Ailes is certainly a thoroughly repulsive individual (to say the least), but the conduct reported does not rise to the level of sexual harassment. Maybe that’s not the way it should be, but I’m afraid that’s the way it is.
(The woman is lucky she didn’t have to work at Fix.)
Based on Trump’s nominee track record to date Ailes seems an obvious fit for some department of workplace ethics in his administration. Every other proposed nominee seemingly was chosen to destroy their department from within, no reason to break the string with Ailes.
No…making her stand up and turn around so he could leer at her ass, and then saying he likes what he sees qualifies as sexual harassment. Unless Fox is now having their anchors deliver the news while standing with their asses facing the cameras.
Add to that his reaching out to a man she was dating to find out “hows the sex?” and if “she puts out” and is a pretty compelling case.
Good grief, if turning her down for the position because she won’t have sex with him doesn’t qualify with you as harassment, what does? He leered at her, commented on her body, called and asked her ex about sex… You think none of that is harassment? Shame on you.
No, but Fox show producers do make a point of placing female anchors in a position where a helluva lot of leg is showing. Rarely are they hidden behind a desk or otherwise blocked from view if what they have is deemed worthy of flaunting.
Two men couldn’t be placed in those outside chairs? Nah…
Funny how not a single female Fox News personality ever deems slacks or a pant suit fashionable. Ever.
And we like us some short skirts and stiletto heels , you know, every day professional wear
Miss Kitty’s preferred fashion choice…AFTER a long day at work. 
It’s hell being suavé, devastatingly handsome and distinguished, but I persevere nevertheless.
Isn’t it odd how this isn’t really being covered by Fox News at all? To be that odious and get away with it for years and then to have it swept under the rug.
Ailes is gone but nothing has changed.
First of all, it’s not at all clear that she was rejected because she wouldn’t have sex with Ailes. We may suspect it, but the story does not suggest that there’s proof of that. A single incident of asking the woman to stand up and turn around is gross and disgusting, but it does is not so severe as to change working conditions.
(I represent employees in discrimination matters. While that doesn’t mean I’m always right, this is probably not a case I’d take. And I suspect that the woman’s lawyers wouldn’t have taken it if Ailes were not involved.)
Exactly - and the fact that the network created and ran by this sick fuck for over 20 years has been the highest rated news source for a long time pretty much tells you all you need to know about where we are as a country. And now we have an actual FOX News administration under another sick sex pervert - nice job, Republicans!
I think it survives a motion to dismiss on the pleadings, and after discovery, we would see if it survives summary judgment.
I also think it is extremely newsworthy, because Roger Ailes and FOX spearheaded the ongoing holy right wing jihad against the Clintons, and the whole Family Values Flim Flam that contributed to GWB being elected and fucking the country and the entire world. I think for history it is crucial that the depth of Roger Ailes’ personal sexual depravity and the arrogance with which he was able to subject his political adversaries to a code of conduct which neither he, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker, nor Ted Haggard ever had any personal intention of abiding by, is important to the politics and political discourse of this country.
Switching a TV at the gym from Fox News to anything else produces howls of protest you can hear in the showers. It’s like cocaine for the addled. Viewers are genuinely invested in wanting everyone to know it’s the ONLY sensible fare to view. It’s as if tuning to anything else is unpatriotic. Weird.
Speaking of Ailes…he’s on the top secret Trump transition team where everyone has been forced to sign NDA’s or they are kicked out. Even though these NDA’s are unenforceable in a court of law…Trump uses them to intimidate people and he’s got enough money to tie them up in court for a long period of time although he never actually wins these cases.
With Trump it is all about intimidation…except for Putin who has the goods on Trump and Trump knows it.
Then I’d like to propose that “doesn’t rise to the level of harassment” may be more accurately written, “doesn’t rise to level of harassment that would win.” Moreover, in your explanation you oddly picked only the least extreme acts to discuss. You say “being asked to stand up and turn around” but fail to mention his comment, “I like what I see.” And more oddly, you leave out his act of calling up her ex to ask about her sexual history. Why would that not be the first thing you address, as it is the most egregious? I’m surprised by that and I wonder what made you decide to not discuss the comment and the call. Genuine curiosity - to me, those stood out above the others; to you they were not worth mentioning.
I respect your experience in the field on this, but those “single instances” exist in the context of all the other instances and are surely part of the decision to pursue justice for things that should never happen to women at all in the workplace. Calling someone to ask about an applicant’s sexual history?
They understand their target audience: Morose losers drinking alone in the bar at 2 PM and always at home shut-ins over the age of 70.
Their audience is actually quite small (compared to Broadcast News) at about 2 million/day but they are EXTREMELY loyal and never, EVER change the channel.
That is what the advertisers want; Easily targeted groups that both extremely easy to manipulate and are GUARANTEED to view their ads.
That is why Fox News viewers are highly prized, not their intelligence, income, or any other reason.
What I don’t understand is how so many women could rebuff such a stud muffin.
Yeah, let’s put the Fox in charge of the Chicken Ranch!
Honestly, though, I’m kind of surprised it took her this long to file. At least Andrea Tantaros was willing to follow right on Gretchen’s high heels. Not that this seems like piling on, but it would have made more sense if she’d sued when Fox already had their pockets open.
Let me start with the calling of her ex. That remark was not made to her, was not (apparently) heard by her and was not intended (again, apparently) to be known to her. It was–yes!–locker room talk between two guys. Well, one pig and one person who may have been a guy or a pig. Sorry to say, it doesn’t count for purposes of harassment.
As for Ailes’ comment about liking what he saw, it was boorish and disgusting, but sexual harassment–to be an act for which damages can be recovered in a lawsuit–has to be worse. For one thing, this seems to be a single incident. For a single incident to “qualify” has actionable harassment, it has to be sexual assault or verbal conduct that is really extreme. Sorry to say, but Aile’s behavior–as reported–did not descend to that level. Perhaps the law should be changed, but there it is.