money can buy his way out of any illegal situation. Unless he's a minority, of course.
45
$32,000,000. For that kind of money, Mr. O'Reilly might have done many good works. Maybe the "Bill O'Reilly Center for the Treatment of Sexual Predators" or "The O'Reilly Center for Alt-Right Men Who Serially Abuse Women."
Really, Bill, the best news you could provide the general public and all women who might cross your path is to buy a cabin in the North Woods and stay inside. Do you know no shame?
24
"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone". The Bible still reigns supreme!!
This is so disheartening. To think that this is happening while/by the very same perpetrators who have so much influence over the easily led masses are themselves absolutely depraved. It's this era of depravity that bring us to where we are.... Trump. Fascism. Rampant and desperate greed. Global warming and noticeable climate change. Ecological collapse. It's enough to make one wonder.
21
32 MILLION DOLLARS paid out to a single individual for harrassment claims. . . Simply unheard of. Head-snapping video must exist. . .
15
Desiato -"I’m not going to sit here in a courtroom for a year and a half and let my kids get beaten up every single day of their lives by a tabloid press that would sit there, and you know it.” It`s all about POWER. If Reilly were innocent, he would sit with his kids and fight it out. He isn`t. He knows, they know and we know. That`s why he paid $32 million.
Steven Brooklyn says "Think about people like O'Reilly, Weinstein, Ailes. They don't just lie, their entire life is a lie. " Add Trump to the MIX and all the men who watch these sick monsters and to the women who voted for Trump - SHAME ON All OF YOU!
42
It seems that the three Bills (O'Reilly, Cosby and Clinton) Harvey Weinstein, Anthony Weiner and the late Roger Ailes all had one thing in common, they all thought that in the words of Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal "I did it because I could". Arrogance, entitlement, power and infallibility were part of their respective belief system and resulted in their humiliation,, disgrace, downfall and in the case of Mr. Weiner and still to be determined regarding Mr. Weinstein...Prison time.
At least in the case of Mr. O'Reilly, his victims received some financial justice and hopefully the same will occur with Winstein as well.
3
Don't stupidly blame Clinton. His affair with Ms. Lewinsky was consensual, and he was not the first man or President to have one out or in the White House. The powerful others you cite sexually harassed, abused, or raped women. Adultery is not a crime, or your Trump would be in jail, too.
14
The Lewinsky affair with Bill Clinton may have been consensual, but he had been accused of harassment many times and of rape once.
He was mandated to pay $850,000 to Paula Jones after she won her lawsuit against him.
In the case of Bill, his crime was a lot more than just adultery.
1
Of course Fox renewed his contract. I'm sure they have a spot for Harvey Weinstein, too. The ouster of Roger Ailes meant nothing to the 'serial offenders' on Fox News. Ailes 'sell by' date had long come and gone. Time for new sexual harassers at Fox.
4
if the us military had to pay for sexual harasment cases the country would be broke.
17
How old are his children? This guy is at least 65!
Are his children still in HS?
6
For your information, I believe he has a teenage son which he has mentioned in the past.
Why it is OK for the Rich and the Influential to settle out of court?
If a crime was possibly committed, should not the police still investigate it?
P.O.
11
If they sign away their rights to go to law enforcement as part of the deal, then they can't.
Trump has bought silence from thousands, including teenage pageant contestants.
Why is it OK ? Good question, but don't look to Washington circa 2017 for any answers.
9
Why are the rich and influential allowed to settle?
BECAUSE there is NO JUSTICE in America! Wake up!!
2
It is a business decision for Fox: Does O'Reilly's show pull in advertising revenue in excess of 57 million? If so, then keep O'Reilly and the 32 million becomes a business expense over and above his 25 million salary that can be deducted to lower taxable profits. If not, adios my friend.
3
Looks like Bill O’Reilly was to Fox what the Pinto was to Ford. Or as the President has written, it’s “The Art of the Deal”.
There's some really disturbing comments that feed the narrative that helps predators, helps perpetuate sexual harassment. Not from those who defend O'Reilly, Ailes, Trump, many of whom denounced Weinstein - because he's part of the "liberal Hollywood elite" and donated to Clinton, not because they had an epiphany and now believe there is systemic sexual harassment and want to address it. They're awful, but expected. The ones that bother me are those who believe O'Reilly, Ailes, Trump, et al are guilty, yet blame and shame victims who take settlements, because they didn't refuse a settlement and go to court, or go to the press or police, in order to expose a predator. I'm not sure they grasp that the societal views that allow for systematic sexual harassment, are the same ones that limit options for victims. If they sue and go to court, they get put on trial too and run the risk of a jury deciding she somehow "asked for it," ending up with nothing but the humiliation of a traumatic experience being public fodder, as well as any dirt a predator's lawyer digs up from a disgruntled ex and threatens to make public, with little likelihood of future employment. Same with going to the press, likely worse. Prosecutors said a tape of Weinstein admitting he groped a victim wasn't enough for an arrest when she went to police, and cases are very rarely tried, if ever. At least predators pay some price with settlements. Blaming and shaming victims helps no one except the predators.
20
None of this surprises me but I'm stunned that Fox News decided to foot the $32 million bill. Wow. I sure hope they think Bill O'Reilly was worth it.
8
He was the tip of the iceberg.
Ailes on the other hand had enough money and couldn't be bought. They needed a different plan for him.
2
Read the article: it doesn't say Fox paid the $ 32 million.
2
You didn't read the article. Bill O'Reilly paid the $32 million out of his own pocket.
It may be time, past time, for the FCC to start enforcing certain "standards" for news organizations in its regulatory role in communications.
9
Money and concern for profit have replaced ethics and human decency at FOX (and many other corporations). The harassed women got the buy-outs and got huge amounts of their silence. Is that a service to decency in society? The irony: these obscenely big settlements do not really hurt FOX much. But even greater damage is done by FOX through its political role. It is hurting American democracy and there's an indecent viewership that is an accomplice in this destruction of our democracy. At least Alles and O'Reilly are gone, but there are plenty of others at the company to do the bidding. Revoltingly sad.
7
$32 million?? "Extraordinary" doesn't even describe it. If that was the settlement, you can only imagine what the opening figure in negotiations must have been. And from this story it sounds like the matter was put to rest fairly quickly, suggesting Mr. O'Reilly had virtually no case in his defense. Clearly Mr. O'Reilly's behavior involved something far, far beyond a few flirty and inappropriate emails.
I sure would like to know what "nonconsensual sexual relationship" means. There's a lot in that artful phrasing and I suspect whatever it refers to must be the reason behind the huge settlement.
12
I don't identify with anything going on in the culture anymore, beyond the stark fact that it is clearly divided into the super rich, and the rest of us. I don't understand the amount money given in these settlements--$32 million, $10 million, $5 million? I do not deny any suffering that these women went through with O'Reilly, and I am as empathic to their suffering from a distance as I can be, but is there not something about these staggering amounts of money that debases, cheapens their suffering? Is there not a clear implication that if you are rich and privileged, the entire legal system plays by a different set of rules, even for those who suffer? (This includes the world of healthcare as well.) I do not want to get into comparative suffering, but stories like these bring my mind to an angry place: How many of us suffer greatly on a daily basis (many due to someone who wields power over us unjustly), but will never, ever get a single dollar for our unjust suffering, much less any type of publicity for what to us is just "life"? I wish that our elites could get this truth through their distant, out-of-touch heads, but alas, I do not think things will ever change. There will always be a different (far more lenient) legal system for the super rich compared to the rest of us. For that, as much as I hope these women feel some sense of justice, I am deeply saddened and angered that many of us will never have the opportunity for similar justice.
6
The name Bill O'Reilly will be remembered for a long long time. It will be a kind of shorthand when describing a certain kind of man. Everybody will know just what you mean when you say, "he's another Bill O'Reilly."
13
Several thoughts come to mind.
1. Harassment (whether sexual or some in other form) is always wrong, and it doesn’t need to happen in just the workplace to be wrong.
2. Harassment, sexual or otherwise happens in other industries. For example, Las Vegas a little bit about the casino industry. It wasn’t all that long ago when cocktail waitress’ were expected to serve sex. Showgirls too. And dealers and secretaries. And not just to the bosses, but also to the customers.
3. Everybody (men, women, gays) everywhere is either guilty of the deed, or guilty of silence. But we have come a long way from Ancient Rome. It’s just taken too long.
4. Only the Hollywood entertainment industry can be so ego driven to think it only happens there.
2
Bill O'Reilly is lost in some fabricated reality, it happens. He believes he has been ordained some way to decide right and wrong, his malady appeared so frequently it was obvious that he was convinced that " if he said it, or thought it then what ever IT was, was true ".
He became so isolated from the general population that his problem was no longer in his grasp, he never thought he was innocent, he thought he was allowed, and everybody around him acted like he was allowed.
In pursuit of relationships he eventually decided that even the other party should comply and not reject him, that is text book mental illness.
What joy and pleasure is there in doing and going where you are not wanted. He decided that he had some veto over other people's free will, more mental illness.
There were thousands of women that would have been interested in Bill O'Reilly before it was apparent he wasn't well.
Fox is culpable. Roger Ailes was living outside of reality unfortunately and the bacteria in his organization was never benign. O'Reilly was much easier for Ailes to control as long as held the control to allow bad behavior then hold it against you....it's really bad psycho thriller where a Network gets a labotomy and eventually commits suicide by mistake.
Why do people work there? What kind of people work there?
8
The rewards are way out of proportion to real life. Why did she get that many millions. What do the relatives of the dead form LasVegas shooting get? Bupkus. What do any of us get if we get harassed or bullied or wrongly accused? $32 million? Really?
7
Ask the NRA to chip in. They are loaded.
The $32mil was a function of BOR's ability to pay that much.
