When CBS fired journo-perv Charlie Rose, they did not actually sound very sorry...just sorry that he got caught as CBS News President David Rhodes whined (emphasis added):
"Despite Charlie’s important journalistic contribution to our news division, there is absolutely nothing more important, in this or any organization, than ensuring a safe, professional workplace — a supportive environment where people feel they can do their best work. We need to be such a place.”
What contribution was that? Workplace terrorism? Predator? Grifter who got rid of the competition by degrading them with his admitted war games?
If Rose thought his hateful tactics were justified, then how good of a journalist could he have been? The lens through which he saw reality was defective; ergo, his journalism was not all that.
And even he would have had to have known this if he resorted to ambushing female employees in that manner. Quality journalists do not stoop to those tactics.
But the overt sexism is still rampant. CNN's Dylan Byers lamented a "drain of talent" because all of the Great Men were getting fired for their abusive war games on his Twitter feed:
Beyond the pain/humiliation women have endured (which is of course the paramount issue), it’s worth taking stock of the incredible drain of talent from media/entertainment taking place right now.
He got called on the carpet, and deleted his Tweet, but he is not the only one out there who thinks it was a bad thing to fire men who, in fact, cannot actually do their jobs, but use misdirections and ruses to climb to the top.
The New York Times' golden boy Glenn Thrush has also been exposed to engage in such guerrilla tactics, and yet the newspaper is "torn" about kicking the abuser to the curb.
Sexism in journalism was always at crisis levels. It has not gotten any better because the ones who decide who is hired and fired don't actually see anything wrong with the structure that got them this far up for this long.
The lens is faulty. It is not one that can see reality. The press love their Great Men, and don't actually think Great Women exist.
They do, but they are always shut out and distracted with stupid games, always having to justify themselves and having to endure barbs that their confidence in their abilities is akin to be an arrogant ass.
Journalism has a serious problem. It has a series of serious problems. It has been a frat house for far too long. The Charlie Roses create hostility, while the Dylan Byers enable it.
If you do not have respect for women, you are not a real journalist. Not a serious one, let alone a great one.
Will the profession actually change? I doubt it. It is too entrenched in its old ways to ever contemplate real change.
But it doesn't mean people should stay silent or take the abuse that slaps them in the face with every story the profession churns out.