On 10/8/2023 at 1:53 PM, Alex said:
As gfweb said, the chosen focus of the brief and undoubtedly highly edited article was how Batali's behavior affected someone vis-a-vis their friendship -- which is a perfectly valid topic. I mean, what if you were in a situation in which you learned that a trusted friend had been doing similar things? Highly inappropriate behavior, whether or not it's deemed criminal, can affect a variety of victims, obviously with varying degrees of severity. How can you assume she's unsympathetic to the abused women when that topic wasn't even addressed in the article?
I’m considering the source here. People doesn’t put out stories that are controversial or leave out context. 95% of their articles are given with an agreement between publishers and publicists and veer from controversy.
I think, as a woman who was sexually assaulted in my workplace, which was a restaurant, that she should have acknowledged the victims as a woman and unknowing co-conspirator.
I acknowledge my view is biased due to my history and my experience.
Even from a PR standpoint, the article could have been better handled. I worked for Y&R for years and this type of quote wouldn’t have been so shallow.
The over all issue with Batali wasn’t a one off. When there’s smoke, there’s fire. I think there’s room for taking ownership of the circumstances. They chose their partner. They made that choice. It wasn’t a good one. And it hurt a lot of women. To me? It’s important to have that acknowledged.
As @weinoo mentioned Joe, I have also met him a few times. Personally I was never impressed.