4
Mickey
the Vegas families are actually sharing donations in the millions , distrubuted by Ken Feinberg ( sp.? )
check it out
He paid the going price. What’s the problem? Law of supply and demand . . .you know. Adam Smith would be proud. Capitalism truly is the foundation for the utopian world the few are working so hard to create, definitely. Kind of like paying a million dollars for a Ferrari that goes 200 mph. That speed breaks every speed limit out there but does that make its driver a criminal just because they can afford one? No way, it makes them the envy of everyone else putting along in their old beaters going the legal speed limit. We should all take our outrage at this to the mirror as that’s the only rightful place it belongs.
2
No wonder he continued his behaviour stealing the careers of women around him. The company he worked for aided and abetted. Can Fox be taken legally to task for its negligence towards its employees?
5
Just as an aside it's pretty stunning that Bill O'Reilly was the biggest star on *Cable TV*. Think about that. Not the biggest star on that less than zero faux-news channel but the biggest star on Cable TV. What planet am I on?
10
Harvey Weinstein, Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly were all very wealthy, perhaps in the nine-digit range. Why don't these wealthy old guys who like young women just hire some escorts? They are abundant in New York and LA.
6
They don’t want to pay their taxes, what makes you think they’d want to pay for sex?
7
Because showing their power and dominance turns them on.
9
We need an expose on all the campaign funds donated by Fox, Ailes and O'Reilly over the years....a goodly sum I'd bet....then find out how much Republican politicians have returned or donated to charity. I know an MSNBC contributor called the RNC and asked the question: they hung up on him.
13
Not much to say here except for: SHAME ON FOX. I will show MY disapproval by not watching FOX again or purchasing from the advertisers of Bill’s show.
Wanna mess with women? We’re just getting started, baby
9
Please--not CNN or MSNBC. Don't subject yourself to their propaganda.
Fox: we don't report ... we don't let you decide
Tip of the iceberg.
5
Fox is a patriotic media outlet, the only one.
Why are they the only network that has always broadcasted the National Anthem during NFL games ?
Oh who am I kidding ? ... they've been refusing to air the anthem for years. Disrespecting the troops in order to peddle beer to kids.
7
has nothing to do with troops , another distraction
1
His popularity always amazed me. He practically oozes sleaze.
12
Did I read this right?? O'Reilly settled with the harassed individual for $32 million US??? And O'Reilly's lawyer is claiming this is a smear campaign making O'Reilly non competitive in the Talk Show job market? She must have had audio or video on O'Reilly.. You don't pay $32 million for she said, he said...
17
that's correct
4
"release the tapes"
$32 million says “Guilty, save me from jail time.”
22
Why aren't the advertisers fleeing Fox after all these disclosures? I certainly wouldn't want my ad dollars going to help fund these huge sexual harassment settlements.
12
O’Reilly should be in jail, not lounging around in his Long Island mansion wallowing in self-pity.
And hopefully some arm of law enforcement is poking around the Fox board including the Murdochs. Certainly they are complicit at some level in allowing the harassment of women to thrive in the Fox News cesspool.
10
The few males left at FOX are outraged by
H. Weinsteins behavior
4
I guess the large number of settlements for the men of Fox is why Fox is so focused on Harvey Weinstein.
7
Thinking of changing genders real quick. $32 million sure seems like a lot of money to get harassed a bit by some old perv...my whole family could retire permanently.
3
Fox is truly despicable. They are immoral and broadcast brainwashing propaganda. It's a sad indictment of our country that they have so many viewers.
6
Money (and sick power) uber alles. Don't they know they can't take it with them? I hear the brain thinks for a few minutes after death. Maybe they'll figure it out then. Oreilly, Weinstein, Trump ...
4
This just goes to show how deeply male (especially white) privilege is deeply embedded in our society and it's institutions. Especially Business, Politics, and Religion. Mr. O'Reily was/is every bit as bad as Trump, Alies, and Weinstein and yet Fox News gives him a huge new contract. Heck, they only dumped him when pubic outcry caused advertisers to abandon his show. Perhaps we need a new 'morality' in this country. One that is truly committed to fairness, decency, and true equality...
5
Billl O’Sleazy. Not your garden variety pervert.
My guess is that he got away with simple sexual harassment for a long time and so he pursued even more perverted forms.
Why do perverts flourish in the entertainment world? The answer is that the companies let the Star perverts skate as long as they bring in the dollars.
PS. O’Sleazy is also a lousy author.
5
A lousy author with books on the New York Times best seller list for years??
3
For the past two weeks I have been in utter awe of the brazenness of the Republicans gloating over the disgusting Weinstein revelations.
Don Trump jr. even went after Jimmy Kimmel about not making jokes about Weinstein. Jimmy Kimmel did make a great joke about Weinstein, comparing him to another sexual predator, President Trump.
But here with Fox News you have a situation where a known sexual harasser, Bill O'Reilly, was actually rewarded for his predatory behavior by being given a contract extension for $25 million a year.
Harvey Weistein has left his company and his company should and will go under. What is Fox doing about all the predators in their midst, other than paying off the victims of Bill O'Reilly, Roger Ailes and “Fox News Specialists” host Eric Bolling?
29
Logically FOX needs to go under.
Supporting sexual harassment.
I am reading 'Fantasy land, how America went haywire' by Kurt Andersen.
It's about how fiction and delusion made it into this society.
3
Think about all those statements OReilly made about Bill Clinton. The height of hypocrisy. Yet, all his fans ate that up and wanted more. Where are the fans now?
With someone so lacking in morals and ethics reporting the news, one wonders how disreputable that news is.
22
After reading this story it gives the reader an idea of where the morals, or lack thereof, of the Murdock family lay.
23
Res Ipsi Locateur: Latin for "The Thing Speaks for Itself". It is self evident that something is wrong with Fox. Nobody is indispensable. Fox needs to find new blood, a new culture, and a new attitude. The 'Spin' by Fox needs to stop. If not now when??
297
Res ipsa loquitur?
Res ipsa loquitur , and I agree. Something IS wrong with Fox.
1
"res ipsa loquitur"
I am interested in why law authorities only seem interested in the Weinstein affair and not anything at FOX. Can these civil settlements preclude criminal charges. Then isn't FOX complicit in criminal obstruction of justice?
12
I'm sure the outraged souls of the right and Fox, apoplectic at Harvey Weinstein, will be equally outraged at this.
By the way, why are there always police cars parked outside Fox News? I never see that at any of the other networks. Are NYC taxpayers paying for police protection for Fox?
9
What exactly is a "non consensual sexual relationship"?
13
Especially one that went of for 15 years. It's worth noting that she filed the lawsuit just after Fox declined to renew her contract. O'Reilly appears to have fallen into the same trap of bad behavior as that of David Letterman.
1
The Letterman case was quite different. He had sex with a number of employees. A man learned of this and attempted to blackmail Letterman for 2 million dollars. Letterman reported this to the Manhattan District Attorneys Office. A sting was set up, Letterman handed over a fake cheque and the man was arrested. Letterman announced this on his show. As far as we know, there were no payoffs to any women and none complained of coercion. No one's silence was bought.
1
I saw what watching Fox News did to my father who just passed away from Alzheimer's. A man who was known by his friends and family as a true gentleman spewed filth ,misogyny,and racist remarks that were repeated almost verbatim from their daily programs with O'Reilly,Fox and friends.The world will be a better place when Murdock leaves this earthly realm.
47
You're not alone. We have a family friend; used to be one of the kindest and sweetest. I personally had to sever all contact. Fox Derangement Syndrome.
2
$32 million...you bet he doesn't want to sit in a courtroom for a year!
There's no question that "power" makes these creeps think they can do whatever they want and get away with it....it can't be from looking in the mirror and thinking "what woman wouldn't want me"....well, maybe they are so twisted with power they do think it.
8
Lock them up! Including the one who coined the phrase, "lock her up."
18
How about donating some of these millions of dollars, Ms. Wiehl, and other multi millionaires from O’Reilly settlements?
3
The hypocrisy of the right wing is stupefying. Do they realize we can see them? I don't understand why this serial sexual assaulter isn't in jail. When will we hold rich, usually White, men accountable for their crimes? O'Reilly, Weinstein and even Cosby should have been in jail long ago. This so called "Democracy" is a sham. Is this the downfall of the Republic? Innocent POC gunned down in the street weekly by Police while the 1% stroll through life without a care.
15
From what I can see, rich celebrities get away with stuff like this...ALOT!
1
Not a very nice man to put it mildly. He got paid a lot of money to spout nonsense on that ridiculous channel. Also have to wonder what kind of people, men or for that matter women, would seek work there knowing the history of all that has been revealed recently. Sick place.
12
As long as Mr. serial sex-offender can draw advertisers willing to pony up the bucks he'll continue to be pardoned...
4
Lis is a former federal prosecutor and a very good and smart person. She would know how to bring down a creep like this.
3
Next book by O’Reilly: “Killing Sex-Abuse Lawsuits Against Me.”
7
O'Reilly is just one more sleaze bag, like Weinstein and Trump and the rest. These guys are the walking definition of "toxic masculinity", and it's pretty clear that most of them ($32 million settlement?!) should be in PRISON.
28
Hilarious how O'Reilly is selflessly throwing money at these situations, even though they're not valid mind you, simply to spare his children. I can only imagine how thrilled his spawn must be that he's chucking away their inheritance to the tune of several million dollars at a pop.
10
I don't see a lot of difference between O'Reilly and Weinstein yet Weinstein seems to have triggered a much bigger response.
Why?
Is it because we already secretly suspected O'Reilly of this kind of behavior because of the kind of product he created, and we thought Weinstein was more ethical because of the kind of product he produced.
8
The fact that he was so popular says a lot about our country and its values. Then there's Trump. We've hit bottom.
