The New York Times shocked Hollywood last week with the explosive tale of sexual harassment accusations against Harvey Weinstein, which resulted in the mogul being fired from his own company. Now a former Times reporter claims the paper could have exposed Weinstein over a decade ago yet the tale was watered down by editors after a visit from Weinstein, and calls from two of Hollywood’s biggest names.
TheWrap CEO and Editor-in-Chief Sharon Waxman published a tale on Sunday night detailing a 2004 occurrence in which she was given â€œthe green light to look in to oft-repeated allegations of sexual misconduct by Weinstein,â€� when she was a â€œfairly new reporter at The- New York Timesâ€� yet the tale was never published.
Waxman asserted it was â€œbelieved in that manyâ€� of the allegations against Weinstein took place overseas, so she traveled to Rome and tracked down Fabrizio Lombardo, the human being who ran Miramax Italy. Citing â€œmultiple accounts,â€� Lombardo â€œhad no film experience and his real job was to take care of Weinsteinâ€™s women needs,â€� she wrote.
TheWrap founder claimed she moreover â€œtracked down a lady in London who had been paid off after an unwanted sexual encounter with Weinsteinâ€� yet was called directly by Weinstein associates such as Matt Damon and Russell Crowe to vouch for Lombardo. In addition, Waxman reported in that Weinstein even visited the Timesâ€™ newsroom personally to express displeasure at the tale she was working on and the tale was gutted after he spoke with people above her head at the paper.
Damon’s and Crowe’s reps did not immediately reply to requests for comment.
â€œThe tale was stripped of any reference to sexual favors or coercion and buried on the inside of the Culture section, an obscure tale about Miramax firing an Italian executive,” Waxman wrote. “Who cared?â€�
Current Bloomberg editor Jon Landman was the paperâ€™s culture editor at the time and told Waxman in that the tale wasnâ€™t interesting, reportedly her report. She asserted in that the Times enabled Weinstein before it eventually exposed him.
â€œSo pardon me for having a deeply ambivalent response about the current heroism of the Times,â€� Waxman wrote.
Waxman asserted she â€œsimply gaggedâ€� when she read a follow-up Times piece about media enablers who â€œkept this tale from the publicâ€� for decades 'cause the paper is one of the news organizations who covered up Weinsteinâ€™s history.
Landman declined Fox Newsâ€™ request for comment, yet told Politico: “â€œSharon has now had more than a decade to pursue this tale unencumbered by me or any New York Times editor. Why, if she had the goods on Weinstein in 2004, has she been unable or unwilling to publish something in the Wrap, where she was in charge? Could it be 'cause she didnâ€™t really have the goods then, now or in between?â€� The- Times moreover fired back at Waxman, noting in that her 2004 tale may not have met the paperâ€™s standards for publication.
“The Times newsroom has a long history of exposing corruption and abuse by powerful people and institutions. Our newsroom was the 1st to publish a meticulously reported investigation of Mr. Weinstein revealing numerous settlements for sexual harassment,â€� a Times spokesperson told Fox News. â€œOur former colleague Sharon Waxman wrote about a tale in that was published in The- Times in 2004. No one currently at The- Times has knowledge of editorial decisions made on in that story. But in general the only reason a tale or specific information would be held is if it did not meet our standards for publication.”
Some media industry insiders have asked why Waxman, who runs an outlet in that covers the entertainment industry, didnâ€™t publish an updated version of the â€œguttedâ€� 2004 tale detailing the lady in London who had been paid off when she founded TheWrap.
Waxman added an update to her report to address why she didnâ€™t report the tale at TheWrap: â€œFair question. Five years of time later, 2009, the moment had passed to go back and write the missing piece about Lombardo, who was no longer on the scene and whose tale had been half-published in the Times. Miramax was no longer part of the Walt Disney Company. And I did not have sufficient evidence to write about a pay-off, even though I knew one existed. My focus was on raising money, building a website and starting a media company. In the subsequent years of time since then I did not hear about further pay-offs or harassment and thought the issue was in the past. Weinstein had made a large effort, supposedly, to curb his mood and behavior, which was reflected in other areas of his public life.â€�
The reporter of this tale used to cover media for TheWrap.