MEDIAWATCH: So Stuff are crucifying a Journalist’s career because of a ‘lewd’ email & a kiss???

Why aren't we burning his house down, dragging his family and pets onto the front lawn and summarily executing them during a live cross with Matty?

65
2767

“YOU are making it work, baby” – THAT’S Stuff’s definition of a ‘lewd’ email?

What sort of double fisted pearl clutching is this?

When Stuff’s Woke Police claimed ‘lewd’ I thought Santamaria was sending dick pics and groping interns!

Let me see if I can get this completely straight, we are destroying a persons career and journalistic reputation based on an allegation he kissed a co-worker on the cheek (we are not sure how long ago that was) and sent an email saying ‘YOU are making it work, baby’ and the latest allegations are he messaged someone from an instagram account and sent a heart emoji?

What a fucking rapist!

Why aren’t we burning his house down, dragging his family and pets onto the front lawn and summarily executing them during a live cross with Matty?

Oh, that would be an over reaction? You mean like the over reaction to crucifying a mans career based on a handful of misdemeanours?

So we have a precious TVNZ staff angry Santamaria was appointed in the first place, who were looking for reasons to get rid of him, an allegation of an ‘inappropriate comment’ is made (we have not been told anything about this comment, but it’s interesting to note the last time Stuff claimed a broadcaster used an ‘inappropriate comment’ they utterly misled the country over the manner of that and it led to Martin Devlin being goaded into a suicide), then all of sudden we have a history lesson on Santamaria kissing a co-worker on the cheek and sending a ‘lewd’ email???

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

That’s the brittle micro aggression policing threshold for sexual harassment?

It’s a public servant you have accused of sexual harassment

This is starting to feel like that time Mallard claimed a rapist was loose in Parliament because Trev wanted to get down with the kids and use the woke interpretation of ‘rape’ which is, ‘if you feel raped, you’ve been raped’.

Post MeToo, due process is now a heteronormative cis male privilege and a mere allegation is the new evidential threshold.

Men didn’t fear a witch hunt post MeToo because Harvey Weinstein clearly proved there were monsters out there to hunt, what men feared was a witch trial, and this desire to convict on nothing more than the word of a woman (because women are morally superior to men and would never lie because you know, ‘patriarchy’), is the reason why the Amber Heard and Johnny Depp trial has become the backlash moment it’s exploded into.

I honestly would not be surprised waking up at some stage over the next month and reading Santamaria has self harmed.

Watching the mob in full Lynch mode based on nothing more than hearsay and innuendo is what we are now.

 

Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice going into this pandemic and 2020 election – please donate here.

If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media.

65 COMMENTS

  1. “YOU are making it work, baby” . Oh. My. God. T.hat’s not even a misdemeanour. That’s an Austin Powers piss take. Some ego in TVNZ didn’t like someone.

    I note there is a full on investigation into TVNZ’s employment processes. I assume application forms must now include in the job description warnings to prospective males, “Will be working with a gender that is more sensitive and destructive than an 80 year old corroding RAF 500 pounder found in a Berlin attic”. Only the seriously self masochistic need apply”.

    Wow, just wow! Thank God for Stuff. Not!

    • Read the rest of it XRAY. There’s a few more words and it wasn’t when he was at TVNZ. Until that article came out TVNZ probably didn’t have a clue. No idea what he did or did not do at TVNZ

      • That was my thought on reading Xray’s first sentence although I suspect the middle paragraph is closer to the truth than we would want.

  2. Well thing is i bet if the ladies in question had received some love heart emoji’s from a guy they fancied they would have been over the moon.

    That’s the danger these days with dating/courting : you like someone and want to let them know and it can go one of two ways: they like you too and warm to your advances OR they don’t like you and think you are a creepy pervert and demand you be cancelled!

  3. Is the only way for hearsay and innuendo to be shown for what they are is for having all the hoary details put out, if there are any? C’mon Stuff and co.
    Labels can then be put on “made up stuff” and scumbags who started that can be given the attention they need.