30
So rather than teaching his kids a real lesson and fighting the accusations because they were supposedly not true, the lesson Bill decides to teach his kids is to throw $35M at the problem to make it go away. Nice try Bill, but we don't believe you. If the accusations were not true you wouldn't have paid the hush money.
9
This is a good reason why Sky News should be kept out of Murdoch hands. They have no class, no code, no decency in them. The whole bunch. All Murdoch controlled channels are blocked on my TV and this just adds another reason to avoid anything to do with these people.
I am still mad at National Geographic selling out to these people. I cancelled my membership the day they announced the deal.
15
I find it very,very, unlikely Trump's lascivious life style did not produce similar evidence. Why hasn't it, along with his income tax returns surfaced?
Is there some sort of agreement that keeps this stuff from being exposed? I am amazed that it has not at least been hacked into life. I mean is it so carefully programmed that these hackers can't get to it, or what??
11
So this neutralizes the charges against him, and because he gets his old job back, he won. There are no consequences for his actions. Well, hopefully, all women will think twice about working with or for him because I seriously doubt that he learned a thing. I wouldn't mind if he kept himself just on Fox, but he intrudes upon the talk show circuit in order to sell his books, so now we get to see his smirky face all over the place. Swell.
2
In the last two lines of the original "Stepford Wives" movie (1975), the female protagonist asks the leader of the husbands' club "Why (do you do it)?"
He responds: "Because we can."
6
That's about the size of it, A. *sigh*
The United States of America is under a stress test. We are losing that test. Anything goes, and will.
2
Wow. Fantastic reporting. Please keep it up!
6
Like me, I think it is beyond most peoples' comprehension that entities like Fox, CNN, NBC, etc., rake in so much money from advertisers, they can literally throw away TENS of MILLIONS of dollars toward these kind of fiascoes!
How anyone like Bill O can get these outrageous salaries gives a hint at just how many semi-truck loads of cash come in daily to these businesses.
18
What is wrong with this country, that so many people watch and listen to and believe in the constant torrent of slime and incendiary disinformation from this thoroughly corrupt organization (Fox)?
67
If you believe O'Reilly, all you have to do to collect money from him is to threaten to sue him; even if he did nothing wrong, he'd just pay you to prevent from the publicity.
Yeah, right! This coming from a petulant bully is quite amusing.
24
In the wake of Fox News and Weinstein Hollywood - It still troubles me we haven't heard from more men within these organizations who may have witnessed such atrocious behavior and chose to remain silent about it. Once something like this breaks we always hear from other women - but never a rush of male co-workers who would dare corroborate the [female] victims claims.
This leads me to an interesting theory I have specifically to the Hollywood/Weinstein scandal. I truly believe there are hundreds of popular male actors who have used and abused their success and fame to pursue and ultimately "bed"numerous women. Isn't their behavior just as egregious and appalling as their Hollywood bosses? I would imagine they are quietly shaking in the dark and hoping the "Weinstein effect" doesn't slowly creep into their lives. In the end- using ones celebrity status as tool to take advantage of women is just as disgusting and morally unethical as an executive using his position of power to accomplish the same.
1
I find it unfortunate that in all these high profile cases of sexual harassment, almost all the victims are willing to shut their mouths for a big enough payout. Not only has that allowed these predators to amass new victims for years, but it raises a specter of doubt for those looking for one.
7
I've noticed that. Or say "me too " only when the influential guy is in the metaphorical slammer.
Lis profited from the association for umpteen years. Yet when M. Bialik mentions avoiding the situation where possible, she is attacked. Instead of movie stars or celebrity lawyers, maybe society ought to focus more on say, a single mother who desperately needs a job, who is getting pressured. Sorry but it seems to me that Lis could have walked away at any time rather than put up with nonconsensual sex, for heavens sake, and smutty emails. Another rule of thumb is and I'm sorry to say this because it seems rather obvious if one has an appointment with a very powerful man for a job or a roll and you are told at the last minute to meet him up in a hotel room you don't go . As I recall Lis was well qualified to work elsewhere.
1
Well said. These settlements are giving men like O’Reilly and Weinstein a hall pass/slap on the wrist for their “bad” behavior. They are repeat offenders who would of continued their disgusting actions indefinitely.... And the companies they worked for never held them accountable. They should of been taken to court like any other predator. Throw the book at them and put them behind bars.
3
15 years of settlements with multiple women? This does not under any circumstance pass the smell test for “private settlements. It’s text book sexual harassment in the workplace. Yet another example of a POWERFUL man imposing disgusting behavior and CONTROL over women who either have a lot to lose, or a lot to gain, IN THE WORKPLACE. This is ILLEGAL folks and FOX let him get away with it for years. No wonder he didn’t want his family dragged through the publicity. These were CHOICES he made, and that’s the price you when you repeatedly behave unethically, immorally, or illegally, and think you’re so important that you’re above the law. I have no pity for him and contempt for FOX.
11
$25m for something that never happened? Give me a break.
8
Bill O'Reilly and his personal lawyer handled the negotiations
with Ms. Wiehl, and Mr. O'Reilly used his own money, $32,000,000,
to settle with Ms. Wiehl.
Think about that: whatever happened was so bad even Fox News
was kept in the dark.
46
O'Reilly will forever serve time in the Fox Hall of Shame along with other Fox staff sexual harassers who have mistakenly assumed that civil liberty extends to taking advantage of women. Comments by loyalists on the Fox site provide a clear indication of their target audience and help explain why such men are tolerated at the network. Read at your own risk.
3
Another perfect example of everything that is the right-wing.
4
And Billy Clinton, a Democrat, is a saint?
Let’s not politicize this important issue. It’s appalling to see this behavior being swept under the rug with hush money at best, silence at worst.
4
Weinstein and Clinton, and Weiner are left-wing.
3
Those who protest the loudest about others' immorality are generally those who are harboring their own deep, dark secrets. O'Reilly and Company are just the latest incarnation- but, perhaps an even more diabolical mix since they combine supposed religiosity, patriotism, and "news reporting", along with undying support of Trump, pervert-in-chief. What a cauldron of hypocrisy- right out of Shakespeare.
7
Villainy has many shapes and forms and this O'Reilly is one of them, quite despicable and sickening.
2
don't forget Fox's latest predator to be fired : Eric Bolling!
3
And yet Fox News thrives... and why not?
Viewership is blind and probably they think all this a soap opera of rich and wealthy .
So there you go....this is like that fake religious cult leader we have heard stories of who end up raping women folk members while the rest accept it as a part of faith, are boondoggled because they are being pandered to their base animal instincts till they are asked to cull the same poison.
4
O’Reilly is a bellicose hypocrite. His pathetic denials, protected by $45 million worth of hush money, ring as hollow as his empty soul.
21
This guy belongs in chains on a road crew in Westchester County, where his former neighbors can see him.
1
Meanwhile Lis Wiehl bites her lip and silently counts her money as her "alleged" predator, who actually said on the air...
BR: "You owe me big"
LW: "no,no,no"
...clearly enacted that conversation privately so often that it cost him 32 mill of his personal fortune. FOX to the rescue with a quid pro quo 28 mill raise, so only 4 mill of his fortune...
But now he can piously claim his innocence, throw his trembling kids up as a shield and impugn Lis and the 5 other known victims as "financially and politically motivated" trollops out to victimize the poor sitting duck Bill O'Reilly.
Is that blood on your lip Lis? Blood money perpetuates predatory behavior.
The lengths the company went to to keep O'Reilly, no matter what, shows the lie about Fox News having anything to do with 'news'. If it were just news, they could've easily found a less radioactive conservative pundit. (With 6 harassment settlements, O'Reilly was a newMAKER as much as being listed as a 'pundit')
But O'Reilly was apparently more than just a pundit mouthing conservative thoughts on issues of the day He seems to have been priceless as an ideologue, a propagandist, a shaper of opinion as much as a person giving one. Fox is to news, as propaganda is to information.
Wake up, America. We have a for-profit, propaganda arm of an identified political party with a stranglehold on the minds of tens of millions of Americans. As such Fox will never report favorably on anything Democrats say or do. Every supermarket, doctor's office, airport--any place in America where the public congregates is likely to have a box tuned into the employer of a serial-abuser that was too valuable to let go. Either there should be a law against news organizations that function as propaganda mills, or the Democrats need to field their own news-propaganda operation. The mantra that 'truth has a liberal bias' is coincidental at best, and a potential handicap at worst.
14
...and apparently it's no longer enough to be a multi-multi-millionaire! He's actually bitter that he doesn't get to show his mug in America's living room on a nightly basis anymore. He and his family can live quietly and comfortably for the rest of his life on those kind of assets. But it's not enough. It's never enough.
People like this are the best argument for a wealth tax.
If we're generating this much income for that many people with billions of souls around the world going to bed at night with nothing, then we have a moral obligation to put such wealth to better use than shoving ever more of it over to ingrates like O'Reilly and his ilk.
2
And no one goes to jail because fees for accusers discourages legal action. Jail is for people who are poor.
10
Instead of cutting the tax rate so these corporations can continue to make windfall profits, just start telling male employees to keep their hands and their remarks to themselves. Sounds like it could save billions.
5
How can 21st Century Fox claim that the settlement was a personal matter for O'Reilly when it apparently includes a release of claims against Fox? What the article implicitly says is that the settlement agreement and O'Reilly's new employment contract (with an additional $28MM over 4 years) were inextricably linked. Wonder if this might expose Fox to any other legal or accounting liabilities??
5
So, those who do this (individuals and complicit organizations) are let off with another multi-million-dollar settlement - begetting a new book deal, "golden parachute", and "any-news-is-good-news" publicity that will further their financial portfolio or aspirations.
When will American's finally step up and say this is no longer tolerable? That money is not the sole equalizer?
