David Letterman blackmailed over sleeping with staffers

Or your potential blackmailer is an idiot.

 

LOL that too

 

As DonnyMost replied, I don't think so. Someone was after a paycheck.

It definitely doesn't make Dave a good BOSS by sleeping with co-workers, but I don't think we can write him off as a bad human being/marital partner. It's not commendable but I don't think this should tarnish his reputation.

I'm not a huge Dave fan, by the way. I'm a Conan viewer. Not trying to take up for him here, I'm just trying to look at it fairly.

 

Umm I don't think you get it.... people have not forgotten that Kobe quite possibly raped a woman, as evidenced by the excessive blood found on his and her clothing.

Huge difference... assuming you believe Kobe raped that girl

 

Jay Leno is standing tall right now with the number 1 rated talk show and laughing all the way to the bank!!!

 

Is he really? How's he doing against his TV competition? I would hate it if Prime time was cut down to two hours.

 

Actually I do get it. He said people forgot about Kobe and I simply said people have not based on the circumstances you just mentioned. But who cares about Kobe? Let's move along.

 

Really? Because I am a Letterman fan since the beginning, and the whole thing seems pretty seedy to me. If these were just "coworkers" it would be one thing, but he is the boss of bosses. There's a lot of room for sexual harassment lawsuits here, and I think this is just the beginning, like a lot of people do.

I thought it was bold on his part to reveal it all how he did... but make no mistake, his hand was very forced to do so, and he was cutting his losses on the deal. Whether he was joking or not, it was somewhat funny the way he delivered the news, and he added his humor in where the end result wasn't even supposed to be funny. Masterfully done, but in the end I thought it came off as very egotistical and while we don't know the true nature of his celebrity relationship/marriage, I can't imagine it's something that would be shrugged off, by his significant other or the public. He's been making money for a long time off of telling jokes about people doing things like this.

It doesn't make me dislike his show, or his humor, but I definitely think it tarnishes his reputation in more ways than one.

 

I think the only scandal here is the extortion attempt, not the sexual behavior. Everything has been among consenting adults.

In the 30 years he's been in the business, not one person has come forward to say they've been harassed by him. The only thing you really hear about him as a boss is that he's very demanding, but that he is loved and respected by his staff.

 

I hate to say this, but Letterman hasn't been funny at all since about '95.

I don't know what happened, but he just isn't nearly as funny and witty as he was back in the day.

I promise you, Jon Stewart mentored his show watching Letterman.

It's sad, but Letterman needs to retire.

 

Dave's production company owns Late Show, which was a big reason he was able to do that. Leno is an employee of NBC and is somewhat the inverse of Letterman in that Leno has the personal reputation for being a nice guy in person but backstabbing/not giving a **** about coworkers. Now before you and mr clueless start jumping down my back out of outrage over these "revelations" I suggest you actually read anything related to their personalities, maybe starting with The Late Shift.

Dave's reputation is well known. It's actually kind of boggling that anyone wouldn't understand that Dave was an ******* in those years treating everyone like **** not only employees, but his bosses, and even his guests whom he mocked on air. You all do realize that the major reason why he did not get the Tonight show (despite the fact that he had Carson and Carson's producer's blessing) is because the guys down at the network affiliates hated Letterman's guts?

Dave's been on the air for 25 years, he's stopped drinking, had heart surgery, and had a kid he's mellowed over the years but not knowing Dave's reputation for treating his staff in the business is like being shocked that Jordan had a reputation for ruthless competitiveness. It's one of the pillars of Dave's humor. Christ it's even been built into the show over the years, with Dave ranting at workers and in turn everyone on his staff down to the seamstress and the stage manager seemingly hating his guts in skits. Yes it's comedy but self-awareness, self-hate and misanthropy is a central part of Dave's humor and those skits were nods to people who understood that it was actually Dave's way of dealing with those things that were going on. Just like when Dave ranted at GE, yes it was funny to see a guy cuss out his boss, but it was even funnier for the people who "got" it and understood that there was this 40 year old man literally acting like a kid, using a network show to grind his own axe because he didn't have the emotional maturity to deal with it IRL.

You're right that Dave's admission on air was masterful and egotistical. But what you miss is that it was totally in-character for his show. Back in the day he'd bring on his "family" who were actually hired actors or Kaufman would come on and act like a r****d, and part of the humor would be the audience wondering for a moment "is it okay for me to laugh at this?" "is this real?" For a moment Thursday people didn't even know at first if his admission was real or a skit.

There's a lot of posters here who I wonder if they even watched his show. This isn't going hurt Dave's reputation at all. Dave's humor has always been centered on a sort of self-loathing and self-awareness. Dave takes snipes at famous people but you understand that the person Dave loathes the most is himself. He's never tried to come across as a Nice Guy like Leno or even a good host like Carson, he's always saying how crappy tonight's show is, and always pointing out faults in himself to guests. This is a big part of why his show was popular in the first place in the 80s it was the first show where someone found the humor in "this is how I am, I dont give a ****." Everyone gives lip service to how seminal Letterman's first late night show was, I'm wondering what you all think made the show revolutionary if you all dont understand that part of Dave's humor and his personality.

