suspension/fine: NBC Suspends Jeremy Roenick Following Barstool Sports Comments

This isn't that.

 

Your comment was you cant say things like that outside of locker room talk between 2-3 people. Explain how comedians can say it to the entire world but the regular guy cant make jokes about it on a known comedic hockey podcast. The venue certainly makes the difference; he wouldve never said it during a broadcast for NBC.

 

 

People love to throw around free speech but all that means is you're not going to jail for saying it. It doesn't mean that your employer can't suspend you over a public sexual comment about your co workers. I'm sure NBC has a code of conduct that's been violated here.

I agree with you in that regard. As a public figure representing a company; you absolutely should factor that in when making decisions otherwise you open yourself up to discipline or loss of a job. NBC has that right but at the end of the day; I dont see him losing his job over it unless she is offended or doesnt feel comfortable working with him then he made his bed and so be it.

**side note: good conversation, wish politicians could have the same banter with open minds. Merry Christmas**

I agree with you in that regard. As a public figure representing a company; you absolutely should factor that in when making decisions otherwise you open yourself up to discipline or loss of a job. NBC has that right but at the end of the day; I dont see him losing his job over it unless she is offended or doesnt feel comfortable working with him then he made his bed and so be it.

 

**side note: good conversation, wish politicians could have the same banter with open minds. Merry Christmas**

NBC is doing this, IMO, because they're co-workers. If he said he wanted a threesome with some rando it wouldn't be a big deal.

You just can't say things like that about people you work with. It makes them (especially women) uncomfortable.

NHL wants personality. They rarely get it, but when they do, they hate it. (And yes, there is a difference between this and Don Cherry.)

Boring-ass league gonna stay boring.

NHL wants personality. They rarely get it, but when they do, they hate it. (And yes, there is a difference between this and Don Cherry.)

 

Boring-ass league gonna stay boring.

NHL wants personality. They rarely get it, but when they do, they hate it. (And yes, there is a difference between this and Don Cherry.)

 

Boring-ass league gonna stay boring.

You gotta be joking. Ridiculous, in my book.

I guess a lot of comedians will be disappointed that their careers are over. Tough to make $$ performing for 2 or 3 of your friends at a time. Venue is the same; the whole podcast is rampant with jokes and off color commentary.

 

I'm not even saying I think its moral to talk like that; I'm just an advocate for free speech even when it may be offensive to some.

Some people surely can stretch the meaning of " free speech ". So I suppose that it's OK with you for people to yell FIRE! in a public place.

Must not matter to them but if it was the female members of their family, or for that matter, friends as well, probably be taking a far different tack.

but it had nothing to do with them. let?s try to be ever-so-remotely objective about this.

A, B, & C are close friends who love/respect one another.

A makes an attempt at humor involving B & C. neither are offended.

however A is reprimanded because D, E, & F would presumably be offended if that same attempt at humor was about them or anyone who thinks like them. which it clearly wasn?t.

but A was reprimanded to show D, E, & F that they or anyone who thinks like them would be justified in being offended if it was indeed about them. which again, it clearly wasn?t.

ok here?s the fun part: D, E, & F likely never would?ve heard of A?s attempt at humor if there wasn?t a reprimand. nevertheless, high fives are exchanged. D, E, & F have presumably succeeded in being justified even though they had nothing to do with nothing. good times.

this is madness.

but it had nothing to do with them. let?s try to be ever-so-remotely objective about this.

 

A, B, & C are close friends who love/respect one another.

 

A makes an attempt at humor involving B & C. neither are offended.

 

however A is reprimanded because D, E, & F would presumably be offended if that same attempt at humor was about them or anyone who thinks like them. which it clearly wasn?t.

 

but A was reprimanded to show D, E, & F that they or anyone who thinks like them would be justified in being offended if it was indeed about them. which again, it clearly wasn?t.

 

ok here?s the fun part: D, E, & F likely never would?ve heard of A?s attempt at humor if there wasn?t a reprimand. nevertheless, high fives are exchanged. D, E, & F have presumably succeeded in being justified even though they had nothing to do with nothing. good times.

 

this is madness.

Sorry but this just makes no sense. Let's use real names.

Roenick and his wife have a relationship with Tappen. That joke is probably OK in their circle.

He made the joke in front of hundreds of thousands of people. She's not OK with that.

Let's not even get into his commentary about her T&A, and about Sharp.

For NBC, that's unacceptable because they're co-workers and you can't just go out on the airwaves and talk about co-workers you wanna fuck because maybe your co-workers don't want to know because they think it's fucking gross to be thought of that way.

There is nothing that NBC did wrong and nothing that JR did was cool, acceptable or OK.

Some people on this board are actually dismissing, and in some cases condoning this kind of talk in public for the world to hear and see? Must not matter to them but if it was the female members of their family, or for that matter, friends as well, probably be taking a far different tack. How can some be so ignorant, I wonder. A$%#!S!!!

You need to be more of a yaysayer

You need to be more of a yaysayer

And take a Valium.

how do we know his wife and Tappen are not ok with it? if either have suggested otherwise, that?s different. but from what we know right now they could totally be into it. and what?s wrong with that?

Because Tappen already said it was unacceptable.

yeah that’s different but I haven’t heard that anywhere. that said, apart from Tappen or his wife speaking out I find any offense to the situation to be bs.

Because Tappen already said it was unacceptable.

Tappen through NBC PR.

Tappen through NBC PR.

Tappen through NBC PR.

anything ?through NBC PR? probably means it went through NBC PR?which is lol some network ass covering all bases shit

Not sure why that matters.

anything “through NBC PR” probably means it went through NBC PR—which is lol some network ass covering all bases shit

That's why.

"Hey Kathryn, we don't want any blowback from anyone by what Jeremy said off the cuff in a Barstool interview so we had to suspend him. We need you to make a statement to keep everyone in Twitterverse from losing their shit. Thanks."

the way he said it made it clear that him and Tap are good friends and this is a joke they probably have made in the past.

 

still, if you think you can publicly talk about wanting to fuck your coworkers, especially on a platform that tons of people are listening to, without any consequences, you are pretty dumb

Note only Matt Laurer, who worked for the same company, had NBC carpenters install a rape buzzer and door lock in his NBC office and used it for decades to rape co-workers.

Some people surely can stretch the meaning of " free speech ". So I suppose that it's OK with you for people to yell FIRE! in a public place.

2C:33-2. Disorderly conduct

a. Improper behavior. A person is guilty of a petty disorderly persons offense, if with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof he

(1) Engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior; or

(2) Creates a hazardous or physically dangerous condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.

b. Offensive language. A person is guilty of a petty disorderly persons offense if, in a public place, and with purpose to offend the sensibilities of a hearer or in reckless disregard of the probability of so doing, he addresses unreasonably loud and offensively coarse or abusive language, given the circumstances of the person present and the setting of the utterance, to any person present.

Nope- not okay.

"While Jeremy and I continue to be good friends, what he said was unacceptable, especially among workplace colleagues. I do not condone his comments," Tappen said, according to John Ourand of the Sports Business Journal.

Shes not okay with it and so JR needs to answer for his comments. Hope he isn't fired; hes a good hockey personality.

That's why.

 

"Hey Kathryn, we don't want any blowback from anyone by what Jeremy said off the cuff in a Barstool interview so we had to suspend him. We need you to make a statement to keep everyone in Twitterverse from losing their shit. Thanks."

Wouldn't the more obvious answer be that she actually wasn't OK with being objectified?

I still can?t believe people are having trouble seeing what JR did was wrong

Yea. I?m surprised actually. I thought most, if not all would agree it?s inappropriate.