When will we say, finally, that these are the type of people that really belong in jail: predators; unencumbered by corporate greed, that are enabled for years by their corporate and governmental masters that continue to pursue their targets just because they are "popular" and can "pay off" a victim?
Those with the deepest pockets and the worst instincts can flippantly evade the law by reaching settlements, and deals!
When will "due process" be carried out? Or is financial settlement enough?
We are better than this? No?
5
A $1M settlement for a big star is go away money to keep your name out the paper. A $32M settlement is something else entirely.
Whatever O'Reilly actually did must have been serious and confirmable for him to agree to pay that much money.
29
Many women adored Bill, voted for Donald a known abuser, blamed HRC for Bill and virtually demonized her, and there will be many drawn again to O’Reilly. Is abuse systemic for these women, commoditized and liking it?
7
Read Susie Truth above.
1
This is sad. And archaic. Take him off the air. Let’s make a statement.
2
When accused by his producer for propositioning her via phone in the Caribbean several years ago this flaming hypocrite proclaimed on air that he would not settle because he was innocent. That is until recordings surfaced to support her charge this blowhard promptly settled. And his piggish behavior continued until the Murdoch sons showed him the door.
9
How do we teach young men and boys to respect women when they see powerful men, get away with raping and abusing women?
460
This is the real question that we need to find an answer to. How does a parent explain to his/her son that they cannot treat women as playthings when powerful men, that they see on television everyday, spend a lifetime abusing women, and getting away with it. The feakin President of the United States is a known sexual predator yet there he is, everyday reminding women, and men and boys, that so long as you are rich or powerful enough you need not worry about the repercussions of your actions.
I am reminded of "The Emperor's New Clothes", where a child sees clearly what adults cannot. Do we really not understand how this looks through the eyes of our children? Both boys and girls understand what is going on, and they will grow up to be men and women.
1
@Beverly, and being rewarded with the presidency after proudly proclaiming to grab women by their genitalia.
2
Seems to me that the FCC should look into revoking Fox's broadcast license for harboring sexual predators.
16
alas, with the foxes controlling the henhouse, this will never happen.
3
Bill Clinton only had to pay off one of his sexual victims $750,000. Perhaps this large $32M settlement will deter men from sexual harassment.
2
It all goes back to the low standards of Murdoch. His organization dicriminates and harasses women. Fox news lies to created fake news and lies to its viewers daily, directly leading to lowering Republican standards. And his newspaper spied on the Queen and royals and broke moral and legal standards. WHY IS THIS MAN AND HIS FAMILY GRANTED LICENSES TO OWN MEDIA???????
9
The scene... Fox News boardroom.
Honcho 1 - O'Reilly brings in a ton of cash!
Honcho 2 - And apparently is sexually harassing women all the time.
Honcho 3 - AND O'Reilly pays off his own lawsuits so it's not costing
us a dime!
Honcho 4 - There's only one thing to do...
Honcho 5 - EXTEND O'REILLY'S CONTRACT AND THEN GO
HARRASS SOME WOMEN!!!
13
A “nonconsentual sexual relationship” - isn’t that rape?
13
He says he is innocent! He’s lying, he’s a liar, he lies. He”s
4
O’Reilly is a predator who should be in jail just like anyone else who commits RAPE. $32 million bucks?! This makes me sick.
34
Thirty-two. Million. Dollars.
If Bill O'Really? isn't careful, he's gonna have to pony up more than his pocket change to get a little action.
5
I'm shocked! Shocked there is sexual abuse by celebrities in the work-place. Shocked at the monetary settlements and utter indifference about those at fault. Ahh, but aint that America, the heated subterranean American Dream Mailer argued, and perhaps realized by Don Trump, as disclosed on an Access Hollywood bus.
6
So their company is full of women who were victims of nasty, powerful men... women who were compliant or equally manipulative? Women who "had to " play the game to get to where they are? I hope the game is over. Meanwhile what does that say for the successful women in the company who didn,t play along.... if, indeed. there,are any?
3
O'Reilly probably selling all his left over "Factor" inventory to raise some scratch. "Good deals to be had"!
2
Sometimes big companies pay LARGE payouts to quietly settle a law suit even if they are not guilty which probably what happened here. There is alot of news stations that hate Fox because they are the number one news station and that is disturbing to the obvious. Don't think this is done every day and all situations in life check for yourself instead of being brain washed by someone who is telling you these are the facts.
2
I have checked for myself. In fact, I've checked 32 million times. You're not really living up to your surname Suzie.
7
The cognitive dissonance created by 35 years of Limbaugh, talk radio, Fox News, along with the Breitbart end of the web is formidable. For you to look at $50 million dollars paid by O'Reilly alone to six women over 14 years, many of whom were already wealthy, successful and had high profile careers at stake, and robotically assume that it's some shakedown of Bill O'Reilly is simply amazing. I guess the next test of just how brainwashed you are would be to hear your explanation for the audio recordings of the late night harassment calls made by O'Reilly to Andrea Mackris which were delivered by her attorney to his team in 2004. Prior to that, O'Reilly had been engaged in a loud campaign claiming that he was the subject of a 'smear' engineered by the left, and filed a counter-suit.
Within 48 after Mackris - who worked as a producer on his show prior to her quitting after two rounds of harassment by O'Reilly - produced the tapes, O'Reilly dropped his suit and settled for a reported 9 million dollars.
Do you have a Trump-level 'fake news' claim to help you mentally spackle over this documented reality? If you manage to come up with a pretzel logic maneuver to sell that to yourself, I guess it explains how so many think the hundreds of deeply sourced stories chronicling Trump campaign/admin meetings with Russian Intel to be untrue as well.
10
Six women from 2002 on. Once, I'd give it to him. Twice, ok, maybe another misunderstanding.
Come on Truth person, stop being ridiculous. These are not lawsuits by people who "hate Fox," these are lawsuits from people who worked at Fox.
You don't make any sense.
7
If word of O'Reilly's $32 million settlement had leaked while he was at Fox, that seemingly could have presented a material financial issue.
Shouldn't Fox have warned shareholders about that beforehand?
274
For a company with about $30 billion in revenue, $32 million is not material.
1
Isn't the point of this article that the $32 million came out of O'Reilly's own pocket? Does he really have that much money? What exactly did she have on him?
You're assuming a set of ethics where none exists.
So glad to be hearing so little from him. Rather than nasty daily quotes on everything, it's now mostly silence. Thank goodness. I'd hate for him to have a big enough platform to jump into Trump's daily utterings.
Also, his books on historical events are truly bunk.
8
Bill O'Reilly is obviously cut from the same bolt of cloth as Donald Trump. No remorse, no apologies and it's everyone else fault (or financial/political agendas) that he has been accused of sexual harassment.
9
I always pay people $32 Million dollars when they accuse me of things I am not guilty! And, I insist on explaining it that way publicly, because I exist in a no spin zone and I am looking out for you.
If Fox fostered the culture which perpetrated persistent abusive behavior and repeated insane hush money, what lies did they tell their viewers?
10
Wow, $32 million. Wow.
We'll never know the specifics of the allegations, but it's easy to speculate that "non consensual sex" meant rape or assault.
Instead of complaining, O'Reilly should be thankful that he only lost his job, and isn't in prison.
32
He certainly appears to be guilty -- and I'm sorry he's not in prison. How can we change this culture if the guilty have their "fines" paid off by others and while losing some status, walk free and able to continue denying their guilt?
2
Say what you will about O'Reilly, the actions of the women involved appear to have been a spectacularly successful career strategy. In what other profession and you earn $8,000,000 to $32,000,000. Wow? What a gig. Please have these women teach us how to get such a successful gig.
3
The first step is to be born white and male. Odds of achieving this even with this as a head start are about the same as winning the jackpot in the multi-state lottery. As for Oprah, she is still one of a kind.
1
I think they can teach us that they were incredibly brave and strong. They fought back against this pig in a work place that didn't want to hear a word from them.
4
Not so difficult to learn how to get a big career at Fox:
1-Graduate from a reasonably good journalism school.
2-Work hard in local TV stations
3-Always toe the Conservative party line any time you are quoted.
4-Stay thin, and preferably blond.
5-Then go to work at Fox, where powerful entitled men could rape subordinates without any repercussions.
Enviable, right?
3
Lis Wiehl's complaints about Bill O’Reilly included “allegations of repeated harassment, a nonconsensual sexual relationship and the sending of gay pornography and other sexually explicit material.” To my way of thinking, these allegations sound like grounds for a criminal investigation and charges. Doubtless, Ms. Wiehl had evidence of these allegations, hence the extraordinary settlement. When Ms. Wiehl signed a sworn affidavit “renouncing all allegations" against O'Reilly, $32 million became the price of her silence. O'Reilly was then free able to negotiate a 4-year contract extension with Fox for $25 million/year. For O’Reilly, the huge settlement was an investment by which he would reap a handsome reward, tripling his money in just four years. At the same time, Foxnews, eager to keep a major on-air asset, was perfectly willing to look the other way, paying O’Reilly so much over the years that he could afford $45 million in settlements to women.
All of that money was made possible by millions of Foxnews viewers. They have watched a network where predatory men, like O’Reilly and Ailes, abetted the rise of Donald Trump, another predatory man. Russian interference changed a few minds, but Foxnews did far more to normalize Trump and minimize allegations about his treatment of women. Sadly, the captive viewers of Foxnews are unlikely to see this latest story on the network or at Foxnews.com, because that would expose the real agenda and values of that entire sorry enterprise.
61
Now's the time for the rest of the advertisers to quit Fox. Boycott Fox.
2
A $32 million payout, his crimes must be truly horrible because settlements of that size are to keep the unspeakable unspoken.
17
Of course Fox hired him back. Their viewers have clearly demonstrated they don't care about victims of harassment or assault by voting a serial harasser/assaulter to the highest office in the land.