There's a lot of people who never got Dave's Late Night show and simply started watching Letterman when he got big press for moving to CBS. A lot of them probably haven't watched the show since 95. These people might be disappointed or shocked at this revelation. For people who actually appreciated and understood Dave's humor in the first place... not so much. It's actually pretty funny that the part he got his real-life mistress to play on the show alternated from utterly clueless ingenue to a girl who hated his guts.

 

Didn't say it was scandalous behavior, only that he seemed egotistical in his method of outing the whole thing, and I don't know how that will sit with the viewing audience in the long run. I like Dave, and what he does is his business in my opinion, but the way he handled it was, while somewhat impressively bold, a bit much. I do think it will affect his reputation, especially once the barrage of lawyers talks someone into cashing in off of the potential harassment suits.

I suspect after all this he will retire... whether FFB thinks he's funny or not.

No... I didn't miss that... but this was more than that. Again. Do I really care? no. Do I think it will affect his reputation? Yes. Has nothing to do with "getting the letterman thing" which I've been doing since before "toast on a stick" and the larry bud melman days. Yes, the "is this a joke" thing has been his deal, but usually... when that was the question... it WAS a joke. Not this time... and he still managed to be as smug as I've ever seen him regarding a subject that he's broiled others over. All in good fun (and self preservation) I guess, but it won't sit well with some. Does that mean I'm shocked or even disappointed? Not really, but again I think it will tarnish his reputation when it's all said and done.

I don't see how it has anything to do with how nice or mean of a guy he is vs. leno... but I guess I'm just sticking to my point that I do think it will affect not only his reputation (and lawsuits are a potential problem) and his tenure on the show, but also his willingness to continue the show at this point in his career.

He used to seem kinda rebellious, this seemed like he was angry and spiteful. Can't blame him, but he also seemed... tired. It will be interesting to see how it all pans out. I don't think the line will be as clear cut as "those who got it don't care".

I hope the best for him, I've always been a fan, but having seen him for so many years, I only tune in by accident the past few years, and it's always exactly what I expect. I don't know if that can survive something like this.

 

Actually I'm just laughing at your own 'outrage' and how worked up you are. Worked with Letterman, have you? ;p

I actually don't disagree with a lot of that, but I don't remember too much on how much he 'pressured women to have sex with him'. You seem pretty sure of that.

 

I get where you're coming from. Let's be real, Letterman didn't even apologize. Not even any of the insincere crap where someone apologizes for some vague "letting down my team and the fans" where they dont even man up to the specific thing they did.

Letterman didn't apologize period. He recognized he was a creep but that's about it. It's possible that Letterman's "reputation" might be harmed among non-viewers but I doubt his numbers are going to take a hit. So much of the show is based on his reputation as a curmudgeon. He even rags on his previous audiences, in a way that yes it's a Bit but you also know he kinds of means it. What his speech did do is make it clear that Letterman does think whatever he did was creepy and inappropriate but also that he seems to clearly think it's HIS business and he's still running things and he's going to deal with things as he sees fit

Please dont laugh at me. It wounds me deeply. Especially when I'm worked up as I am.

I'm simply providing context for people who seem to have opinions on the story but may not be familiar with Dave's humor or watched his show in a while. It's no secret that many people dont "get" Dave which is why his show probably worked better at 12:35 rather than at the Tonight Show time slot which CrazyDave was probably alluding to when he talks about Dave mailing it in.


this is what I posted about Letterman's indiscretions

the agency where I work, I'm not allowed to date women who work under me period. people do it of course, but the idea is that there can be coercion and pressure implicit whenever someone in a position of authority puts advances on a subordinate. Explicit or not, there's an implicit pressure when a boss asks a girl to date him/have sex with him, which is why human resources at many companies discourage or prohibit this behavior. Blame the legal system but if there are implicit or explicit professional benefits of the relationship, you even ASKING her is pressure if she can create a plausible potential link between any sort of relationship and subsequent benefits at work. Stupid? Yeah. Who's "outraged" about this? Bloop and Rikket baby!

In Letterman's case you realize that the woman at the center of this controversy stephanie birkitt was on the air numerous times while she was Letterman's PA/ assistant. she wasn't even a writer or a performer. there's a reasonable implication (fair nor not... in the minds of other female employees) that she may have gotten valuable exposure as a consequence of that sexual relationship, with a corresponding professional incentive/threat for any other staffers that Dave might have propositioned over the years. You seem to have a sort of strong displeasure at my characterizing such potentially actionable behavior as "pressure" but the modern idea of sexual harassment doesn't only apply to jumping physically on a girl like Kobe, it means there was either implicit or explicit pressure that dating or not dating the boss could affect your career. But but but says Rikket, you dont have any PROOF that Letterman said any of that stuff to pressure the girls. It may well be true that Dave never threatened the girls, but if the girls felt that their careers were going to be impacted by dating Dave it doesn't matter.

Dave himself characterized his behavior as "creepy." If we take him at his word for every time he said that about himself, that's where my comment of self-awareness and guilt comes in. He recognized that whatever happened was not appropriate and he shouldn't have gone there but he still did it. The bottom line is, if Letterman recognized himself that it was creepy then he did in fact understand that a boss hitting on a girl was not kosher and constituted unethical pressure, even if he had no intention of giving that particular girl a gig on the show or a promotion.

 

Manny the hippie, Mujibar & Sirajul, Biff Henderson, Pat & Kenny, Susan Hum, Rupert, Alan Kalter, etc. all must have had sex with Dave too. That's the only explanation why they got airtime.

 

I agree with the latter. As to the former, consenting adults is a grey line, as bloop and others point out, where differentiation of authority of this magnitude comes in. TV exposure time added to a list of other perks or recognition of any kind is appealing when there is that much money in the equation, from a lawyer's perspective... and people are easily swayed by such things.

It could get ugly... I -completely- agree the alleged extortion is the biggest crime by far that we know of, but the question was posed about tarnishing of his reputation, and I just think when it's said and done, the way it's come about... the way he's had to handle it, it will be tarnished to a degree for some people and their various reasons. Consider that with his health, age and will to continue this gig under such "trauma," it might be enough to bring it all to a halt.

hate to see it... but the question wasn't "Will you like Dave less now because of this?" it was "Will his (public) reputation be tarnished by these events?"

Seeing how it's going, I still say yes. Still like the show though. Which was bloop's point... many who are fans won't care as much... you like it or you don't. My point is that public opinion of his reputation will matter, and not just from his fan base. You have sponsors and contracts to consider etc. I'm not suggesting they should drop him for this, who knows he could even pick up a few, I'm just saying there's more to it than just "do the current viewers care enough to tune out." regarding how his reputation might be affected and what that might cause.

 

I'm just not sure of who could replace him with enough name recognition and talent to retain their ratings. Stewart's the only one that comes to mind, just because he's been able to build a national audience in indirect competition with a younger demographic. Dennis Miller (good comedian) and/or Bill Maher (experienced host with two hit shows) come to mind if they can somehow completely suppress their political views. I've never once watched Kimmel and I bet he's a little annoyed that Nightline is still on the air.

 

You definitely are going off on this subject, for whatever odd reason.

But look, I'm not even saying that all of that isn't possible. But that entire rant you wrote basically comes down to is that you are guessing and want to come to that conclusion for whatever reason and no matter how many times you read The Late Shift or read a NY gossip column that doesn't change that.

And yes, I found the certainty and aggressiveness to which you come to this conclusion amusing, but I'm not about to try and stop you from continuing your crusade; not that you were going to anyway. Carry on!

 

What does any of this have anything to do with the thread?

Is it truly "odd" for you that someone posts about Dave Letterman on a Dave Letterman thread? Really? It's that hard to understand? Is that statement on your mental coherence really the thing you want to put out there?

First you basically had no clue on who David Letterman is, and based on nothing entirely than a cocksure ignorance accused me of making things up about his reputation. Then you posted basically QQing that I was manufacturing allegations of his conduct. As petulant as you've come across on your posts, I've specifically taken a couple minutes to type out in terms a first grader could understand what's up with both these concerns you had, I guess you've really had nothing to say regarding both your half-cocked assertions, because you prefer to keep complaining that I'm posting stuff about Dave's indiscretions on a thread dedicated to Dave's indiscretions.

You've posted 3 times and said "look I dont necessarily disagree." If you dont disagree and dont have anything to add other than tepid passive aggressive statements about rainbows and butterflies that make you smile and keep you amused... what are you posting for? Just to see your post count go up? Just sit this one out Skip.

It might not even be worth it for CBS to sign another talk show host to a long term contract at that time slot once Dave exits. Networks only make a fraction of revenue from late night like they did when Dave went on the air for them 15 years ago. The old Steve Allen format with the monologue and band and 3 guest segments is kind of played out.

For what it's worth Letterman has actually apologized for his behavior. He's not going anywhere

 

lol - really? Discussion/comments on coming to 'cocksure' unfounded conclusions on the subject of David Letterman...in a thread about David Letterman? You really need some help with that one, dude?

No, your vehemence and ranting on the subject - including how so many people basically 'don't know Letterman' like apparently you do - is. It's also amusing to watch you get angrier and angrier because you want everyone to believe what you do, when you are only guessing yourself.

I said I don't necessarily disagree with certain things because that is always a possibility - but also because the point is there isn't anyway it's logical to simply 'know' that at the moment. I don't expect that to mean much to you, though.

Not like you do, eh? Do you hear him whispering softly to you in your head? Please make sure we all know the evil that is Letterman - only you can impart this knowledge on the rest of us.