That is why I like the Ricky Gervais monologue at Golden Globes so much.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple TV+ and Oprah Drop Documentary on Sexual Misconduct in the Music Industry Over Creative Differences
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is why I like the Ricky Gervais monologue at Golden Globes so much.
Fair enough.
I was making a joke.
I'm not claiming to be privy to any inside information- I’m just aware that he’s got “a reputation”... & found the idea of the film makers needing to scrub the footage mentioning him amusing.
Again, I’m not accusing him of anything- just wisecracking!
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
Her show at its best was really good. Interesting conversations, people, questions, good interaction with the audience (especially in the earlier years). And she brought the country together over big topics. I remember the Mark Furman interview after the OJ verdict. I remember the pre-ObamaCare episode. She actually got all the actors involved on stage together, including the health insurance companies. The post-9/11 episodes. I'll never forget Gary Zukav after 9/11 on her show. I don't know who else would put a guy that sounds that out-there on a show after 9/11. And there's nothing like that on TV now where it's like a meeting of everyone on national issues at the time they're happening. She was a fairly neutral platform. To answer your question of why people like *her*, I always thought she was unique in how much she disappeared on her show. She was kind of like a blank screen to an extent and allowed others to take over the stage in an interesting way. I don't think of her as a person I know but more of the space she created.
Since her show, I don't know. I don't have the OWN channel, but it doesn't sound too interesting. To me, the show was the big thing.
Apple TV+ isn’t going to be the next big streaming business. They shouldn’t even have tried. They gave me a year for free and I still haven’t watched any of their shows. I would have rather they gave me a free year of Apple Arcade or Music for free instead. Don’t try to push your garbage on me when you are not a content creation company. They had their chance when they came out with iTunes and before Netflix had done the streaming side of their business and creating mostly great original content.
wait so you’re simultaneously calling people rapists without any tangible proof and also defending innocence until proven guilty? Which is it? PickUrSide
From what I can tell, it’s pretty simple: she’s likable. It’s allowed her to amass a self-made, multi-billion dollar fortune. She’s estimated to be worth over $4 billion, and that is very upsetting to some.
Like many celebrities, there are tens or hundreds of millions who like or even love them, but of course some will view them negatively. This ranges anywhere from mild annoyance, to hostility, to contempt... all the way to intense anger and hatred at the furthest extreme 🤷♂️
How about you watch a season or two before you bash them. Not a lot of content yet, but the shows they have made in the genres I enjoy are head and shoulders above the quality, individuality, and in some cases depth than Netflix has been.
I held off watching too because of the “reviews” - but I didn’t badmouth the service and claim “Apple wasn’t a content creation company”.
for months, I have been watching the first few episodes of probably a dozen Netflix series. Nothing-NOTHING- has been worth the time for me and I’ve stopped mid first season in all of them.
Apple may not be the biggest streaming service in 5 years, but I bet they will be going strong in their own right.
netflix, however, will be struggling if they keep up this “quantity over quality” approach.
She’s protected by the media, and the gullible and naive amongst us fall for all the sanctimonious hand wringing and virtue signalling. Some people are desperate to believe in someone. Someone they don’t even remotely know.
Putting aside that everyone in the industry knew about Weinstein for decade(s), Oprah and any other multi billionaire rarely/if ever reach that status by being good people or ethical.
At best, if they do qualify as decent human beings - which Oprah may be, very unlikely, but possible - I guarantee they turn a blind eye to almost everything around for reasons related to $$$.
To then be preached to about morals/ethics/honesty by the same people.....words fail me. I like a lot of Apple products, but they’re utterly shameless in this same regard.
Last edited:
The headline to this article is terrible. It strongly implies that Oprah and Apple TV+ are having creative differences with each other. I hope that MacRumors edits the headline to be less clickbaity.
[automerge]1578742536[/automerge]
[automerge]1578742868[/automerge]
[automerge]1578742536[/automerge]
What’s your point? That Oprah should’ve known the deep, dark secret this man harboured for 15 years? That she is somehow culpable? Or that Harvey Weinstein has zero redeeming qualities as a human being and has never done anything in his life worthy of earning a kiss on the cheek? Please, what is your point? I’d like to see how you are going to blame Oprah for what HW did. Go ahead. Enlighten us all.Uh ... yeah ...
[automerge]1578742868[/automerge]
What’s your point? That Oprah should’ve known the deep, dark secret this man harboured for 15 years? That she is somehow culpable? Or that Harvey Weinstein has zero redeeming qualities as a human being and has never done anything in his life worthy of earning a kiss on the cheek? Please, what is your point? I’d like to see how you are going to blame Oprah for what HW did. Go ahead. Enlighten us all.Uh ... yeah ...
I love when it’s obvious that someone didn’t read the article.
Last edited:
Just because a small percentage of people might have inside knowledge of something doesn’t mean that everyone does. Rumors float around about people all the time—sometimes true, sometimes not. The average citizen is not a private investigator, detective, or prosecutor, and has neither the evidence nor the resources to verify rumors or to exact justice in the absence of it. You cannot blame people just for working alongside a massively powerful and conniving individual. He committed the crimes. And while a very small group of people may have had real evidence that they ignored, the vast majority of Hollywood knew nothing but rumors and innuendo. Just like many of us have heard rumors and innuendos about friends, colleagues, or neighbors in our own lives and continue to know and interact with those people until the buzz around them goes beyond rumor into verifiable, undeniable evidence. Why? Because much of the time those rumors are completely specious gossip. Did Oprah hear rumors about HW? I don’t know. There have been rumors about Richard Gere and gerbils for years. And yet... people continued to work with him. All I know here, from the cheap seats, is that there appears to finally be enough evidence about this powerful creep to put him away for a long time, and that’s a good thing.
Is there evidence that Oprah is guilty of being an accessory? Of being part of a cover up? Of willfully ignoring proof of his crimes? Let’s hear it.
They dropped it after realising that no one was convinced this stuff is new, groundbreaking or creative. Everyone knows there are inequalities worldwide in a range of industries - we don’t need it shoved down our throats to make use feel guilty and to tout Apple as the do-no-wrong ‘investigator’.
Spot on.
[automerge]1578749390[/automerge]
I think user PickUrPoison is trying to say that people shouldn’t be judging before knowing all the facts. I could be hanging out with a friend for years and years later find out that he murdered someone. Should I have known this? That’s a rhetorical question; of course not, unless there are obvious clues leading to the fact that I should have known about it.
People can’t blindly state that Oprah knew all of this in advance with no clear evidence to back it up. Unfortunately, many people allready made up their minds and state that Oprah is either suspect or guilty in advance. I wouldn’t go there in that territory.
And of course, no one should insinuate each other for being racist. That’s not on the list to have a debate about here.
Peace! Greetings from Amsterdam the Netherlands.
Last edited:
At some point, I think we should check our outrage. Like, it’s definitely mortifying not just Weinstein but Spacey, Lauer, bunches of others we know about and surely many more we don’t know about. But there are sadly plenty of other mortifying things going on in this world. I feel like Oprah deserves some benefit of the doubt. Maybe she knew. But she definitely for a long time now has demonstrated that she’s trying to help make the world a better place. She is only superhuman though, maybe she can’t solve every terrible issue going on in the world. Maybe
[automerge]1578756117[/automerge]
I think Sarah Silverman had some good comments on this regarding her friendship with Louis CK, who I’m told had done some unsavory things in his past.
I read the date wrong. Regardless ... a woman with as much power and influence as she has ... with the billions of dollars that she has ... being as close to Weinstein as she is ... with this horrible crap he's been doing for the better part of 15 years ... and then this article regarding her self awareness of sexual misconduct in the media industry ... leads me to believe that she must have been at least somewhat aware of the ongoings of this man. It just seems a bit sketchy to me.