32
Yet another hypocrite, a bible thumping purveyor of fake news is caught up with. And it's not that Fox "News" didn't know. They didn't care! That they enabled O'Reilly's TV rantings on morality and behavior, appealing to the undereducated and uninformed paying him so much money that he could afford these multimillion dollar settlements. Fox should be required to double the settlement amounts to make amends. Of course this will never happen and as long as Fox's viewers believe that "The Simpsons" is reality TV, it won't matter either to the Murdochs or Fox "News" viewers..
17
Harvey Weinstein has lost his job, company, everything and rightly so. Bill O'Reilly is still chumming it up with the President of the United States every week or so.
What is wrong with this picture? Where is the public outrage?
118
A few years ago, when Ms. Wiehl was a regular contributor to a certain Fox broadcaster’s show, I mentioned on her Facebook page that he had destroyed my broadcasting career three decades prior when I was 25 years old and he was an alcoholic, drug addicted, abusive “star.” Although I did not mention the particulars of the abuse, because I’m working on my own book, I did expect some kind of a response. Instead of displaying any sympathy, or reaching out to me, or posting an appropriate comment, or sending me a Facebook message behind the scenes, Wiehl simply banned me from her page, removed my comment, and made elusive reference to how important the broadcaster’s “charity work” was. Now I read that she collected a $32-million payout as a middle-aged woman who didn’t lose anything in her life, only gained millions without having her career even noticeably interrupted. That gives you an idea as to how low on the integrity, interest, curiosity, and morality scale the Fox line-up falls. You couldn't make this stuff up if you tried!
16
Also a lesson on why women don't report. Swallow your pride, have a career, allow predators free reign OR report the crime, lose the career, and the predators will still enjoy free reign.
4
Fox News is a long-term enabler of male predatory behavior against women. I wonder if Trump will want the FCC to revoke their broadcast license like he did with NBC.
24
"according to two people briefed on the matter"
That's impressive.
and the documents Mary and the documents. and the no denial but Fox admitting that it is true.
except for that their is no case at all.
1
Isn't this one of the many reasons why Preet Bharara was investigating Fox News before he was fired by Sessions and 45? Because Fox was using its shareholders' funds illegally for payouts for the victims of Bill O'Reilly's illegal harassment?
35
O'Reilly, Bill Clinton, Trump, and Weinstein are all either sex offenders, or used there power to harass women. They all belong to jail. This issue should not be resolved by just paying some money, there should be also jail time.
As long as predators like these guys know they can get away with their crimes by just paying some money, we will experience more and more sexual harassments in America. Jail time is necessary to protect people.
1
No evidence what so ever that Trump was a sexual predator. All of his accusers never came close to proving a case. No evidence of payoffs or lawsuits. Orielly, Weinstien and Clinton have plenty of proof they were guilty. Just because a guy uses dirty talk to describe what he likes to do doesnt make it true. Especially when all guys like to over-speak about sexual stuff. Woman talk dirt to one another about guys also.
1
The Murdoch family is complicit in this attempted cover-up. The sons too, not just the dad. Recently they have been trying to act all noble by ousting Bill O'Reilly and Roger Ailes. But they only did this because they saw no light at the end of the tunnel. The men were not fired to protect women; they were fired because ads were being pulled, money was being lost. The predators are monsters, but the power-brokers who prop them up, look the other way, conspire to pay off victims -- or know about the payoff -- and collect the profits...they are monsters too.
6
Wow! Can you imagine how much wealthier all Fox stockholders could be if the Murdochs did not embrace sexual harassment at the core of their culture? And, they believe as a family the cost of this culture is a worthwhile business cost. Molester in denial O'Reilly seems so concerned about his kids - remember statistically, parents are the most likely people to sexually abuser their kids! And he seems so upset with the tabloid media - would that be the same tabloid media owned by the Murdoch family?
4
The damage done to the country by the Murdochs - including the sons - is incalculable.
They know exactly what's transpiring - whether its the slime oozing through their corridors or the hate, ridicule and racism being spread over their airwaves. The cultural wars are their reason for being.
The name of the game is greed.
16
These sexual predators and their management need to just Stop. I am so grateful to the NYT for continuing its pursuit of this case, as people like O'Reilly, Weinstein, and Ailes need to be stopped. Their actions make me feel dirty, and it is beyond belief that 21st Century Fox would even offer O'Reilly a continuing contract. The hush money is disgusting, and if I were Ms. Wiehl, I would *never* have taken the money (even $32 million) by the dirty hands of O'Reilly. I would rather him have his day in court. Just maybe one of the victims will brave the "limelight" to send this evil man to jail.
5
Rupert Murdoch guides his control of Fox by ratings not by moral principled actions unless it starts to cut into his bottom line. But if the viewership want to see the sexual predators -Rupert will place them on the scale opposite moral principles actions! Depending on the out cry as to which is more preferred - affecting Rupert's bottom line! Given todays climate and tastes sexual offenders may just win out over principled actions. Especially when you consider how the U.S went about picking its president, a self-bragging sexual predator who had no bones in telling the world that he uses tic tac to smooth his way in!
2
So after years of abusing women and buying them off he's the victim?
24
You had to think this was coming. You have a working class guy who came from nowhere, has an enormous chip on his shoulder, is less than conventionally attractive (to say the least), and who then becomes a "celebrity" -- what do you often get with that combination? A guy with an overinflated ego who is nevertheless deeply unsure of his real worth as a human being. He forces himself on women, in part because power has gone to his head and he feels entitled, and in part because deep down he doubts his self-image as a great, important guy.
Fox enables his behavior because he makes them lots of money. In addition of course we know what the culture there was (is?) like. It was a sick situation, like so much that passes for acceptable behavior in postmodern America.
11
Who are you writing about, Jon Harrison, O'Reilly or your president.? This script almost fits both.
2
Good point, Champagne socialist. Although Trump was probably "conventionally good-looking" when he was a young man. O'Reilly never was.
1
Disgraced Republican kingmakers Ailes and O’Reilly share much in common with Mr Trump.
15
I would like to see these celebrities go to the jail like their poor counterparts for abusing women.
12
This is all egregious behavior beyond words. But bear in mind this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Imagine a network that supports sexual misconduct. If you can then you can also imagine a network that distorts facts to shape an ugly corporate agenda that has as its central aim the destruction of every average American. The problem is we continue to live on their sound bites and no one calls them out.
This is an even worst problem in the era of Trump. We can hope perhaps that we can take out these Corporate controlled media networks just like we took out their sexual predators.
22
Ever notice how it's always the extremely ugly " men " who consider themselves utterly irresistible to any Woman???? Extreme Privilege is REALLY extreme. And self-deluded.
35
Their power is the only thing that allows them to force themselves on women. When are the enabler men going to speak up? The enablers are just as guilty.
4
Fellow NYT'ers - especially women readers, please chime in. How can female Republicans 1. vote for and continue to support Trump after the Access Hollywood tape emerged and 2. be devoted to Fox News given the disgusting history of sexual predation there. It is mystifying to me.
24
It's part of the culture and American culture at large.
3
@Fascist Fighter
I would assume the easy answer is that their Republican husbands tell them to..???
3
No mystery. It is the moronic culture of the right. They shout from the highest mountains they are saving the world's Christian values when in fact they make a mockery of Christ's teachings.
7
And why does Fox still have their license??
9
Typical O'Reilly
He talks tough, but actually he's a coward! He rages against his accusers and then quietly pays them off rather than "fight" to prove his innocence. What does that tell You?
38
Coward and bully: two sides of the same warped coin. And the warped beat goes on: POTUS re-tweeting sound bites he hears on Fox & Friends, etc., the America First Network, owned and operated by a citizen of a foreign nation.
1
At least he wrote his own fine books.
Oops.
8
How. Ice of him to protect his children. Of course he would do anything for his children not to have to learn their daddy is professional harasser. So nice. And of course they’ll grow not being able to add two plus two to equal sexual abuse like the rest of us. So nice of him. And you know it!
4
Fox News' motto should be "viewers at any cost," not "fair and balanced."
4
So funny btw lets remember this is not a pay out written in stone as there is no verification. The hook is in your mouth.
I don't care how filthy rich you are, no one pays $32 million to someone when there is no merit to any of the allegations and when proof of that exists, as O'Reilly claims. I hope this disclosure finishes off O'Reilly's career for good.
63
Fox News
Dropped "fair and balanced" for "predators and settlements".
10
Settle down you guys. A 32 million dollar settlement for a senior Fox News star? Nothing to see here. Why does the liberal media go on these witch hunts? Now Harvey Weinstein, there's your story! We should call for Miramax to immediately shut down, as a Fox news anchor recently suggested.
Hypocrisy isn't even a word anymore.
7
Sswank, the difference is that O'Reilly spent so much time in 1998 lambasting Bill Clinton about the Lewinsky affair. On the other hand, I don't recall Weinstein ever spouting such as "holier than thou" rhetoric.
2
I have never been impressed with Bill O'Reilly. I remember in the late 1990s going to my Super Crown Bookstore to buy some books and there was a big display of O'Reilly's latest book. I don't remember the title, but I didn't buy it. (It was the same time as Hillary Clinton's book "It Takes A Village" came out. There was a display of her books nearby.) I do remember thinking that O'Reilly's book was probably a worthless book because my impression of Bill was he was writing about something he did not know a thing about. I figured he got some ghost writer to write it and then he edited it to give it his personal style and slap his name on it. Maybe he did write it and I just was applying my distaste for Bill to his book.
I remember Bill O'Reilly having a hissy fit on election night one year when Obama was the projected winner by even Fox News. He stormed down a hallway, followed by cameras to visit some back room where the projections were calculated by a bunch of people sitting at too many desks crowded in the room. He was ranting. The people in the room were telling he that, sorry, it is true.
This is a man who lives in his own world.
