The Washington Post reports that junior employees at the centrist think tank No Labels were incensed by the firm’s decision to hire disgraced journalist Mark Halperin, who has been accused of sexual misconduct by at least a dozen women.
Nancy Jacobson, the company’s CEO, reportedly told people that she was able to hire the ex-journalist at a lower rate thanks to his determination to reenter the mainstream political sphere after he was fired from NBC over the sexual harassment allegations.
Bargain basement sleaze. With this kind of institutional ethics, why would anyone hire No Labels?
Two of the angered employees were given paid time off “to think about what they wanted to do”
Maybe they’ll finally come up with some labels.
For their employer.
“[W]e support and respect their point of view,” Morrison said of the two staffers who were taking paid leave, “just as we do the decision of one of our colleagues to perhaps leave our organization.”
“So if you don’t like it, lump it,” Morrison added. “Just don’t let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya on your way out.”
CaNceL cuLture AttemPts to caNcel men whO exPress theiR liKe of woMen.
I can think of some labels.
To summarize No Labels’ policy, they like people accused of sexual misconduct because they are cheap hires.
It is true that people who hurt others, either through criminal acts or simply damaging and anti-social behavior, do deserve the opportunity to apologize, atone, and accept a reasonable punishment for what they did. (And it’s not clear that Halperin checked all those boxes yet.)
But put all that aside - Halperin was never even very good at his job. His commentary was trite, his opinions knee-jerk and one-dimensional, and he was unnaturally focused on the horserace aspect of politics to the detriment of all other angles. He was nothing more than a poor journalist with a robust contact list in his mobile phone. Why would No Labels want to die on his hill?
Because “No Labels” = “No Principles”?
Earlier this week, No Labels had defended its contract with Halperin, telling Punchbowl that though his actions were “reprehensible,” the company’s leadership “believe a second chance is warranted in this case.”
Too soon.
company’s leadership “believe a second chance is warranted in this case.”
A second chance to do what, exactly?
This firm is willing to make their employees super uncomfortable because they were able to hire this guy cheap. Just because one changes jobs doesn’t mean they’ve changed their disgusting behavior. Doubt if this will go well.
Men like Halperin give men a bad name.
Two of the angered employees were given paid time off “to think about what they wanted to do”
A senior official told the Post that No Labels had offered the paid leave out of “true compassion for our staff, not to force them to make a decision.”
I’m sure these employees and their concerns will be given just as much value as the hire of a known and disgraced tee-vee talker, whose hiring has caused many clicks and notoriety to be garnered by their organization. Hah.
Nope. He’s what the news business calls a “hack,” a mediocrity with no interest in or capacity for striving toward excellence. I’ve probably personally raised Chris Cilizza’s bounce rate by immediately clicking away when I see his byline. But you can rise, like in many other businesses, just on the strength of relentless careerism, mouthing conventional wisdom, and kissing ass. And I remain persuaded that they hired this bum for the buzz of it.
It’s like being in the building trades. You get 4 estimates and if you’re at all smart you never, ever go for the low bid.
Oh, I can think of plenty of labels for these maroons.
Not just men, but the entire species. Is it any wonder that extraterrestrial intelligent life refuses to stop by here? We’re not even a backwater rest stop.
“…such intellectual heavyweights as David Brooks.”
Oh, Cervantes! Thanks all to pieces for giving me a jolly chuckle so early in the morning.