  4. It’s awful isn’t it.
    I see one of the original incidents was messaging an ex colleague that he essential thought she was hot years after working together.
    Jesus Christ the human race is going to go exctinct if that is the new threshold for what constitutes abuse.
    If something more serious has happened it should not be all over the news it should have been dealt with quickly and confidentially for the health of all concerned.
    Why is the minister involved?
    This whole media storm is revolting.

    • Keepcalmcarryon “ This whole media storm is revolting.” Quite right. Trial by media is never a good idea, and the media themselves should know better than to be indulging in it. Small country, small minds, lazy faux journos jumping on band wagons instead of addressing the real issues which impact on people.

  5. there is the small matter of the preferred candidate getting a job ‘on the nod’ with little no checks from the boss, another AJ alumni (what checks were carried out on the TVNZ boss when he was appointed?)

    this isn’t about some low level texting stupidity it’s about outright corruption in employment practices at TVNZ.

    • Thanks for a bit of perspective. Yes the news from Qatar seems over-egged but we don’t know exactly what’s happened at TVNZ.

      How he came to be employed seems suss. TVNZ has some important questions to answer.

        • Trevor S. Faafoi ? It’s an employment issue, and in any case dragging in ministers isn’t necessarily the best way to get honest answers, they all go into self-protective mode, they’re politicians. It looks as if this is going to be investigated by an employment law specialist, which is as it should be. After Mallard and his cronies got away with turning the parliamentary hoses on protestors and blasting the legitimate neighbours with music so loud that they had to move out, government doesn’t look the best bet to be reporting on best practice in anything. At least lawyers do have some sort of code of practice – or they used to – which is more than can be said about politicians. Crikey, Trevor, even real estate agents try to monitor themselves now…

    • Gagarin. Corruption ? A strong word. It looks a little like the type of old boys’ network which has existed everywhere for eons. Sometimes it actually works very well, sometimes better than references from strangers.
      In this case it’s gotten rather sticky. C’est la vie.

      • yes and adults not to mention feminists call the old schooltie corrupt nepotism because that’s what it is.
        if your brother in law is ‘the best’ then the process should come to that conclusion (if it isn’t distorted) if his only qualification is ‘brother in law’ then clearly not the best.

  6. Martyn I completely agree that Stuff are over the top. There should have been action taken with some of things published about the PM and she “might have to resign”, with that bs rape allegation involving the Labour groupies. Also agree with your Mallard comment.

    That said, you clearly have the blood of a politician coursing through your veins. If readers don’t click on your link they won’t see what context that “your making work” statement was in. What about the rest of it?

    “there is no more attractive outfit on a woman than the white blouse/black skirt combo…… and YOU are making it work, baby ;)”

    He then says he might combust! May be I have been exposed to way too much corporate training but I would no sooner send an email to a colleague like that than I would p*ss on a power line.

    • He needs to control his tongue if Wheel’s quote is correct:
      “there is no more attractive outfit on a woman than the white blouse/black skirt combo…… and YOU are making it work, baby ;)”
      Can this be put in a file for reference as unacceptable ‘jockular’ suggestion.

  7. So my 20 year old daughter got a dream start to her career as an intern at a major law firm. Problem was a senior partner, successful rich
    married family man (my age) started commenting on her appearance not her work and tried hitting on her during happy hour. The dream job becomes a nightmare and my biggest regret is that I didn’t get to fuck up that sleazy cunt. This guy is no different and good riddance. I hope some one does burn his house down. Post this one you misogynist fucks.

    • Peter H, for the sake of his family I would not concur but I do concur that this example, if the email is verbatim, is not Stuff being woke at all.

    • Your story does not ring true. Why didn’t shé make complaint? All these organisations are walking around on egg shells these days thanks to #METOO witch hunt hysterics.

      And face it Peter there are plenty of young pretty females who chase after high status rich married men, or have you been living under a rock all your life?

      • Moon reckt you must have been living under a rock yourself. Peter H didn’t say when that happened did he?

        But look what happened to law graduates who probably know a thing or two. If you want a career you think it’s easy to point partners of firm’s out? Get real

        • “Peter H didn’t say when that happened did he?”

          So it happened a billion years ago and has no bearing on the current climate of feminist anti (White) male #BelieveAllWomen witch hunts.

          “But look what happened to law graduates…”

          What did happen? You talking about the Maori boy who was a partner at Rusell McVeagh and got nailed to the wall by the white female interns who drunkenly dirty danced with him all night back at his?

          • Well if it happened to his daughter, pre the me too era, then organisation’s would not be walking around on egg shells would they ( hence no complaint).

        • ” law graduates who probably know a thing or two.”

          They sure did with a legal begal degree and a side dollop of Intersectional Feminist “Critical Theory”.

          Knew exactly what legalese and feminist buzzword salad to feed the tribunal and take down a Maori boy – probably the only brown one who was a partner at Russell McVeagh.

      • @MR I agree re the excesses of the meToo movement, however application of the ideology is patchy. Some organisation are hyper-woke and others nearer the 1950s.

        “there are plenty of young pretty females who chase after high status rich married men”
        How is that relevant here? Are you saying ALL pretty young women should accept the advances of wealthy older men because SOME engage in a hypergamy, if so that’s a textbook definition of ‘entitled’.

        Imagine if a gay man was interested in you, physically bigger and stronger, wealthy and your senior at work when you were first starting out. If they commented on your appearance, tried to hit on you and wouldn’t leave you alone would you feel the same, would it be easy to complain if you felt you might get the sack and ruin your big, perhaps only opportunity for a perfect start to a career?

        (From your comments I assume you are a heterosexual male apologies if that is not the case, adjust the example to someone you would never be interested in but with more physical strength, higher authority, higher social status and vastly more money than you).

        • that exact scenario has happened to me twice in my field, both times thankfully mentioning my girlfriend often seemed to calm the ardour though lewd comments continued I just put it down to (trigger words coming) ‘that’s how effeminate queers are’ flip with the banter…it’s frankly more wearing in it’s unoriginality than threatening…but if the suit had been pressed either time it may well have been fisticuffs in the carpark…a working class upbringing tends toward a more immediate complaints procedure..

          • Yes, it a rough position to be in, the fictional girlfriend/boyfriend/wedding ring is a nice ploy, good thing it paid off!

            “it may well have been fisticuffs in the carpark”
            Understandable, my point from a woman’s perspective (inspite of what Queer Theorist would have us believe) is that the average women’s ability to ‘physically deter’ the average man is like the average man trying to deter a trained wrestler or boxer.

            • oh the G/F wasn’t fictional just mentioned/emphasised at every single opportunity..

              I agree on the men theoretically being able to fight back more effectively but equally in my punk rock days there were girls who could flatten any bloke.

      • Have you not heard of consent. There is a big difference of chasing and being chased. If these people in powerful positions haven’t got the message by now they only have themselves to blame. John Key would not have survived the creepy ponytail pulling if he did it in this climate.

    • I agree. Repeated, unwanted advances (including touching and kissing in the reporter’s case) that make the recipient feel creeped out and fearful have no place in the workplace and should result in disciplinary action including dismissal if the behaviour continues. The reporter in question appeared to be using his senior position to prey on junior staff. Creepy and unacceptable in the workplace in my opinion.

    • @Peter H What happened to your daughter sounds like a consistent pattern of harassment with a massive power differential. I’m sorry that happened, it would make your daughter’s life throughly miserable, I hope it has not had a lasting effect on her. The senior partner deserves disciplinary action and the sack at a minimum.

      However in this case there is not enough evidence (yet) to suggest a consistent pattern of harassment. Was it consistent behaviour, was it targeted at individuals, was it compounded by exploitation of a power differential real or perceived OR was it one-off actions and comments that could seen as inappropriate if interpreted in bad faith?