Apparently, despite O'Reilly being the expensive immoral person he is, Fox News has decided they need him.
What a pathetic world we live in.
10
It was Megan Kelly who made that who made that infamous race to projection room, where the calculations called President Obama the winner. You can find the video on You Tube. I have watched it a number of times, just for the pure enjoyment.
1
Character shows.
Honesty, integrity...
It is pervasive.
As is the lack of it.
You are never the exception
to being dishonored by the dishonorable.
You are never the exception.
There IS never an exception.
Image management only goes so far,
if you (we) are willing to see the truth.
The Murdoch's & Fox News power players were benefiting and that's what mattered.
Fox News viewers, what's the benefit
that's keeping your truth- radar turned off?
And Fix news turned on?
You are never the exception.
There is no exception.
4
No wonder why Fox News commentators and anchors are so scared of feminism. Empowered women are costing them millions simply to keep its dysfunctional weirdos in power.
10
How are these companies not subject to civil RICO claims, as organizations facilitating patterns of criminal behavior? What on earth drives these men to behave like this toward women, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars? And why refer to a "nonconsensual sexual relationship"? If it was rape or assault, say so! If it was coerced, say so! "Nonconsensual sex" doesn't just magically happen -- someone forced someone else into sex against that person's will. Say so!
612
Good point. Sounds like grounds for shareholders to bring a case against Fox News and parent company. In admitting they knew about the serious complaints against O'Reilly--essentially they were putting the company at risk in re-contracting with him.
1
How can it be "sex" if one party forces another to do it or engages in it without the consent of the other? It is abuse, assault or harassment, of a sexual nature, probably resulting from abuse of power.
If the conduct included criminal assault, the extent of such behavior would indeed support a RICO claim. Fox has been paying off the victims to forestall that.
I didn't do anything wrong, and I won't do it again. Here's $32 million.
24
Twenty-First Century Fox is a publicly traded company. How do they avoid a breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit? This is beyond outrageous.
10
We see Mr. O'Reilly slowly making his comeback with his new book and a PR firm willing to sell him for a hefty sum. Wealth at his fingertips to buy his way back.
4
Everyone knows that Trump is yet another predator. He admitted it openly on numerous occasions and, in spite of this, he seems to have insulated himself because he's part of an elite boy's club. (Remember, all these settlements are illegitimate and this is all fake news, right?)
As others have asked here: when will journalists begin a thorough investigation of Trump? We don't want to make the same mistake as Fox and "renew his contract."
And ya, sure, for those of you who want Clinton and every other "liberal" investigated, that's fine too.
9
So O'Reilly personally paid the $32 million? That's alot of royalties from his so called books.
4
Payout exceeds annual salary. The corporation is colluding in this settlement; reminiscent of organized criminal conspiracy.
10
This coming week would be a great time for O'Reilly to have a guest appearance on that Fox program "Outnumbered." How would the four women treat him? As he deserved to be treated? Or would they be polite, because, of course, it's a Fox "News" show and he's been their Prince Valiant for two decades? Huge conflict there! Huge stress! I'd really love to see that.
5
Clearly, the monetary value of pandering to people's fears and hatred has more value to FoxNews than having professional relationships that are "fair and balanced." Since FoxNews spent so much money to conceal the truth, and since the people giving their "news," lack moral character, it's slogan should be changed to "duplicitous and unhinged."
Why would anyone believe anything coming from the network?
5
... Because of the misdirected anger and astounding ignorance and gullibility of the many Americans who buy Fox's nasty hyperbole, some of whom probably think this sort of behavior towards those less powerful is to be expected and even acceptable. This, coupled with the systematic dismantling of social, environmental and financial regulations and safety nets by hack appointees to benefit the few while we're being distracted by inane tweets and bizarre behavior, make for the incredibly disappointing times we live in here in the good old US of A. How can "the adults in the room" band together to support one a another in stepping the country back from the brink of utter mayhem?!
3
Hopefully Great Britain is watch with respect to the SKY News negotiations. Say no to Murdoch.
4
Where Trump can be elected after the Hollywood tape; nothing seems impossible.
This is a moral value of our society.. at least one of the top 10 for sure.
11
Fox News has been fashioning itself after the National Enquirer with a stilted political bent.
The only diff the headlining sexual exploitation content that comes out of " Fox News" is what has been taking place within the Fox Newsroom and with sidebars from Rupert Murdoch who controls 21st Century Fox!
It like a self contained news room, sexual explicit soap opera - with President Trump tuning, and calling in, to congratulate the performers on their scripted performances.
3
Memo to Fox News - While its certainly appropriate to report on the Harvey Weinstein scandal, please don't get too celebratory making fun of a fallen Hollywood liberal, when there are more sexual harrassment skeletons in the FOX closet than at all the haunted houses in America combined.....
6
And you think that Fox News is going to read your "memo?"
Seen their ratings lately?
1
Fox has truly become the voice of that great conservative mosh pit of middle America.
Their latest acolyte, Trump, is nothing but another me-too guy in the sexual predator hall of fame with doors closed except to the most privileged and upstanding of that august group.
What now Conservatives as you follow another of your rich, over-stuffed, lecherous heroes into your own form of nirvana and bigotry and poverty of soul?
What now, indeed.
3
Trump, Bill Clinton, O'Reilly, Ailes - what's a father to tell his young daughter?
4
How many times have we heard in the past, it is easier to pay people off. It makes sense financially to buy people off, rather to even risk the possibility of losing money. Weinstein ran his racket in Hollywood for years, while all who knew of his proclivities remained silent. O'Reilly too, though the worm that he is, blames Democrats, because he has the morals of a louse.
Laws need to be changed, these psychopaths that are in charge of business need to be criminally prosecuted. O'Reilly's bosses knew! They chose to allow him to prey on other victims, and though they paid these victims off, it shouldn't have been more than one victim to remove him from the air, fire him and prosecute him. He is a predator. Just as any other serial sex offender, no difference.
2
Speaks volumes about Fox News.
2
We knew he was arrogant, a liar, an opportunist, and self serving.
Now we know for sure he is an abuser of females.
I’d say he seems after all to be qualified to run for president of the USA.
6
Bet Bill isn't so smugly smiley now.
1
As my dear mother would say, "Good riddance to bad rubbish!"
4
Arrogant, narcissistic bully. The right wing has a love affair with cowardly shallow so-called Alpha males and hypocrites.
3
Weinstein is a disgusting pig who deserves everything he's getting, but O'Reilly must have done many many really really bad things ("nonconsensual sex") to Ms. Wiehl to warrant a $36M payout. That's an enormous amount of money to one person for sexual harassment. He was probably jealous of her Harvard law degree and had to continually humiliate her to sooth his ego.
5
O'Reilly claims that these allegations are all "crap". That's an awfully hefty price for manure.
3
But Fox News is OUTRAGED about how Harvey Weinstein was allowed to continue being a predator.
7
Shame on Rupert Murdoch, his family and everyone at Fox News. O'Reilly is a predator who should do time but News Corp should lose their broadcast licenses for giving a new contract to a proven sexual predator
6
"Shame on Rupert Murdoch, . . . ." you say. I agree.
Thing is, if there weren't a significant fan base willing to ignore O'Reilly's transgressions, he'd be yesterday's news.
Of course, I'm sure it's just the menfolk who're willing to give him a pass -- "Boys will be boys," of course. Certainly, no respectable woman would condone O'Reilly's conduct. Right?
2
You know this is disgusting overall, but the Times doesn't have to add that he sent the woman "gay pornography." The word "pornography" would have sufficed. Des the fact that it was gay make it worse because, presumably, he is and she was heterosexual?
218
My take was not that gay porn was particularly distasteful, but it emphasizes O'Reilly's hypocrisy, because he was bigoted against LBGT people. Once again, that man was talking from both sides of his mouth.
5
Yes it does because the Fox Conservative World News demonizes gay people.
4
Disagree. Including the detail 'gay' adds information the reader wouldn't otherwise have and a perspective that would have gone unseen.
2
Since when can sexual harassers and abusers "strike a deal" for any amount of money? Fox News should be ashamed, but then again, considering its audience...
6
Ask Rose McGowan and all of the women who settled with Weinstein's company.
2
The common thread? Unchecked, people in power are monsters. The other common thread? Those whose responsibility is to check power will pursue their own self-interests. O'Reilly's downfall were his unchecked sexual aggression, as well as simple math on the part of the Murdochs. If it still made business sense for the Murdochs, then O'Reilly would still roam the halls of Fox News, hunting women. This begs the last question: Who's the bigger monster, the Murdochs of this world, or the O'Reillys?
5
“Nonconsensual sexual relationship”? Isn’t that the very definition of rape? Let’s begin to address this issue by dropping the euphemisms that only serve to trivialize these attacks on women, and let’s stop letting these perpetrators and their employer/enablers off the legal hook by payouts. Civil settlements are not enough anymore — not when it’s easy to just write a check for any amount, and go on as if nothing ever happened.
Furthermore, there shouid be NO statutes of limitation criminally as it concerns any sex crime.
Fox proves that power, celebrity, and almighty ratings mean more than the health, well-being, and dignity of those who O’Reilly abused.
Color me shocked.
7
You nailed it!
But the deplorables will still flock to Fox for O'Reilly's daily diatribe of hate.
2
Only the ignorant believe O'Reilly can still be seen on Fox. Even the article notes that O'Reilly lost his job with Fox. Sheesh.
2
He didn't fight the accusation because he didn't want his kids to know what a reprehensible person he is, so instead he gave the woman $32 Mil. Ya sure Billo. Guess what, they already knew and now we all know how much money your piggishness has cost your family. Hey Bill, I bet they would have rather you fought the charge instead of giving up the cash, since you are so innocent and all.
