Jump to content

NBC poised to fire Ann Curry from the Today show


dragonflies

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 253
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

That read like a long Gawker blog entry, not a good thing, especially the final part (about Lauer and Vieria meeting at a restaurant) which is sourced by someone eavesdropping. Lauer actually comes off much better in that article that I thought he would. It was Ann who came off as entitled and weird in the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This sentence sums up how I feel, Carl. I especially commend you for the first part of it, since so few people are willing to acknowledge (their belief) that Curry wasn't the best fit for the job. (It's true that some people really enjoyed her, but it seems to me that many are now pretending that they loved her all along, when in fact many didn't like her prior to witnessing NBC's ruthless treatment of her.)

Even though I believe what was written in that article, I think it is poor taste for Curry to publicly say bad things about NBC. If she was not an employee, I'd have no problems with her trashing the network, but it's grossly inappropriate to be trashing NBC while--at the same time--receiving a fat paycheck from them.

If Ann Curry hates NBC so much (and she has good reason to), then she should leave them. If most people publicly criticized their employer, they'd be fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Agreed again, Max!!! I just can't see Ann Curry as a victim in all this when her contract ($$$$) was honored by NBC and she actually has to do less work for the same money.

Yeah, she lost her dream job, and yeah, they were shady motherfuckers about it, but people lose jobs every day and bosses are shady motherfuckers every day. At least she GOT to have her dream job for 8 months. That is 8 months longer than 99.9% of people get to have their dream jobs.

That said, watching NBC and Lauer getting roasted by the media IS satisfying, I just hate the cycle of martyrdom/cut them down that must constantly repeat itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That was a great post, Juppiter.

It's interesting to contrast the huge amount of backlash that resulted from Curry's firing, when one considers that almost zero backlash is usually generated when those in show business get treated like s#it. I suspect that the main reason why the public reacted so strongly to this firing was because of Curry's tearful good-bye (and Lauer's awkward reaction to it). Actually, had NBC been even more ruthless--and not allowed Curry to say goodbye--the network and Matt Lauer would ironically be in better shape.

Shows like Today are able to build an audience (in part) by fooling the public that they are one big happy family. Of course, that illusion was shattered as a result of Curry's goodbye. Yet even other "we're all one big happy family" shows have fired people and not received the sort of backlash that Today is going through. For instance, CBS This Morning fired Erica Hill last year and replaced her with Norah O'Donnell. There was no backlash, and Hill was not given any opportunity to say goodbye. Aside from Dian Parkinson (who resigned and was allowed to give an on-air farewell), all of the long-running Barker's Beauties were fired (and the severance--if any--they received paled in comparison to Curry's current salary). Their departures were not even acknowledged, and while there was some outrage against Bob Barker and TPIR, it was nothing compared to what's happening with Matt Lauer and Today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think part of it is that Ann Curry was part of the Today Show for so many years before she was one of the hosts. People wanted to see her in the chair even if they weren't regular viewers as they felt she earned the job. The difference with what happened with TPIR compared to today has to do with the web. The outcry couldn't have been as severe as many people had no clue what was going on with the program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'd say it has to do with Lauer's public image. I think he's very cold and smarmy, and this is something that has been apparent for some time. I also think that when women see a man on TV who is clearly hostile to a woman (which I believe Lauer was, at least in body language), they're more likely to empatize, especially since they'd "known" Curry for decades and she was non-threatening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Someone show me where in any of this is a DIRECT comment from Ann Curry. It's all heresay and speculation. Good grief Lauer is being given consideration but she isn't. And does anyone believe Ann Curry is allowed to publicly comment based on her current contract.

Sure she's still earning a paycheck but they went out of their way to tarnish her image and reputation. Who were the "sources" before her firing which led folks to believe she was going to be fired or was being blamed for ratings. Oh I'm sure its not the "innocents" at NBC right.

And whether she was the right choice or not(I don't think she was either) isn't the point. Today's ratings were dropping BEFORE she was given the cohosting job. But I guess NBC did have people believing she was the only issue, It seems to be resurfacing again.

This network has a PROVEN history of mismanagement and debacles and arrogance and it shows daily in the persona of Matt Lauer and others on and off screen. How soon everyone has forgotten the Leno/Conan debacle, lets forget the years of blaming the woman anchors at Today for their problems(Jane Pauley anyone?)

I did have to chuckle though on Katie Couric calling someone else fake. Now of course, I have no idea if she actually said it because again its all quotes from unnamed heresay sources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Actually, Curry has criticized NBC to others. Here's a blurb from the NYT article:

Even before she was fired, she publicly criticized her bosses:

http://video.answers.com/ann-curry-claims-she-was-fired-for-her-choice-in-footwear-clothes-517438704

And while Brian Stelter's new book may not contain any quotes from Curry, he is a respected journalist who would be highly unlikely to exaggerate the complaints that Curry has made to others.

