My .02, from a purely business POV....

[lagilman]

Since everyone else has their .02 on the recent Tor/Puppies kerfuffle, here's mine from a purely (mostly) business perspective.

(backstory for those who've missed it and want to catch up)

If you are not a corporate officer, or an acknowledged Corporate Spokesperson, you should not be presumed to speak for the company. If an employee says something that could hurt the company (negatively influencing a merger, causing stock prices to fall, etc) then they should be dealt with internally (NOT on the front page of your website). Merely expressing personal opinions on a matter affecting the entire industry? Is still free speech, for good or ill, unless said employee has signed an NDA/gag order, which to the best of my knowledge is not part of Tor's employment package.

And if someone complains about someone else's free speech? That's also free speech. That's how it works, however annoying it may become.

In my observation, Tom Doherty's reacting the way he did - while ignoring other comments on the topic, interestingly enough said by MEN - has caused more potential harm to Tor Books than anything any employee could have done.

(and this comes AFTER Tor Books allowed a reported sexual predator in their employ to quietly resign, without a similar public apology from Tom to those the employee had abused. Which...yeah.)

*sighs*

Comments

[badgermirlacca.livejournal.com]

Tor is possibly my least favorite publisher for a number of reasons, but this mess is a good example of why. Some of the books they publish are really, really good, but I don' think they treat all their authors equitably and sometimes are downright abusive. Tom Doherty is acting as expected in this instance.

[lagilman]

I am extremely fond of many people who work at Tor, and - had things gone differently - would have worked happily with them. But right now I find myself being thankful that things did not go differently.

[kradical.livejournal.com]

Irene's remark was probably ill-considered, but it had the ring of truth when speaking of Venereal Disease, and it was on her personal Facebook page, which nobody with a brain would consider an official Tor statement. Tom's reaction was completely out of proportion to the offense, and you're right, it should've been dealt with internally instead of on Tor.com. And if the high-level Tor employee who'd said it was male, I bet it would've been....

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

It was the aspect where it was a woman's words that caused public discipline that really disturbs me, I have to say.

[lagilman]

I find it amusing, in a horrible sort of way, that they're clearly so scared of women, far more than men....

But yeah... that's what takes it from a problematic reaction to a problematic and potentially lawsuit-inducing reaction, if someone were so inclined.

(I don't think anyone is so-inclined, but dear dog I hope somewhere in the depths of Corporate, some lawyer is shitting themselves over the possibility.)

[martianmooncrab.livejournal.com]

we all know that women must be reminded of their place...

[joycemocha.livejournal.com]

Yeah. At this time this leaves me grateful that I am not dealing with Tor (the one publisher I am having a slow-mo "discussion" with is bad enough but nothing like this).

There's a lot about this to extremely annoy me.

[jmward14.livejournal.com]

The whole statement/reaction/non-apology/non-defense dance reminded me of my days in the Fed in the worst possible way. So not surprising. I'm with la_marquise_de and martianmooncrab on this one.
Ironically, I recently interviewed someone who claims this kind of crap is all evidence of an "extinction burst". All I can say is if we are, the dinosaurs are sure taking their time.

[jemck.livejournal.com]

Agreed - both in respects of the original post and the comments thus far.

[madrobins]

I suspect (having worked at Tor, granted 25 years ago) that Tom was encouraged by forces outside than the SF field (ie., the lawyers and corporate masters). It was poorly thought out, alas, and I think you're right about the potential for harm.

Meanwhile I'm almost certain that Lawyers instructed Tor, in no uncertain terms, not to apologize for the Sexual Predator, because apology suggests culpability, which leaves the corporation open to lawsuits, etc. Ain't saying it's right, but this is the way that Corporate Bodies work.

[lagilman]

Oh, completely how it works...but once he apologized for a (female) employee offending someone somewhere, the fact that they had NOT issued an apology for the previous offenses PLUS the fact that a male employee of similar seniority made similar comments and was not singled out nor rebuked in public....

Some bright young legal thing should have raised a finger and said "um..."

Because even if it's not a winnable case, it's one that could make a considerable amount of ink. None of it good for Tor or their corporate parent.

Once upon a time, Tom was savvier than that, in my recollection.


(EtA: and that's even without considering the fact that had they handled this in-house, without the splashy public show, it would have be done and died down, with no fuss for either side to grab onto)