3
And to think that Fox has been in the forefront of the recent conservative media circus over attempts at tying Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein's bad behavior and sexual aggression to "Liberals" and the Democratic Party? Just curious if Fox's current lead attack dogs Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson will ,tit for tat, mention their predecessor Bill O'Reilly's recently reported fixation on gay pornography and attempt somehow to tie that to the GOP?
Pigs - whether Hollywood producers or conservative news anchorman
- their treatment of women is inexcusable. What values did they model? Certainly not their mother's. Pigs...
2
surprising that o'reilly is a predator....no / surprising that Fox took him back..../no. what i find unfortunate here is that this woman did not stand up as gretchen carlson did and say no thanks to the money...... she now helps this continue. his children are not that young and are well aware of their father's actions so saying he needed to protect his children is ridiculous. he has already lost custody of them from what i have read. he should have thought of them a while back. taking the money in light of what is going on today does not say much for ms weihl i think.
1
Bill O'Reilly has had a great life, a great life. There's just this nagging issue that it is all unraveling in the end.
4
One more reason never to watch FAKE News ... er ... FAUX News ... er ... FOX News.
3
No, they never did anything "wrong". The endless lying, apparently, isn't "wrong".
4
I've never worked for a company that would pay to settle sexual harassment suits against me.
The companies I've worked for would fire me for sexual harassment.
Fox should lose its broadcast license over this.
8
Fox did fire O'Reilly. And most companies in America would settle sexual harassment suits based on an employee's conduct (before firing the employee).
All these sexual predators, no matter what their political leanings, deserve to be imprisoned. If that's not possible, total shunning is the next best thing.
433
But shunning, as we can see by looking at the occupant of the White House, does not work. With rich white guys, "bragging rights" about sexual "conquests" can be a huge prize and worth the millions it costs. Disgusting on every level -- but be real about the impotency of "shunning." It won't work until the whole culture of power that sanctions white male behavior of this sort is transformed.
I don't think shunning a multimillionaire vs. jail is " moral equivalence "
How did Harvey Weinstein get off so cheap?
4
What a horrid man and he will also be remembered in his obit for his serial sexual harassment. What also should not be discounted is that after a bitter child custody, his former wife won full custody at which time it had been revealed that O'Reilly abused her which had been witnessed by his daughter of him dragging his wife down a staircase by her neck. Reports of his temper and that he was never around to foster a relationship also surfaced. His vindictiveness towards his ex-wife continued with his attempt to get her excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church for remarrying.
Family values indeed. Echoing Trump: Sad
11
Mr O'Reilly claims that he has proof that he did nothing wrong but wanted to protect his children from bad publicity.
If I were Mr O'Reilly child, I would tell him :" daddy,i know we are rich, but $32 million is too much money . If you know, you have done nothing wrong, I don't mind the publicity".
Second, why is Mr O'Reilly treated differently than Mr Weinstein. Mr O'Reilly is still being interviewed on National TV to promote his books. The man belongs in jail.
3
Amazing. Only in America, land of the free ... to abuse.
Sexually harass women, pay $32 million to settle your claims and get rewarded with a new four year contract for $100 million. Rogers nets $68 million with Fox essentially footing the bill.
What a twisted country we live in.
I bet Horrific Harvey wishes he worked for Fox. Hopefully, after what's come out about him and all of his enablers, who are complicit in his actions, those days are over.
6
As disgusting and horrible as they are, the real problem for America is not Bill O'Reilly or Donald Trump.
Our real problem is the people who support them, who - against all evidence - continue to believe them.
Those who opposed ending slavery, and their descendants, have been holding America back for over 150 years.
How long will we let those who support Trump and O'Reilly hold America back?
6
It is not worth 32 million...I don't want to watch him either.
1
Where is Christopher Hitchens when we need him - RIP. He said that religion poisons everything. O’Reilly is a “nice Catholic boy” - surely money paid to cover up his immoral sex behavior cannot possibly be! ARRGHH. He gives our mutual faith a bad name.
2
If O’Reilly was such a lucrative commodity for Fox News then the Murdochs could have gotten away with keeping him. While there was ourtrage over O’Reilly from the broader community, Fox News viewers are loyal and the Murdochs could have shown high ratings to the advertisers who boycotted O’Reilly. The Murdochs could have stuck to their guns.
Right Wing Christians and Trump people get their news from Fox. They endorse O’Reilly. Fox simply could have reported the same information that O’Reilly is stating today about his affairs. Fox News viewers’ eyes would merely glaze over and they’d believe it, calling contrary reports “fake news”.
Fox News is part of the bitter divide in our politics; it spins its tales that its viewers take as news. O’Reilly, Ailes, et. al. are artifacts of that organization. Fox viewers don’t care one way or the other. It’s not like they’re going to turn to a more rational source for their news.
14
I don't buy it. For that kind of money it should have gone to court. And no, his kids would not have been dragged through the mud - only him.
11
You failed in remedial logic as a kid.
You're comment makes no sense. Who would bring it to court? The victims? Aside from the money, it's very difficult to prove sexual harassment in court, and if you lose, you get nothing.
1
When the repeated multi-million consequences of sexual harassment are simply written off as a "cost of doing business" by an organization, it no longer deserves to exist. Five years from now, there will be no Weinstein Co. Five years from now, there should be no Fox News. Folks are either repulsed by a company that effectively endorses as policy the abuse of women or they are accomplices after the fact to the abuse. There is no moral middle ground.
81
Let’s be honest. These are financial transactions between a high profile man and high-profile women. The women are getting a lot of money. And Mr. O’Reilly is getting protection. Who knows what really happened between them. None of them will talk about it.
2
Lawsuits that muzzle the victims after payoff are a big part of the problem.
In truth, there are certain agreements that should not be permitted to part of a civil contract.
Agreeing not to testify in a court of law against a felon should not be permitted. Such an agreement should invalidate any contract.
Or, are American lawyers themselves the problem?
10
In any large number of people, there are going to be a few odious, scurrilous creatures that temporarily or permanently drag the majority down into their cesspool. Lawyers are not exempt...anymore than plumbers, electricians, physicians, clergy, politicians, or grocery store clerks.
I do not condemn all lawyers, but I do condemn anyone including lawyers who allow themselves and their profession to be sullied with the excrement of the guilty parties.
1
O'Reilly claims political and financial motivation for the false claims, yet strikes a $32 million agreement to settle. Talk about some serious pants on fire.
I just don't understand why O'Reilly needs to write a book and do interviews to promote it. Needless to say, the allegations will be the primary questions he will get posed. I guess he needs to sell some books to help pay out this settlement because otherwise he needs to spend his remaining years completely out of the public eye. Mr. O'Reilly just needs to go away.
466
Mr O'Reilly, we do implore,
you go away and lie no more.
But if that effort be too great,
please go away at any rate!
1
Mr. O'Reilly just needs to go to jail.
1
Forgive me for appearing to treat this serious matter in a flippant way, but for a lot less than 32 million dollars he could have had his sexual appetites appeased without fear of a court case. What is with these guys?
533
Because this is not about sex. It's about power.
4
T'aint about the money. They're power freaks and you never want any woman you love to be around one.
3
It's not about the sex. It's about the POWER.
3
$32 million is a lot of money to pay out in settlement. Is this amount significant and is there a specific reason it is so large? O’Reilly crying about what harm his behavior might bring to his children is absurd. And this wasn’t simply one settlement but several.
18
Innocent people don't write checks for $32 million.
116
If O’Reilly's sexual harassment cases were clearly bogus and he was the model of pristine decorum and innocent, it's hard to imagine Fox or any other corporation willing to payout $46 million to settle all the cases rather than fight it in court. It may be small relative to total income for the Murdoch empire, but it's not exactly pocket change and no corporation would be willing to pay extortion money to hush up false allegations. Not only does crime pay but so too does licentiousness behavior. It's terrible punishment to be fired from a job and walk away with a $25 million golden parachute. Perhaps contracts should include provisions that if anyone is fired for illegal behavior, they forfeit their guaranteed salary.
12
What an odious and despicable excuse for a man. And what kind of corporate culture is willing to countenance such a man? Fox "News."
34
O'Reilly, Ailes, Weinstein, Cosby, Donald....the list is long and even longer because so many women (and men) have been paid to keep quiet about the predators!
I'm not surprised that men like Weinstein and O'Reilly make millions, and are "respected" look at whom the holier-than-thou-self-righteous crowd elected and placed in the Oval Office! A man whose own words spelled our...p-r-e-d-a-t-o-r!
We, are in need of doing some collective soul searching so we can decide how we will change the status quo. My heart aches for the vulnerable who are preyed upon by rich, powerful men.
9
Do you think they included a "morals clause" in the new contract? Just kidding, this is Fox we're talking about!
6
$32 million to keep a $25 million job.
Geez, there must have been serious, provable, prison-time-worthy offenses to pay that much to keep someone quiet.
19
A self-proclaimed sexual predator in the White House, Clarence Thomas in the Supreme Court and Fox News spending tens of millions to try to enable Bill O’Reilly to keep pontificating on those good old fashioned American family values while all the while mercilessly preying on his female co-workers. These men would be shamed and shunned in any decent society and yet in America they are raised to dizzying heights of wealth and power- this country is sick.
105
If they do this in France, they make you Prime Minister.
1
Suggestion: avoid supporting companies that sponsor FOX.
13
I agree with most of the readers' comments. However, it would have been nice if the NYT go after Bill Clinton with the same vigor. Until they do, please don't complain about Donald Trump. I do not support him, but none of his alleged conduct is worse than Clinton's.
4
The Republicans, using the entire investigatory might of the U.S. government, spent over four years and $40 million dollars investigating Clinton and the best they got was the blue dress.
In fact, the one and only time one of the three women accusing Clinton of rape was under anything resembling an oath she denied anything ever happened.