Of course, I believe that her criticisms are valid, but that is not the point. Regardless of how terribly she was treated, it's just not professional (for a high profile individual making tons of money) to be bad mouthing one's employer to others. If Curry wants to do something really commendable, she should resign from NBC ASAP and no longer take their money.

While Curry was treated very unfairly, I think that this sympathy has gotten to the point where it has become too much (when you compare it to the sympathy others have received who were also treated ruthlessly by their companies and bosses).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Miche, we'll just have to agree to disagree. Again, I have always thought that NBC has acted most reprehensibly in this matter.

I personally don't believe that a high profile celebrity should tell her friends about matters like this, because there is a danger that these "friends" (who are supposed to keep things like this confidential) could leak these comments to the media (which appears to be what happened). Moreover, some of the feelings she had about her bosses--which were expressed before she was demoted--were not just made to her friends, but to The Ladies' Home Journal.

Even as terribly as Curry was treated by her bosses and Lauer, I don't fully understand why she was blindsided by this treatment. (At least it appears to me as if this was the case.) NBC had rudely snubbed her when they were looking for Katie Couric's successor, and expressed back then why she "wasn't a good fit" for the job. Instead of choosing to leave NBC at the first possible moment (and go to a place where she would actually be wanted), she chose to stay at NBC. Much of that was indeed strong loyalty on her part, but it wasn't 100% selflessness, as she had a provision in her contract that allowed her to leave NBC if she wasn't chosen as Meredith Viera's successor. I wish that she realized just how much her bosses hated her (years ago), and further realized that they would probably be rooting for her failure if she ever did get her dream job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Except again thats not a direct quote. It says "what she was known to have said". If thats the case, I should believe every ugly comment about what Lauer allegedly said and Couric and all the others quoted. Outside of a direct interview Lauer made to the Daily Beast to help restore his image, I haven't seen any direct quotes from him either.

Let me ask you. Should NBC have honored their original contract with her? I have no issue with her taking a paycheck but someone needs to explain to me why the leaks at NBC. So the executives all the way up to the President of NBC Universal all acted professionally in helping orchestrate Operation Bambi right? All the leaks that came out about her poor performance and how NBC was unhappy you think was not planned?

I think the NYT except clearly explained why the public reacted so vehemently to what happened, Maybe its out of proportion.But when you read about how calculated her boot off of Today was orchestrated, its sickening. And imagine having to work with that. Are people treated worse elsewhere, yes but this is what generated attention. And yet again its a woman taking the fall for the multitude of problems at Today. And regardless of what people seem to want to believe, Lauer is one of the problems same as Bryant Gumble became one in his later years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The article explains why she stayed. She believed Steve Capus who was the President of the News Division and was one of her champions. He told her not to worry. He was the one who was beside her for years at NBC and it was the News Division the Today show reported into. Was she not to believe a person who championed her for her entire career at NBC and who seemed to be the person who had the final say?

What about Lauer. If I'm to believe the article, he didn;t act professionally, deliberately sabatoging his on air partnering with her. He has been alleged to have told friends about how he didn't like her and didn't think she fit the role. Is he supposed to now be lauded for that while she is chastized? I call it a double standard. Seems it not only exsists at NBC but in popular opinion also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Jane, I'm sorry that you are finding my comments so disagreeable. The quote from the NYT article wasn't 100% direct, but the author of the piece is a respected journalist. The quote that was from The Ladies' Home Journal (when she criticized her bosses before she was fired) was a direct quote.

I find NBC's conduct indefensible, so I won't even try to say anything in support of them. My main point is that this backlash has indeed become out of proportion, even though I am in the minority in thinking that way. Regardless, because of the huge public backlash, I just think there is a zero chance of Lauer's public image ever recovering.

Shoddy treatment of women at Today is sadly nothing new. There was of course the infamous Jane Pauley incident. And while this is another uncommonly held opinion, I felt that Deborah Norville was treated terribly as well (when it wasn't her fault that Pauley got fired; the fault lies with Bryant Gumbel and the NBC executives). In her final months, Norville seldom appeared during the first hour, and she never got to say goodbye on air. But strangely, I don't recall Gumbel's popularity nosediving this much as both women were treated so badly. (It's true that NBC and Today received a huge backlash for removing Pauley, but Gumbel's job never seemed to be in danger the way Lauer's is now.)

I'm certainly not lauding Lauer for what he did, since I have already criticized him for his conduct. NBC employees (and Howard Kurtz) seem to be the only ones singing his praises. While they have a double standard, I don't see any double standard in current public opinion, given that the public has huge amounts of sympathy for Curry, as Lauer's Q Score hits new lows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy