Stop Yelling and Go to Human Resources
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
My interpreation of bullying includes a number of factors, a key one of which is a power disparity between the bully and the bullied. By the Times’s telling, what actually occured was a disagreement between at the very least peers, if not of a less senior (Garfield) and more senior (Gladstone) team member. It sounds less as if Garfield was guilty of bullying and more that he was fired in retaliation for what might be uncharitably considered insubordination rather than a professional disagreement.
This bears poorly on WNYC, On the Media, and Gladstone.
And yes, given WNYC’s stated goal of becoming New York City’s news source “of record”, the Times itself has a horse in this race. Though its own position is and long has been as the national paper of record.
It seems to me that, regardless of whether this was bullying or how individually kind and ethical they may be, Garfield and Gladstone's relationship - and possibly the larger culture of WYNC - was toxic to the point of being nonfunctional. Throwing Gladstone under the bus for something that seems to be bigger than him isn't the right thing to do, but the relationship probably had to be terminated one way or another.
Something does indeed seem to be sick at WNYC based on the larger pattern. Financial stresses expressed in various ways, perhaps.
Listening to this week's episode (I note that there was no Podcast Extra released, though the weekly show did come out on schedule), there wasn't a full investigation, though Brooke did address the matter at the top of the show. In context with Bob's statements, what I had been noting (mostly through Garfield's Twitter feed in the past few weeks), and my own near-20-years of listening to the show (I think I picked up around 2000/2001), her comments rang hollow. I also question how free people are to speak their hearts where a 20-year star is summarily dismissed. Mind, I could be wrong.
There was also the case of the 2016 post-election session which was a pretty frank exchange between Garfield and Gladstone on what had happened and what the show should be doing going forward. There's this bit:
BOB GARFIELD: Yeah, you know, I hope that it’s some sort of clarion call but I – you know, what I most hope is that we are not all passengers on the ship of fools.
BROOKE GLADSTONE: What the [BEEP] does that mean?
[Dred: As I'm listening to this, I'm not sure if that's a friendly or annoyed expletive, but then ...]
KATYA ROGERS: I don’t know what that means, either. [LAUGHING] What does that mean?
BOB GARFIELD: What’s it – what does it mean?
BROOKE GLADSTONE: Why would you want to end on the line of, we’re all going to hell?
BOB GARFIELD: Perhaps I misunderstood, but if you wanted to know what I'm thinking and feeling and what we should do –
[Dred: Bob at this point sounds annoyed that he was asked for his feelings, stated them frankly, and was then challenged and forced to justify them. And I think he was right in that.]
https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/segments/brooke-bob...
Another point that comes from that session is that it appears to have been Garfield who was pounding the drum for the constant stream of warnings and analysis of the GOP candidate in the 2016 primary and general campaign. I can remember listening at the time and starting to think it was all a bit over the top, but by the time the election came (and the four years of the administration), feeling it was entirely justified.
I would occasionally email OTM. I mentioned my response to the campaign coverage, and apologised for my (private, unvoiced) feelings, crediting the programme with getting that call right. I've also written more recently noting Garfield's anger (it does express on his Twitter feed, though largely addressed at the industry he covers), and the possibility of looking to the show's continuation and transition from the current hosts. I didn't expect those two issues to resolve in the manner they have, and am quite sorry they have.
That said, at this point I'd say OTM needs a full reboot. As a long-time fan, and someone who's appreciated both Garfield and Gladstone for decades, it's quite painful to write that.
(And no, that reboot itself won't address the apparently deeper concerns at the station.)