You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘“WINNING”’ tag.


Icorrect: this girls new BFF

For three years I have lived with the collateral damage of a deliberate and continuing cyber smear campaign from a handful of detractors who have hidden behind the time-honored protection given anonymous news sources. They are more school yard bullies than protected sources in the traditions of  great journalism.  But even with school yard bullies, you at least know who they are.

Two old stories in particular (2007 and 2008) were actually manipulated  for years to reappear on the first page of my Google Search. Both articles, highly sexist,  were based on false or twisted information provided by those with apparent malice who choose to  portray me as a workplace wackjob.

At the time the articles first appeared, I made a decision to take the high ground and ignore the bad press.  I now know that decision was wrong; not defending myself against the many lies let them  live on, unchallenged,  in cyberspace, a new world that has a real and measurable impact.

The “anonymouses” were actually “winning.”   But today, in the words of one ESPN anchor, “Not so fast, my friend.”

Today, the New York Times  has an article in the Week In Review section called “Celebrities Set the Record Straight” about  a new website called where , for a membership fee of $1,000, one can correct a false story and then see your correction posted side by side with the original accusation.  The NYT story today features Stephen Fry, Bianca Jagger, Michael Caine, Tommy Hillfiger, Kevin Spacey and me!

If $1,000 seems like a lot of money, it’s a drop in the bucket compared to the $65,000 I was quoted by one company  to chase down all the lies that had been ricocheting around the internet. That was just to start; there was no promise to tackle unforeseen problems, such as what turned out to be a cyber “stalker(s)” who, regardless of any accomplishments, will manipulate the headlines with the words “Ballistic Boss” and “Tantrum-Prone” back to the top of my search page.

The most vicious stories were published at the end of my 17-year tenure at ABC News, then at the end of a much shorter one at CBS News where, after 23 weeks as senior executive producer of The Early Show, the bad press was at a fever pitch and I was asked to leave.

March 3, 2008 was my last day at CBS News and, ironically,  also the day I was about to assign the story of Paul Tilley, a 40-year-old creative chief of an ad agency, DDB Chicago. A week and a half earlier Tilly, a husband and father of two, jumped to a violent death from an upper floor of the Fairmont Hotel,  the building next door to his offices.  The talented Mr. Tilley had been the target of vicious, anonymous blogs on two ad industry websites.

At the time, I named this new phenomenon blood blogging, a far more accurate phrase than Sarah Palin’s more recent blood libel, and certainly less incendiary.  To me, blood blogging seems more of a sport than anything else, one designed by those not particularly witty, talented or inspired, but rather  those who are seemingly disgruntled, disenfranchised and not willing to put their own ideas front and center for anyone to notice, let alone judge.

Under the cloak of anonymity, they tear others down, wound with words and when all else fails, make stuff up.

The blood blogging of me began even before I even accepted the CBS job, when it was published that  my secret contract negotiations to become senior executive producer of The Early Show were halted because Katie Couric was mad at me.  Not true, but the lightning round of phone calls from reporters revealed one certainty: someone was working a sabotage story pretty aggressively.  I was hoping this was just a little gossipy speed bump, but not so.  Following my introduction to The Early Show staff, I gave my first talk about the difficult but exciting days ahead as we faced the challenge of moving out of third place.   Soon after that, my old pals at ABC called and repeated back my words, almost verbatim, and even told me their favorite parts of the Q&A session.   When I officially began work at CBS  the next week, I changed the pass code to the telephone conference bridge.

The steady stream of malicious gossip began pretty early. I “melted down,” went “ballistic,” “became enraged” and “threw temper tantrums” in meetings I did not attend, in hallways I didn’t walk in and on phone calls I never placed or received.   In the early days, almost like clockwork each Friday afternoon at about ten to six, my boss and  I would be handed a demeaning anonymous item to confirm or deny for Page Six of the New York Post.  Despite the clear and specific denials from the president of the news division, Page Six eventually ran one big story anyway, telling our publicist, “but our source is so good.”  Perhaps the source had an ulterior motive.

As one website picked up each false and malicious story from the other,  personal threats began, some addressing what should happen to terrible bosses like me.  There was simply no recourse, until now.   Read the rest of this entry »


Online TV Shows by Ustream

It was bound to happen. One person in one great shining moment of new technology and brass balls who could give the finger to the network bosses and herald in a new era of really direct tv.

Within three hours, Charlie Sheen’s low-tech, low quality premiere episode of “Sheen’s Korner,” pulled in 631,000 viewers on Ustream.

“Good Evening from Sherman Oaks,” he began, introducing his grand experiment.  “You’re either in Sheen’s Korner or with the trolls!”

He introduced his trusty sidekick, The Rick, and his amazing staff: Jason, Matt, Simon Rex musical director aka Dirt Nasty and one of the goddesses.  There was a photographer: The Steve, The leo,  and the guy he called his fabulous producer, Brad Weiman (no spelling available.)

During his monologue, (he must be using the term loosely), he held up his arm to unveil a new wrist tatoo. But he forgot, there’s no camera to give him a close up.  So he holds his hand up to computer camera where the new tatoo is blocked by lower third banner CHARLIE@charlie sheen.  Somehow, we figure out the tatoo spells out “winning,” after which Sheen borrows a page from “Network” and implores viewers to go to their window, open it and chant with him “Winning! Winning! Winning!”

The next segment in the webcast is a series of random pictures including one that shows cat bites dog.  Lots of farting noises sound effects continue before we’re off to a segment on “winning” news that begins with a  shout out to Zachary, the youngest ever eagle scout who is then  welcomed aboard the winning team.

Sheen is wearing a black t-shirt with a green Warhol dollar sign and a bowler hat, covering exactly what we don’t know as he reads another winning story: a bald eagle who survived a crash into a windshield.

About 9:21 in to the premiere, Sheen lights his first cigarette, and then moves on to the story of Josie Dimples, an 80-year-old woman who tweeted Sheen to say she is now winning, too.  For that, she gets a polaroid of Sheen, freshly snapped by one of the goddesses. He tells us there will be only one given out on each show.

He adlibs: “As the story develops… ” along with the polaroid coming to life and we watch him sign it.

And there’s more!  Howard Schnitzer was kept alive by a chain of neighbors who gave him CPR for over 90 minutes until medical help arrived.  Winning news, indeed.  Just snapshots, he tells us,  of the components of genius you’ll see on Sheen’s Korner.

Frankly, the backyard “let’s put on a show” feel is a lot much more exciting than  many network sitcoms and, other than the distracting farting noises, has tremendous potential.  It’s like a Wayne’s World with more awkward moments and herkier, jerkier audio, if that’s possible.

Someone named Paul calls to interrupt and tell him he’s watching the show.  “Who isn’t?”  Sheen says. Read the rest of this entry »