      I’m sure like many I have been hugged, side-hip-bumped, kissed on the cheek and head by male and female colleague’s (not close friends) during emotional highs of celebration (often when they/we were drinking). Yes it could be considered overly familiar but the intent was well meaning and different cultures express themselves in different ways. Most importantly it was not a consistent pattern of behaviour directed at me or anyone else and if I said something they stopped. Should I have had them disciplined or sacked for inappropriate behaviour?

      There are two issues, what are the facts and what is a proportionate response?

      I’d suggest in this case we know neither. What we DO have is a mob and a media exploiting a well trodden and fashionable ‘evil-doer’ narrative for clicks and ideology. This makes it impossible for the punishment to fit the crime (if a crime was committed), gives cover for other agendas such reputation destruction of a rival and more importantly it risks a ‘crying wolf’ effect diminishing the importance of genuine cases like that suffered by your daughter. If the MeToo card is weaponised on people who don’t deserve it, or played ridiculously disproportionately then real harassment and abuse victims are increasingly less likely to be taken at face value and perpetrators more likely to be afforded sympathy and credulity.

      Santamaria may turn out to be another Andrew Cuomo, if so f$ck him. However WE DO NOT KNOW. Until we do let’s go easy on the pitchforks and the whole ruining someones life just to feel the endorphin buzz of righteous retribution while boosting media ad revenue.

      • Tui you make a lot of sense. We don’t know a lot. I would say however that if the email is verbatim and it was sent to a young female colleague you would have to say it’s a ridiculous message to send ( that’s being polite). The other words certainly make “you are making it work” seem a lot different I don’t care what Stuff say.

        • @Wheel I agree with your take on the email also with your earlier comment that Martyn seems to be downplaying the full context of the allegations in favour of emphasising woke mob excesses.

          However as you say ‘if verbatim’ (if true) a caveat which can be applied to many things at this stage. That caveat makes judgement premature. Even if the allegations are all true is the punishment being dished out in the media and court of public opinion proportionate?

          Final thought is there an underlying agenda or double standard?
          Time’s Up selectively MeToo-ed political opponents while protecting political allies while discrediting the very survivors they were supposed to be protecting and supporting. Would reporters and editors at any media organisation with a relish for woke-mobbing go after all entitled behaviour without fear or favour? Would they come out with a clean bill of health themselves if the same scrutiny was applied to them?

          • Completely agree that there is no way it should be ‘litigated’ in public. People see snippets and form opinions that tend remain regardless of what the full story might have been. I guess I have done that myself but it was hard not to get sucked by the snippets that Martyn used. Perhaps I took the bait. I have to say some comments have been an eye opener

      • Its history repeating. Remember when Feminists got into bed with the New Right back in the 70s and 80s about “repressed sexual abuse memories” and mass Satanic ritual abuse of children. How many innocent men got burnt at the stake of Feminist ideology then? Has there ever been any justice for them?

        And here we go again…

      • seriously how do you even start a prospective relationship with someone, you hit on them BUT and it’s biggy, a rebuff is a rebuff….and NO MEANS NO continued attempts are pestering and that’s when it becomes a problem….’fancy a coffee’ isn’t a crime.

        • @gagarin “’fancy a coffee’ isn’t a crime.”
          Nobody said it was, it’s a perfectly good way to express interest without risking a creepy vibe while allowing the other person to gracefully decline if they want to. As you say pestering and I’d add unwelcome or premature familiarity is the problem.

    • Peter, I empathise and if you know anything about the legal profession, you will know that this has been an endemic problem in that industry for years. And because its the legal profession no one complains because they end up getting the boot.

      But that doesnt equate to this situation. We dont know what he did or didnt do and he has been hung out to dry. If that email was lewd, I’m a monkey’s uncle. Gauche, unfunny and slightly inappropriate but a sacking offence. No.

