10 Thoughts On The "Off-ness" Of Tavis Smiley's GMA Interview

“I want to make sure we don’t lose all sense of nuance and proportionality in this conversation. Because if we do, then people end up being guilty simply by accusation.”

There’s nothing necessarily wrong with this statement. Again, I’m highlighting the moments that just make me bristle. This is the second time I’ve heard the word nuance used in the discussion of sexual assault and harassment. And I’d argue that there is very little if any of it. If Smiley’s relationships were indeed consensual then that doesn’t represent nuance. It represents two consensual people entering into a relationship. Still, as the head of his company, his program and radio show, I would think Smiley would recognize the grave risk in dating several people on his team. People who, by the nature and structure of the company, his subordinates. For the reason outlined on the next page.

Do you understand how that can be viewed as an abuse of power?

“There are some people who believe there are no such things as a consensual relationship in the workplace. I own my company. PBS distributes my content. In our employee handbook, while we do not encourage office relationships, we don’t forbid them either because I don’t know where your heart’s going to lead you…And indeed, there are millions of Americans watching this program right now who met their spouses at work. ”

There’s an old adage that applies to this situation. And while it’s a rule that folks frequently break, it exists for a reason. “Don’t sh*t where you eat.”

But his point about folk meeting their spouses at work is true. You’re currently reading the words of a woman who is the offspring of two people who met at work. Thing is, my father wasn’t my mother’s boss when he approached her. He didn’t have the capacity to fire her. And he didn’t own the company where they were both employed. I’m not one of those people who believe work relationships shouldn’t exist. But if Tavis wants to speak about nuance, power dynamics have to be a real part of the conversation.

Did you ever fire anyone you were in a relationship with?

“I own the company but there’s a team of people who run the company. I have never given anyone any employment instruction to do anything to anyone with whom I’ve had a consensual relationship.”

Come on Tavis. It’s possible that he never gave any instruction about hiring, promoting, demoting or firing someone who worked for the company. But I think we’re all pretty clear. If you own the company, you run the company whether you’re involved in the day to day operations or not. You think if Bill Gates asks for an engineer at Microsoft to be fired that the person will have a job next week? No. The suggestion is wild.

How many people who you had a consensual relationship with are still employed at your company?

After pausing to think: “One.”

I was hoping that the follow-up question would have been so how many of your employees have you had consensual relationships with?  It just seems like instead of Tavis happening to fall in love with women who happen to work for him, he actually recruits women from his employment pool. And there’s something unsettling about that. Also, if there were several women, the fact that only one still remains is also pretty telling.

Sources tell ABC News, that you’ve also been accused of “sexually explicit messages and unwelcome banter about women’s bodies.” So what are we talking about here?

“I have no idea. I’ve never sent lewd text messages to anyone. In a consensual relationship, we use text messages to communicate but I’ve never done that to an employee ever.”

I feel like I lost distinction here. Is he saying he sent lewd text messages to employees he was dating but not employees he wasn’t dating? I would like to think if PBS decided to suspend his program, and someone was alleging he sent vile messages, that there was some proof to back it up. Text messages make for the best receipts.

Are they supposed to tell you that they’re investigating you?

“PBS only agreed to talk to me after weeks of investigation. PBS never informed me that a complaint had been alleged. I was never told there was a complaint. I was never told there was an investigation.”

I’m not up on this type of protocol. But I would assume to maintain the integrity of the investigation, Smiley might not have been the first person they contacted. And there’s a good chance that they spoke to him before suspending his show because they had to have a rationale for ending their relationship with him.

Most of your employees had to sign non-disclosures. They feel threatened. They’re scared to come forward, to reveal who they are.

“I’m not sure I believe that.”

Then Tavis says there was no specificity about the allegations. Likely because PBS promised anonymity to those who testified. Also, if they signed non-disclosures and they violate the terms of that agreement, then that may mean that these people would face legal, financial and possible professional consequences.

Do you regret anything that you’ve done?

“Oh absolutely. I’ve made mistakes. I’ve written two books about all the mistakes I’ve made in my career and the lessons I’ve learned from them. I recall once sitting in a conversation with a person who was interested in being a producer on our show. It was supposed to be a short 30-minute meeting. For a couple hours, we were sitting there talking.  At the end, I said to her, ‘My Lord, you’re brilliant, you’re smart, you’re gorgeous. I’d rather date you, I think, than have you work for me. And I realized immediately what a mistake it was to make that comment. I went back immediately and apologized to her and the situation was resolved. I’ve made mistakes. I’m human. I’m not perfect but it doesn’t rise to the level of wrongful termination.

Interesting. Again, an established pattern of workplace relationships–from the onset, interview stage apparently.

You can listen to the whole interview in the video below.