OnStage Blog Picking Up Dropped NYT #MeToo Broadway Story — Page 2

Does anyone know who they're even talking about? I'm assuming since NYT didn't run the story, there probably isn't enough evidence to responsibly publish an accusation, but rumors would have gotten out otherwise.

There are definitely other people out there I trust more to be Broadway's Ronan Farrow.

Sutton Ross said: "They are just dumb 20 year old children who clearly don't have any background in English or journalism. They are embarrassing and I honestly hope they get sued for their IG post."

The most likely result of this is nothing. Onstage Blog's (unverified) Twitter account has less than 3000 followers. Compared to BroadwayWorld and Broadway.com's 300k+ followers each, they don't have a fraction of the eyes watching that they think they have.

The publicist of anyone they try to MeToo is going to have a field day. If there was a Louis CK or a Kevin Spacey in the industry, we'd have known by now. They had decades of systemic toxic behavior, with dozens of accusations and witnesses. A DM on Twitter isn't going to end anyone's career.

The only thing they MIGHT have in the barrel is an accusation against Neil LaBute. They ran a piece on him a few years ago that's a complete mess. To name a few flaws:

1. They claimed he's a Mormon. He's not anymore. He left the church years ago.
2. They claim The Shape of Things is about "a mean woman who dates a guy as a social experiment". Depending on what you think of the play, this description of the character is subjective at best and reductive at worst.
3. They claim he has documented cases of misconduct against him, and as a source they link the NYT article that reported his leaving MCC, which does not levy an accusation against him anywhere in the article, either on their behalf or MCC's behalf.

I'm not trying to defend LaBute's work, as I'm honestly not a fan, but this is mudslinging dressed up as an editorial.

jonartdesigns said: "When I read “Were picking up where they left off and will publish what they wouldnt.” I assumed they actually HAD the story, and weren’t just fishing for one.
"

I don't think the NYT had a story written that then wasn't published. I think there never was a story to begin with. From what I heard, they spoke to a few people, but nobody was willing to go on the record and a story was never written. I'd imagine that happens a lot in journalism: you investigate something that doesn't pan out, or there isn't enough evidence to report on. If Harvey Weinstein couldn't get the NYT to kill a story about him, I doubt any Broadway producers could get one killed.

They will either **** bricks whenever someone mentions lawyers and don't publish it or it will be so laughably bad no one will take it serious and it will ruin potential serious reporting on the issue