Are you that naive to think that everyone in Hollywood didn't know what Weinstein was doing? Please tell me that you aren't.
I wonder if his comments at the Golden Globes about the sexual assault documentaries or Apple had influenced Oprah's decision to leave this Apple TV+ project.
Probably not, but maybe.
[automerge]1578763101[/automerge]
Not sure what Oprah knew about Harvey Weinstein, but it seems like there are plenty of people claiming that everyone (people involved in the industry) knew, but no one said anything.
Wrong, that photo is from 2014
FACT CHECK: Was Oprah Pictured Kissing Harvey Weinstein on the Cheek?
A photograph showing Oprah offering Harvey Weinstein a peck on the cheek is real; it was taken in 2014 at the Critics' Choice movie awards.
www.snopes.com
Yes ... that's already been established.Wrong, that photo is from 2014
FACT CHECK: Was Oprah Pictured Kissing Harvey Weinstein on the Cheek?
A photograph showing Oprah offering Harvey Weinstein a peck on the cheek is real; it was taken in 2014 at the Critics' Choice movie awards.
I know, it’s just I hate seeing someone say something completely factually wrong, and seeing a bunch of people “liking” it. They’ll just believe whatever suits their narrative.
Yes, I would wonder if you were accusing me of being sexist---that's because I said zero about race or gender---it could have been George Lucas laughing with Weinstein the photo (or the Macrumors story) and I would have said the exact same thing.
I'm the one who's projecting? You literally injected identity politics into my comment having NOTHING to do with either race or gender.
You're just another person who sees racism and sexism hiding behind every corner (or comment!).
[automerge]1578765765[/automerge]
That was the entire point of my comment.
Some dude just accused me of being racist and sexist for calling out Oprah because she likely knew about Weinstein (like everyone else).
Smh.
Other than a bunch of failed actress feminists with only words against a very wealthy person years after the alleged event, where is any of your evidence that any of these things actually took place? It seems like you want to pick and choose when believing things fits your agenda.
Uh ... yeah ...
This documentary has nothing to do with that Weinstein.
Oprah Winfrey exits Russell Simmons #MeToo documentary, and the filmmakers respond
Oprah Winfrey says she is no longer serving as executive producer of a new Sundance documentary about Russell Simmons and the #MeToo movement.
www.latimes.com
This is about Russell Simmons and in particular I think the creative differences hinge on this line:
It seems perhaps the documentary format wasn't going to allow for a complete and individual telling of the events that occurred to each victim in it and that is what they couldn't agree upon.
At any event, this just happened:
On eve of Manhattan sex assault trial, Harvey Weinstein charged with 2013 attacks on women in Los Angeles
The L.A. County D.A. has filed charges of forcible rape, forcible oral copulation, sexual penetration by use of force and sexual battery by restraint.
www.latimes.com
And three other cases are pending as well.
'Creative differences'
...over exposing rampant sexual assault in the music industry?!?
Wonder why she wouldn't be interested in exposing the movie industry's depravity specifically, something she seems to have vast direct experience with
--
Not sure who's a bigger fraud anymore, Foxconn virtue signaling Tim or empower women Oprah.
Come screech at me fam about how I'm so categorically incorrect about everything and my eyes and brain deceive me. Watch me care
...over exposing rampant sexual assault in the music industry?!?
Wonder why she wouldn't be interested in exposing the movie industry's depravity specifically, something she seems to have vast direct experience with
--
Not sure who's a bigger fraud anymore, Foxconn virtue signaling Tim or empower women Oprah.
Come screech at me fam about how I'm so categorically incorrect about everything and my eyes and brain deceive me. Watch me care
Yes, no one can churn out mediocre-to-crap original content (and shows that are so drawn out they could've easily cut 3-5 episodes) at the rate Netflix currently does.
Last edited: