读过 She Said
Hollywood was an organied system for abusing women. It lured them with promises of fame, turned them into highly profitable products, treated their bodies as property, required them to look perfect, and then discarded them.
It wasn't new to say that Hollywood took advantage of women, forced them into conformity, and dumped them when they aged or rebelled. But hearing a direct account of exploitation from a familiar face, in full disturbing detail, and with one of the most renowned producers in Hollywood as the perpetrator, was entirely differenrt: sharper, more specifc, sickening.
The settlements didn't prevent the story; they were the story, a tale of cover-up that illuminated the alleged wrongdoing. This was a new way of reporting on sexual harassment.
to go beyond indivudual wrongdoers and pin down the elements, the system, that kept sexual harassment so pervasive and ahrd to address.
look at a range of industries:
Silicon Valley and the tech industry, a utopian field, supposedly unbound by old rules, which nonethless excluded women.
Academia also seemed ripe for investigation because of the power that professor held over graduate students who wanted careers in the same fields.
The journalists also planned to focus on low-income workers who had low visibility overwhelming economic pressure, and less recourse than women higher on the economic ladder.
Rebecca Corbett: she was sixtysomething, skeptical, scrupulous, and allergic to flashiness or exaggeration, the cohead of the Times investigation department but so low profile that she barely surfaced in Google search results. Her ambition was journalistic, not personal.引自 The First Phone Call
In each industry, harassment had its own particular sociology. In restaurants, liquor was ominpresent at the workplace, eroding judgement and loosening inhibitions, and managers were often loath to confront customers who got out of line. Silicon Valeey was filled with young men who got rich overnight and felt accountable to no one. In shipyards, construction sites, and other traditionally male workplaces, men sometimes tried to drive out women by putting them in physical danger.
the language of the deals made them look less like aboveboard legal transactions and more like cover-ups. The agreements included one restrictive clause after another. The women were obliged to turn over all their evidence - audio recordings, diaries, emails, backup files, any other shred of proof - to ... and his lawyers.
They could avoid being branded tattletales, liars, flirts, or habitual litigators. This was a way to get paid and get on with their lives. Federal sexual harassment laws were weak, leaving out vast categories of people - freelancers, employees at workplaces with fewere than fifteen employees. up to $300,000 = net necessarily enough to cover lost earnings or atttract a good lawyer. 引自 How to Silence a Victim
The Weinstein story was a solvent for secrecy, pushing women all over the world to speak up about similar experiences. The name Harvey Weinstein came to mean an argument for addressing misconduct, lest it go unchecked for decades, an example of how less-severe transgressions could lead to more seriuos ones. An emerging consensus that speaking up about sexual harassment and abuse was admirable, not shameful or disloyal. A cautionary tale about how that kind of behavior could become a grave risk for employers. Most of all, it marked an emerging agreement that Weinstein-like conduct was unequivocally wrong and should not be tolerated.
That story was based entirely on one incident, recounted by an anonymous accuser, hghlighting another dilemma: Though many publications continued to publish exposes based on in-depth investigation and one-the-record evidence, others were running stories that relied on a single source or unnamed accusers, much lower standars. Once published, some of those storeis flusehd out additonal allegations and more evidence of wrongdoing. But other storeis appeared thin and one-sided, raising questions of fairness to those facing accusations. So did allegations leveled on social media without any backup or response from the accused.
But the obligation of journalists was to scrutinize, verify, check, and quesiton information. (A former editor of megan's displayed a sign on his desk tha tread: IF YOUR MOTHER TELLS YOU SHE LOVES YOU, CHECK IT OUT.) The Weinstein story had impact in part because it had achieved soemthing that, in 2018, seemed rare and precious: broad consensus on the facts.
Accountability was easy to insist on, but in some cases, much tricier to assign.
Journalists had stepped in when the system failed, but that wasn't a permanent solution.
Had a novelist tried to conjure a scenario to capture the swirl of strong feelings around #MeToo, it would have been hard to write one more flammable. The lack of corroborating evidence from the time of the alleged assualt meant that the facts were probably going to be in dispute. 引自 The Beachside Dilemma
No one could ever predict how speaking out would go. Forecasting was futile. Once a story was publicly told for the first time, there was no telling what might happen, who might read it, or what others might echo, add, or disagree with. There was no guarantee of affirmation or impact. The results could be wrenching, empowering, or both.
But this is what everyone in the kroom, and more people beyond it, now understood: If the story was not shared, nothing would change. Probablems that are not seen cannot be addressed. In our world of journalism, the story was the end, the result, the final product. But in the world at large, the emergency of new information was just the beginning - of conversation, action, change. 引自 The Gathering