A version of this article first appeared in the Reliable Sources newsletter. You can sign up for free right here.
One year since Weinstein
One year ago, on the evening of October 4, the top headline in this newsletter said “Weinstein stories coming soon?”
Looming exposes of Harvey Weinstein had been rumored for months. But THR brought it out into the open by revealing that an NYT story might be imminent. The site said that Weinstein had hired “an army of attorneys and crisis managers” and “unleashed them on The Times.”
Do you remember what Weinstein said to THR that night? “The story sounds so good, I want to buy the movie rights.”
Ha-ha. Do you think he’s laughing now?
Take a minute and think about how the world has changed in the past year… And what still needs to change…
“None of us knew what was about to happen…”
Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey’s first story about Weinstein’s abuses was published in the 2 p.m. hour on Friday, October 5, 2017.
Looking back one year later, Kantor told me, “None of us knew what was about to happen. Not the team at the Times. Not Ashley Judd or Laura Madden, the first two women to go on the record.”
Kantor reminded me that there were legal threats from Weinstein’s camp. But there was also this element, something I didn’t know: “Many sources had told us that Weinstein’s behavior was an open secret, that no one would care about our findings.”
Those sources were wrong. Ten days after the story hit, the words “Me Too” spread across social media like a spotlight on a dark, hidden world. But the #MeToo movement wasn’t an inevitable result of the reporting. A confluence of events – a series of individual choices – brought us to this moment. My story about this will be up on CNN Business on Friday…
– The # of workplace sexual harassment claims filed with the EEOC “has spiked in the year since the #MeToo movement took off,” Julia Carpenter reports for CNN Business…
– The Wrap has a look at how Hollywood’s sexual misconduct policies have changed in the past year…
SUPREME BATTLE: First vote set for Friday
CNN’s live blog has the latest updates here. A cloture vote is expected Friday at 10:30 a.m. ET… “The action moves the Senate closer to a confirmation vote, though a final vote would not take place until Saturday at the earliest…”
“The Supreme Court must never be viewed as a partisan institution,” Kavanaugh wrote in this op-ed for Friday’s WSJ.
I think most Americans would agree with that statement. But Kavanaugh’s testimony last week – his broadside against Democrats and his conspiratorial comments about the Clintons – flew in the face of his new remarks. Oh, and he wrote the op-ed for the Rupert Murdoch-owned WSJ. Last week his outlet of choice for a TV interview was the Murdoch-owned Fox News.
His message is simple: “I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge.”
“I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been,” he wrote in the op-ed. “I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said. I hope everyone can understand that I was there as a son, husband and dad. I testified with five people foremost in my mind: my mom, my dad, my wife, and most of all my daughters.”
The op-ed has some people wondering if he’s trying to appease Jeff Flake,who (speaking at The Atlantic Festival on Wednesday) expressed concern about Kavanaugh’s “sharp and partisan” tone…
Apparently this was Kavanaugh’s idea
A source close to Kavanaugh told CNN’s Ariane De Vogue that “he penned the op-ed because he felt like it was important for the full Senate to have before it in his own words something that sums up not just the last two weeks but the entire confirmation process and his life’s record.” A senior W.H. official toldSarah Westwood that it was Kavanaugh’s idea… A different official criticized him for “calling his own play again…”
Cuomo channeling Maya Angelou
Chris Cuomo on CNN Thursday night: “Maya Angelou gave us the best advice in these matters: ‘When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.’ How will the senators interpret that wisdom here? We will see.”
This hasn’t happened since Bork…
Less surprisingly, the NYT edit board is also saying “no.” This editorial says “it is a terrible reality that, at this point, either confirmation or rejection of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination by a narrow and overwhelmingly partisan margin will dismay and anger millions of Americans. But only by voting no, by asking Mr. Trump to send someone else for it to consider, can the Senate pass its test of institutional character and meet its obligation to safeguard the credibility of the Supreme Court…”
These sites are benefiting…
“This Supreme Court confirmation process has become one of the biggest traffic generating news stories for hyperpartisan news pages on Facebook of the past two years,” BF’s Craig Silverman reports.
Daily Wire COO Jeremy Boreing says “it is certainly the biggest story in politics since the 2016 election…”