Jump to content

Jian Ghomeshi Fired from Q


Recommended Posts

https://www.facebook.com/jianghomeshi/posts/10152357063881750?fref=nf

Dear everyone,

I am writing today because I want you to be the first to know some news.

This has been the hardest time of my life. I am reeling from the loss of my father. I am in deep personal pain and worried about my mom. And now my world has been rocked by so much more.

Today, I was fired from the CBC.

For almost 8 years I have been the host of a show I co-created on CBC called Q. It has been my pride and joy. My fantastic team on Q are super-talented and have helped build something beautiful.

I have always operated on the principle of doing my best to maintain a dignity and a commitment to openness and truth, both on and off the air. I have conducted major interviews, supported Canadian talent, and spoken out loudly in my audio essays about ideas, issues, and my love for this country. All of that is available for anyone to hear or watch. I have known, of course, that not everyone always agrees with my opinions or my style, but I've never been anything but honest. I have doggedly defended the CBC and embraced public broadcasting. This is a brand I’ve been honoured to help grow.

All this has now changed.

Today I was fired from the company where I've been working for almost 14 years – stripped from my show, barred from the building and separated from my colleagues. I was given the choice to walk away quietly and to publicly suggest that this was my decision. But I am not going to do that. Because that would be untrue. Because I’ve been fired. And because I've done nothing wrong.

I’ve been fired from the CBC because of the risk of my private sex life being made public as a result of a campaign of false allegations pursued by a jilted ex girlfriend and a freelance writer.

As friends and family of mine, you are owed the truth.

I have commenced legal proceedings against the CBC, what’s important to me is that you know what happened and why.

Forgive me if what follows may be shocking to some.

I have always been interested in a variety of activities in the bedroom but I only participate in sexual practices that are mutually agreed upon, consensual, and exciting for both partners.

About two years ago I started seeing a woman in her late 20s. Our relationship was affectionate, casual and passionate. We saw each other on and off over the period of a year and began engaging in adventurous forms of sex that included role-play, dominance and submission. We discussed our interests at length before engaging in rough sex (forms of BDSM). We talked about using safe words and regularly checked in with each other about our comfort levels. She encouraged our role-play and often was the initiator. We joked about our relations being like a mild form of Fifty Shades of Grey or a story from Lynn Coady's Giller-Prize winning book last year. I don’t wish to get into any more detail because it is truly not anyone's business what two consenting adults do. I have never discussed my private life before. Sexual preferences are a human right.

Despite a strong connection between us it became clear to me that our on-and-off dating was unlikely to grow into a larger relationship and I ended things in the beginning of this year. She was upset by this and sent me messages indicating her disappointment that I would not commit to more, and her anger that I was seeing others.

After this, in the early spring there began a campaign of harassment, vengeance and demonization against me that would lead to months of anxiety.

It came to light that a woman had begun anonymously reaching out to people that I had dated (via Facebook) to tell them she had been a victim of abusive relations with me. In other words, someone was reframing what had been an ongoing consensual relationship as something nefarious. I learned – through one of my friends who got in contact with this person – that someone had rifled through my phone on one occasion and taken down the names of any woman I had seemed to have been dating in recent years. This person had begun methodically contacting them to try to build a story against me. Increasingly, female friends and ex-girlfriends of mine told me about these attempts to smear me.

Someone also began colluding with a freelance writer who was known not to be a fan of mine and, together, they set out to try to find corroborators to build a case to defame me. She found some sympathetic ears by painting herself as a victim and turned this into a campaign. The writer boldly started contacting my friends, acquaintances and even work colleagues – all of whom came to me to tell me this was happening and all of whom recognized it as a trumped up way to attack me and undermine my reputation. Everyone contacted would ask the same question, if I had engaged in non-consensual behavior why was the place to address this the media?

The writer tried to peddle the story and, at one point, a major Canadian media publication did due diligence but never printed a story. One assumes they recognized these attempts to recast my sexual behaviour were fabrications. Still, the spectre of mud being flung onto the Internet where online outrage can demonize someone before facts can refute false allegations has been what I've had to live with.

And this leads us to today and this moment. I’ve lived with the threat that this stuff would be thrown out there to defame me. And I would sue. But it would do the reputational damage to me it was intended to do (the ex has even tried to contact me to say that she now wishes to refute any of these categorically untrue allegations). But with me bringing it to light, in the coming days you will prospectively hear about how I engage in all kinds of unsavoury aggressive acts in the bedroom. And the implication may be made that this happens non-consensually. And that will be a lie. But it will be salacious gossip in a world driven by a hunger for "scandal". And there will be those who choose to believe it and to hate me or to laugh at me. And there will be an attempt to pile on. And there will be the claim that there are a few women involved (those who colluded with my ex) in an attempt to show a "pattern of behaviour". And it will be based in lies but damage will be done. But I am telling you this story in the hopes that the truth will, finally, conquer all.

I have been open with the CBC about this since these categorically untrue allegations ramped up. I have never believed it was anyone's business what I do in my private affairs but I wanted my bosses to be aware that this attempt to smear me was out there. CBC has been part of the team of friends and lawyers assembled to deal with this for months. On Thursday I voluntarily showed evidence that everything I have done has been consensual. I did this in good faith and because I know, as I have always known, that I have nothing to hide. This when the CBC decided to fire me.

CBC execs confirmed that the information provided showed that there was consent. In fact, they later said to me and my team that there is no question in their minds that there has always been consent. They said they’re not concerned about the legal side. But then they said that this type of sexual behavior was unbecoming of a prominent host on the CBC. They said that I was being dismissed for "the risk of the perception that may come from a story that could come out." To recap, I am being fired in my prime from the show I love and built and threw myself into for years because of what I do in my private life.

Let me be the first to say that my tastes in the bedroom may not be palatable to some folks. They may be strange, enticing, weird, normal, or outright offensive to others. We all have our secret life. But that is my private life. That is my personal life. And no one, and certainly no employer, should have dominion over what people do consensually in their private life.

And so, with no formal allegations, no formal complaints, no complaints, not one, to the HR department at the CBC (they told us they’d done a thorough check and were satisfied), and no charges, I have lost my job based on a campaign of vengeance. Two weeks after the death of my beautiful father I have been fired from the CBC because of what I do in my private life.

I have loved the CBC. The Q team are the best group of people in the land. My colleagues and producers and on-air talent at the CBC are unparalleled in being some of the best in the business. I have always tried to be a good soldier and do a good job for my country. I am still in shock. But I am telling this story to you so the truth is heard. And to bring an end to the nightmare.

A shame... the most I think we could get from this controversy is that we start to understand more about making judgements in the multiplatform age... this will be tried out in court, as well as on all forms of new media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

https://www.facebook.com/jianghomeshi/posts/10152357063881750?fref=nf

A shame... the most I think we could get from this controversy is that we start to understand more about making judgements in the multiplatform age... this will be tried out in court, as well as on all forms of new media.

It is a shame. I immensely enjoyed his shows and his guests. He truly was able to connect with his musical guests like no other host on CBC. I say kudos to him for coming out in public and being honest and forthright. Unfortunately, I am guessing we will lose his talent to south of the border.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A shame... the most I think we could get from this controversy is that we start to understand more about making judgements in the multiplatform age... this will be tried out in court, as well as on all forms of new media.

CBC made the right move by offering him a 'leave of absence' to allow him to address the allegations. It appears that Jian turned it into a public firing (a detail mentioned in other reports but omitted from his FB post).

We live in a world where a CEO gets fired for kicking a dog or donating to a anti-gay marriage campaign and Jian knows it. He was stupid to engage in private activities which would make a large segment of the public recoil in revulsion if they became public.

Edited by TimG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CBC made the right move by offering him a 'leave of absence' to allow him to address the allegations. It appears that Jian turned it into a public firing (a detail mentioned in other reports but omitted from his FB post).

We live in a world where a CEO gets fired for kicking a dog or donating to a anti-gay marriage campaign and Jian knows it. He was stupid to engage in private activities which would make a large segment of the public recoil in revulsion if they became public.