      As an ex HR Manager, I imagine what has happened here is that he has not done anything really substantive but has been dragged in by the Boss and told allegations have been made, it will be investigated and he is to go home on leave. He has resigned and may be claiming constructive dismissal. Hence the agreement he left for family reasons. He may well have a settlement and a reference and the terms would all be subject to non disclosure.

      I imagine If Mr SantaMaria had done anything substantive, he wouldnt have got their agreement to silence. (However sometimes the individual is in the wrong and the employer simply wants the whole thing kept quiet). I have seen these things play out before and at times, the legal threshold for action hasnt been met but the employer may be under internal pressure to get the person out to keep the peace.

      The employees leaking and publically discussing the case are likely in breach of their employment agreements re: Confidentiality or even ‘bringing the employer into disrepute’. Will they receive as much as a slapped wrist?

      I can also say I have seen investigations where more than 1 employee has lied because the end result will benefit them. So there are times when people get moved on (especially from govt sector) when they actually havent done anything technically wrong. Sometimes the appearance of impropriety is enough. Unless of course, you are a cabinet minister!

    • Something very similar happened to my daughter during her early 20s. (by the head of a Gummint Dept.)
      She simply told him she was not interested and confided in a couple of people in authority asking them to be discreet AND making it clear that if it persisted the guy was likely to get a slap across the chops or a boot in the balls with an almighty scream. It was quietly logged, and nothing more happened.
      I think they used to tell women to be loud and let rip if they thought they were under threat.

      Subsequently they worked together without a problem and are likely to do so in future.

      • Exactly the guy wasn’t aware how he was coming across OR his approach had been highly successful in the past. That was well handled by your daughter.

        Conversely I have been around a few years and have lost count of the times a female will try to sexually manipulate men in the work place and else where. Is this not a form of sexual harassment by these females?

        You might not like it but there was probably a good reason that for 99% of human history females and males have been kept separated and only allowed to meet at formal social gatherings watched over by the parents until married!

        Just like not long ago if a girl got pregnant her father rang the lad’s father and they were married by the end of the week, lol.

        • As ir happens @ moon – they DO now come across each other I have just learned
          Guess what! (Why what OwT)! The guy is one of the staunchest advocates for equal pay.
          Pfffft/ Next

    • Oh, and btw, given what STUFF have done, and IF you’re familiar with AJE (you don’t even have to be in with the in crowd), I think we can probably figure out who at least one of the “victims” is – rumours are now free to indulge in as being fact.
      Well done Simon Plumb and enterage.

      Let’s separate the issues without being a bloody lynch mob.
      TVNZ doesn’t need to be ‘merged’, it needs to be taken over, and operate with a proper charter. We might then get rid of a few of these flakes

    • Hate that unfair behaviour to my core, Peter. This blogger is unhinged, losing his compass points.

      My account for your child, I’m awkward, starey, when drinking around young women, frequently, but my uncle was the model of integrity, barrister, QC, and more. Fairness is everything. To cross across that would be to cross my torso with knives.

    • Exactly Peter, it used to be if you spoke up it would be all your hard years of study down the tubes thanks to the old boys network, essentially you would be labelled “difficult” and become unemployable in your field.

  8. Mr Santamaria’s major crime could well be wearing a beige jacket and grinning like Paul Henry on Ritalin. It is just not cool to send personalised messages to workmates any more than it is cool to wank in front of them as other media figures have discovered–time for everyone to grow up.

    What really offends me is that The Daily Blog appears to have become a Joe Rogan junior grumpy male enclave.

    • Be not offended young Tigger. There may well be method to this madness.
      And be vigilant my Tigger, for thou may grow into a Rogan and all this madness (in this space, going forward)

      /fart //very smelly fart

  9. There is a fine line between hitting on women at work and general flirting. This guy’s attempts are quite frankly pathetic. Who the hell writes emails to attract a potential mate?

  10. Ooh does that fall into the setting for what constitutes hate speech? My daughter – why does she need hyper angry father to defend her? Who then uses his example to ramp up the anger against everyone? Weird world.
    Reading some of the old Regency stories – the bucks used to threaten a duel on micro matters like this.