Clinton may be a horndog but he's nowhere near O'Reilly or Trump.
12
Deflect, deflect, deflect.
6
So you think consensual sex is worse than "grabbing women" in private places without their consent? What President Clinton did was morally repulsive. What Donald Trump bragged about is criminal.
7
From the awful fake news junk tabloids Rupert Murdoch let loose on the world since the 1960s to the the utterly dismaying Fox News populated by obscenely rich harrassers and predators, it's way past time that regulators squelch the Murdoch family's inky spread across our culture. They are a root cause of the degradation of our discourse and I only hope that they can be rooted out.
I hope that reg
10
With that kind of track record, he should run for President.
4
The guess here is that the attorneys started at, maybe, $50 million and negotiated with Bill O'Reilly down to $32. There must be some serious stuff that the lady has on Mr. Fox News. Gay porno tapes? O'Reilly? Wow! And he's passing this off as "keeping in contact" with his lawyers? She wasn't an attorney of yours, Mr. O'Reilly; she was your subordinate! You hired her!
This really isn't surprising given the misogynistic culture at Fox and America, generally. What we've seen recently is the ability of men in power to wield a terrible influence upon women in the workplace. They hold over the heads of women the fear of failure and dismissal; they subvert the careers of uncounted women of talent; they send the broad message to teenage boys that getting what you wants trumps any decency.
Mr. O'Reilly, though, is only this melting iceberg's tip. Rupert Murdoch and his sons knew that their star draw power was a snake--yet they rewarded him financially and professionally. They desperately attempted to hide O'Reilly's criminal behavior because the almighty bottom line was all that mattered.
And, let's remember, Fox is the president's preferred "news" outlet. Neither he nor his "base," Fox subscribers, will be outraged at this latest scandal.
18
I would think Rush Limbaugh should be reading this and consider it to be the writing on the wall he should pay heed to and retire before this spotlight finds him. Doesn't matter if he actually did do it, it's the nature of the beast all of these characters have been milking for eminence and profit that makes it
not a great leap of the general public's imagination to picture them doing
other kinds of things when accusations concerning those other kinds of
things emerge.
The Murdochs made a business decision on whether to oust O'Reilly or not. Definitely says that the Murdochs are willing to look the other way if it could have been hidden from all of us. Typical of all sexual harassment cases when management also feels the same way about the subject which is they don't care and it does not matter. These men truly do not have any morals and the Trumpistas and those electoral college voters have placed one of their own as President. The immoral are ruling now and in 2018 we better state that this is unacceptable.
22
Perhaps your average person truly doesn't "get it," but people making this kind of money (Trump, Weinstein, Cosby, et al) really aren't like the rest of us. They inherently understand that their money makes them almost untouchable and they use that power every day to undermine, demean and utterly destroy other people. That they are ultimately sad little men is no consolation for those they have, and will continue to hurt.
133
How is a 25 million dollar settlement “almost untouchable” pray tell?
Money makes them bigger targets. Wealth, whatever charisma it may impart on someone in the eye of the average person, also brings a greater dollop of lethal vulnerability that is woefully disproportionate to the value of what power it may seem to buy. A lotta rich folks eventually learn they need the bigger boats to fend off the bigger sharks, but by the time the lesson sinks in it's too late because any attempt to abandon those obligations that got them into the mansion may also incur unwelcome and extraordinary measures.
You know, like when Michael Corleone realized it was the lesser of two evils to be the don rather than do nothing and watch his father die?
I worked in corporate life for almost 35 years and saw this sort of behavior all the time. Companies will hang onto "rock star" employees and continue to reward and forgive them---that is, until the rock star's hubris leads them into conduct that is so publicly embarrassing (or downright criminal) that they have to be jettisoned for the corporation's brand's sake. I became a real cynic by the time I retired. This article surprises me not at all.
834
Truth......
2
Happened to my ex husband. A superstar in his firm until he finally got fired when one brave woman spoke up. His inability to control himself destroyed an incredible career. As his wife, I had no idea because he traveled so often. Glad to be rid of him.
3
"(or downright criminal)"
"...a nonconsensual sexual relationship" - I would have to presume that is a polite way of saying rape
As a lawyer, I sense what appears to be possible extortion by the victim given the huge amount paid to her, and possible criminal obstruction of justice by BO and Fox into his many criminal acts.
She understands he will be ruined if this came out (he was), he has loads of cash and can get loads more from his sponsor Fox, and while she was indeed a serious crime victim here, no doubt at all, and deserves to clean this little boy out, there's more than meets the eye. OJ was ordered to pay $33 million in a civil case for viciously murdering two people.
Fox knew of this, still retained him, and for $100 million since he was its biggest ratings grab. There is an odor of obstruction of justice, covering up his many crimes. Crimes, not harassments. What gives?
Fox: Fair & Balanced indeed.
7
A "nonconsensual sexual relationship" is called RAPE. O'Reilly needs to be behind bars - for the rest of his life. And Fox has no problems keeping felons on their payroll. How absolutely repulsive. And as a woman, it's infuriating, I am seething.
54
Clickbait. I was hoping that FOX was returning the O'Reilly Factor to the network. He was a great guest on Hannity and commented on how he should have fought, rather than paid the extortion money, in these bogus claims.
2
No reason he can't fight these "bogus" claims--he can repay Fox for all the money they paid silence all these women. I'd look forward to seeing him confront his many accusers. Especially when he can't just yell "cut her mic!" to shut up a dissenting voice.
3
So something 'was said' to be true....seems like a lot of work to try to take the spotlight off Harvey Einstein, but this story will have no legs...nice try though.......
1
Right. That is all it is Dennis. Just an attempt to distract by picking on poor Bill. Do you see, in the mirror, the actual problem?
5
I've seen this man deny the charges, and his acting skills are atrocious. "Hit job"? He ties to come of as an every day man and indignant, and fails miserably. While I am here...if you are going to forward e-mails to legal, of a sensitive nature, then send them to a group and not individuals. You don't just send messages with porn to a woman and not expect it to be weird. If you send them to a group, the other members can back up his claim. Also, add a disclaimer that something offensive is included, by using a proper subject line. At best he's incompetent at communication, and at worst a liar.
5
As Captain Renault said in Casablanca
“I’m shocked”
Looking forward to Sean Hannity’s outrage... yeah right
9
Hmmm, so both O’Reilly and Weinstein secretly pay off multiple accusers but ultimately lose their jobs after their gross misconduct finally becomes public. Trump on the other hand, has been very public with his misogyny for decades and remains so, but retains his position as POTUS.
Is the life lesson here that “sexual predation and the use of power to coerce sex is okay as long as one is open about doing it”?
50
Of course they did! He is a Republican, and they are...............FOX. What else do you need to know?
12
"Non-consensual sexual relationship"? I believe that is more commonly referred to as "rape". Which is a crime. But money can buy anything these days apparently.
128
Depends upon the meaning of “sex”!
Remember that bill clinton “did not have sex with that woman.”
In fact, this is a perfect time to re-examine exactly what did or did not go on with clinton.
Paula jones should be freed from her nondisclosure agreement in the interests of full disclosure.
1
Should such settlements even be permitted?!
Especially ones that require non-disclosure agreements -- and, in this case, repudiation and withdrawal of all claims that there was anything wrong?!
These settlements are tantamount to paying off victims -- and even witnesses -- to silence them and avoid justice.
No wonder Donald Trump made his employees sign non-disclosure agreements.
I wonder if she could sue for defamation...
There should be laws that either prohibit such settlements or give the right of the victims to unilaterally abrogate the agreement if new circumstances arise, other victims come forth, or the person or company paying out the bribes makes public statements casting aspersions on the victim of sexual assault.
I realize there are complications with any scheme, but what happened with Weinstein and O'Reilly and many others is essentially the paying out of hush money to cover up sexual crimes!
7
You forget or are in denial of where you live.
1
And the right is apoplectic about Weinstein. Is this the NY Times or The Onion?
15
Long story short. Bill O'Reilly retires on a mountain of money paid by a 'network' that enables sexual harassment & worse.
104
I am shocked that Fox did not endorse Bill and then Hillary Clinton.
This just demonstrates what a rag Fox "News" is.
48
Wait...*$32 million*? That must have been some extremely serious harassment. Like, a major felony the victim didn't care to provide testimony about in a criminal case. What kind of guy is this? And really, what kind of company would employ him knowing about it, let alone feature him prominently? This is very, very serious!!
1228
I would guess the behavior was so embarrassing that O'Reilly had to pay through the nose. What we did learn about the first settlement back in 2004 would indicate as much. It's unfortunate that the first case was settled; had it all come out in court that probably would've been the end of O'Reilly as a media "star."
4
"And really, what kind of company would employ him knowing about it, let alone feature him prominently? "
WHY DO THEY STILL HAVE A LICENSE?
5
I guess they can't live without him. What if no one watched any of their programming in protest? What if family-oriented sponsors dropped their advertising again?
4
What I can never wrap my mind around is that any person in our country is paid $500,000 a week! Even if taxes took half of O'Reilly's income = then $250,000 a week? That's about 5 years' gross income for the middle of 'middle income' family. SO, people, when the so-called "tax reform" bill comes up and it eliminates the inheritance/estate tax, and YOU approve of that, what you are saying is "I want to help Bill O'Reilly, (and all those who have taken, over the last 20 years, the nations' wealth for themselves), KEEP IT FOREVER." Don't OK that - it will make the new Gilded Age permanent.
101
Not only does absolute power corrupt absolutely. So does the capitalist system of obscene disproportion in renumeration for one's work too.
5
I don't know about his personal activities, I greatly disapprove of anybody using their position to obtain special benefits of any kind. He was the most popular commentator on Fox and perhaps they gave him way too much rope.
1
What a creep!!!
Money & settlements can't wash the stink & strain away, you know
40