It was quite simply a vengeful ex-gf. Bedroom activities should be private. She was a vengeful ex, plain and simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found him too ponderous and annoying in that CBC way. That being said, he could still be vindicated.

How? He has publicly admitted to engaging in S&M activities. There is no vindication to be had. He torpedoed his own career which is built entirely on an image. Edited by TimG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was quite simply a vengeful ex-gf. Bedroom activities should be private. She was a vengeful ex, plain and simple.

And political donations a CEO makes or a CEO's treatment of animals have no bearing on their ability to do the job. Yet they lost their jobs. Life is a bitch when you have a public facing occupation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gian did not mistreat an animal or human being.

You need to stop assuming that everyone in the world has the same priorities as you. To some people donating to an anti-gay marriage campaign is a legitimate political expression but engaging in consensual S&M is evidence of a truly twisted mind. Now if you want to argue that the CEOs AND Jian should have been left alone because their private lives have no bearing on their professional roles then I would agree. But if you want to argue that the CEOs deserved what they got and Jian was persecuted then you are just a shameless hypocrite.

You can't have it both ways: if you want to say that private lives where people engage in lawful activities are off limits then that applies to everyone - even if YOU despise those lawful activities.

Edited by TimG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How? He has publicly admitted to engaging in S&M activities. There is no vindication to be had. He torpedoed his own career which is built entirely on an image.

? The vindication is over allegations of abuse, not about being involved in BDSM. If they have a contractual right to fire him based on that then that's that. I don't think anybody should really care though - it's pretty boring stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to stop assuming that everyone in the world has the same priorities as you. To some people donating to an anti-gay marriage campaign is a legitimate political expression but engaging in consensual S&M is evidence of a truly twisted mind. Now if you want to argue that the CEOs AND Jian should have been left alone because their private lives have no bearing on their professional roles then I would agree. But if you want to argue that the CEOs deserved what they got and Jian was persecuted then you are just a shameless hypocrite.

Jian did not kick a helpless puppy in an elevator. He engaged in consensual S&M sex with a partner. His parter got pissed because he broke off the relationship. End of story. No more to tell here folks. She knew of his high standing at the CBC and played on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

? The vindication is over allegations of abuse, not about being involved in BDSM. If they have a contractual right to fire him based on that then that's that. I don't think anybody should really care though - it's pretty boring stuff.

If it's pretty boring stuff, why did you start an OP on it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they have a contractual right to fire him based on that then that's that.

I would expect most on air celebs have a 'morals' clause that gives their employers considerable latitude when it comes to these kinds of things. I suspect that the CBC execs realize that even if the abuse allegations were disproven the BSDM activities alone would have tarnished the CBC.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really should suspend judgement, if not forever than at least for a few days.

Suspend judgement? Isn't that what debating is all about. Contributing our thoughts. If I suspended judgement, there would be no reason for OPS. Our contributions are based on our thoughts, feelings, intuitions. If I wait a few days, why would I bother contributing to this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would expect most on air celebs have a 'morals' clause that gives their employers considerable latitude when it comes to these kinds of things. I suspect that the CBC execs realize that even if the abuse allegations were disproven the BSDM activities alone would have tarnished the CBC.

Honestly, the folks listening to Gian would not have a problem with his bedroom activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jian did not kick a helpless puppy in an elevator. He engaged in consensual S&M sex with a partner.

Some people think kicking a dog is a sign of a perverted individual others see consensus S&M is a sign of a perverted individual. It really makes no difference that you think one way because we are talking about opinions - not facts. And everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people think kicking a dog is a sign of a perverted individual others see consensus S&M is a sign of a perverted individual. It really makes no difference that you think one way because we are talking about opinions - not facts. And everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Yes, of course we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was referring to your remark that he is too ponderous and annoying in that CBC kind of way. I found his shows rather refreshing in that CBC kind of way.

Ok. I assume that you're saying that you liked the ponderousness because you're older than me, and like that traditional aspect of CBC? Ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,713
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...