  11. I originally thought that Santamaria was being unfairly and or prematurely lynched. And he may well be. But after reading Rob Jennings article on newsroom, I actually think TVNZ is having a gigantic internal meltdown. This story is being propelled by leaks coming from within the organisation. In this scenario Santamaria is the straw that broke the camels back.

  12. Considering a number of prominent news stories in recent months involving New Zealanders who work/worked at Al Jazeera, it appears they are surprisingly shallow and up themselves, especially when contrasted with the serious tone of coverage that channel provides on screen.

  13. and so it transpires that TVNZ confess to lying about ‘family issues’ and his current and former boss at AJ has gone on leave no doubt to avoid embarrassing questions…no doubt the circumvention of employment practices used to grease him into TVNZ will get lost in the ‘inquiry’ shuffle.

    the really amusing part is had they not lied and fessed up to employment investigation he might well have been back at work next month for the minor offending AS REPORTED (we’ll see if anything else comes out)
    it’s another case of failed spin the administrative class really fail to grasp that the people don’t belive a word they say anymore…PR is a redundant as wheelwrighting….now I think about it we might need wheelwrights someday.

  14. He’s been ‘Amber-Bushed!’

    So all those french folks who greet one another with a kiss on each cheek!
    A common practice that has been around for centuries!

    I bet this all kicked because an old crustie journo feels she/he/her has been abused in another lifetime as a journo back in the old days and wants utu?

    Fuck when are these kids going to grow the fuck up?

  15. So you think a married man in his 40s in a senior position hitting on a young woman in her first real job is ok??? You do know about power imbalances, coercion etc I assume? This is textbook sexual harassment and any man stupid enough to send an email like that deserves to be fired.

    • Santamaria The Witch. This poor guy. What’s he done? Unless he goes Johnny Depp on his unnamed accusers he’s just done!

      Who knows maybe he was a bit of a tail chaser around the office – so what! Or may be some kiwi journo chics in Doha quite liked talking to a kinda handsome fellow Kiwi and when one of them smiled at him and laughed at his jokes and involuntarily flicked her hair and didn’t know why she touched his elbow and thought it was a good career idea to be super real friendly to one of the top news anchors and never bothered to tell him she was just being super real career climbing friendly and didnt want to fuck him. Lo and behold he gets the wrong idea and gives her a friendly peck on the cheek and still she doesn’t say “I dont want to fuck you” instead she says she goes out of her mind with fear and hides in a toilet. What I have said here is called victim-blaming but shes a kiwi and we used to be pretty blunt, she could have just “womened up” and told him “no thanks sorry if I gave you the wrong idea”. Instead, she went all kiss and tell and complained to management and subsequently he didn’t talk to her because he feared her power over his job. And there is also the Doha context that if she was a known or suspected adultress (which a peck on the cheek could possibly indicate) she could face prison time.

      This likely scenario ended up with him leaving Doha for a job back in Auckland. Apparently there is a recruitment process at TVNZ where management are not supposed to pass over long-serving if mediocre local talent for a world-renowned, excellent at his job, journo looking for a fresh start because the TVNZ Newsroom Soviet thinks it should be consulted about which Maori, Pacifica or gay man’s turn it is to be senior journo and their misandry belief is all men give them the creeps and their racism says Indian men give them the super creeps.

      Maybe I’m wrong about the above but we won’t know because the gutless accusers don’t stand up and woke TVNZ, Stuff and Herald journos either won’t report the names of the accusers OR the editors and lawyers know there is actually really ‘nothing to see here’ that won’t see them pay out a million bucks in defamation to Santamaria. No one has said he broke the law so why has he been forced to resign – cancelled? The evidence is an email without context, it’s just trial by hearsay in the court of public opinion.

      One mob of feminists tell us we are already in The Handmaids Tale while another mob (or may be the same mob) want a New Puritanism.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.