#Me-too: New York’s classical go-to man is toppled
mainFor years, the first port of call for New York classical PRs, after the Times, has been the NPR and CBS talkshow host Charlie Rose, a man who genuinely enjoyed classical music and never subjected any artist to probing questions.
Charlie Rose was suspended last night by CBS News and PBS after the Washington Post published accusations of sexual molestation against him by eight women, mostly on his staff.
Rose, 75, issued this statement: ‘In my 45 years in journalism, I have prided myself on being an advocate for the careers of the women with whom I have worked. Nevertheless, in the past few days, claims have been made about my behavior toward some former female colleagues. It is essential that these women know I hear them and that I deeply apologize for my inappropriate behavior. I am greatly embarrassed. I have behaved insensitively at times, and I accept responsibility for that, though I do not believe that all of these allegations are accurate. I always felt that I was pursuing shared feelings, even though I now realize I was mistaken.
‘I have learned a great deal as a result of these events, and I hope others will too. All of us, including me, are coming to a newer and deeper recognition of the pain caused by conduct in the past, and have come to a profound new respect for women and their lives.’
Classical PRs will need to find a new outlet.
Meanwhile, the bragging pussy-grabber sleeps soundly in the White House.
What a shame. I’ve always enjoyed his excellent interviews with top classical artists and conductors as well as interesting personalities from all walks of life.
I remember spotting him in the audience at a MET performance a number of years ago. An avid classical music fan, it was clear that he was thoroughly enjoying the opera.
Listening to good music does not excuse being a pervert, something Rose has not denied, unlike the man who “sleeps soundly in the White House.” Reuters:
Three of the eight women spoke on the record to [The Washington Post] and the other five spoke on condition of anonymity fearing retribution that could affect their careers, the Post said. Reah Bravo was an intern and then associate producer for Rose’s PBS show beginning in 2007, and told the newspaper Rose was “a sexual predator” and she was his victim. She told the Post there were unwanted sexual advances while working for Rose at his private waterfront estate in Bellport, New York, and while traveling with him in cars, in a hotel suite and on a private plane. … Kyle Godfrey-Ryan, one of Rose’s assistants in the mid-2000s, recalled at least a dozen instances where Rose walked nude in front of her while she worked in one of his New York City homes, the newspaper said.
I do not agree he was a “pervert” – he had the honesty and courage to admit his failings and apologize. He is basically a fine man.
This is sad for those of us who have enjoyed his interviews but far from it for those whom he molested. With the present climate, it amazes me that those like Charlie Rose who must have known what he had done in earlier times have waited to be outed rather than come forward and confess. That at least would surely have garnered a slight degree of sympathy.
How many more? And how long before the pervert-in-chief is caught firmly in the web? Will the Russian dossier ever throw up what it is rumoured to contain?
The Weinstein case seems to evolve into some kind of a hysterical,ridiculous witch hunt.Copycats jumping on the bandwagon from everywhere now,after decades,without any sufficient proof,leaving the accused without any chance to clear themselves from those accusations.Reminds me a bit of Philip Roth´s novel The Human Stain…
Well, when the man* acknowledges that the accusations are true and issues an apology, the “without sufficient proof” argument is pretty much made moot.
In the meantime, what would you consider to be sufficient proof? Just wondering.
*(or woman, of course; but so far the big-publicity cases have all been men)
Shocking and disappointing. Always held Charlie Rose in highest esteem.
Charlie Rose has always been a cut-rate William F. Buckley wannabe, but utterly lacking the intellect or gravitas of the late great WFB.
Especially,and thankfully lacking the pompous self importance,arrogance and alt right wing views of WFB….
If so,is going to be very difficult to find in all domains people with a “clean” past, real gentlemen.
What to do?
What about former President Bill Clinton?
He was clean as a whistle.
Sometimes I wish people (women in my case) would just come out and say that they’re not interested in going out, or don’t want to get involved. But often those words are never said. In this society you’re supposed to figure that out somehow… and if you were dating the person, walking past them in the nude or whatever might not be a problem… But if the person is unclear or difficult to read (which we know never happens), then every ex may seem like a criminal… If you say no and it still happens, that’s of course different.
Sometimes I wish people (men in my case) would just figure out that in the absence of a very specific invitation, they should not present themselves naked to a woman, or pull out their genitals, or grab a woman and kiss her. It’s most disturbing to me that anyone can reach adulthood and not have a glancing awareness of what consent means. I guess some men really think that if they pull out their genitals in front of a female acquaintance without asking for permission, there’s at least a 50-50 chance it might actually develop into a mutually enjoyable sexual encounter.
Let’s stop it with the absurd “but I don’t understand!” infantalizing of these people. I have never, ever been UNSURE of whether a person wants me to undress and walk in front of them naked. If your reaction here is “Oh I just wish women would be more clear about what they want!” you . . . . don’t get it.
When you are in a position of power over a woman, or a man for that matter, you shouldn’t be putting them into a position where they have to say that they are not interested. The charges as reported against Charlie Rose are a vile abuse of power. This isn’t about someone being tone deaf to the usual social cues. This is about someone who used his position and power to subjugate and abuse women. Appearing naked in front of, or molesting, a subordinate employee is always wrong and it shouldn’t be up to the employee to tell you that.
I’m disappointed to see him pass from the scene but I always thought his questions in the form of essay-length multiple choice inserted himself into the interview a bit too much.
Surrogate for Michael Bloomberg, among his various activities. He took up an hour or so of radio in the night, left on low as companion to my fitful sleep so I’d wake to him sometimes..
Always considered him a terrible interviewer who loved the sound of his own voice and seldom listened to the answers to his questions. Presumptuous and un-curious, a flatterer who loved flattery and was happiest when he could take over from a guest and inflate on politics, art, whatever came into his head.
Can’t remember a single interesting thing he ever said.
I thought him boring. A milk toast persona masquerading as an intellectual.