Barker Sued

[clemon79]

What's interesting, tho, is that the OP cited this news item out of Entertainment Weekly (which isn't MUCH better than the Enquirer, but still.)

Did EW cite THEIR source, or use a generic "It has been reported that..." or anything that would take the onus off of them? Seems to me if they reported this as fact falsely then Claudia might have legal recourse against them of some kind...

[chris319]

This was discussed a couple of months ago. If a newspaper comes out and says "Former Model Sues Bob Barker For Sexual Harrasment" and it's NOT TRUE, they're treading on thin ice legally if it can be proven that the paper acted with "reckless disregard for the truth", as they taught us in communications law.

[inturnaround]

[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Aug 16 2004, 05:43 PM\'] This was discussed a couple of months ago. If a newspaper comes out and says "Former Model Sues Bob Barker For Sexual Harrasment" and it's NOT TRUE, they're treading on thin ice legally if it can be proven that the paper acted with "reckless disregard for the truth", as they taught us in communications law. [/quote]
 But they didn't say she sued them for sexual harassment. EW said that she sued the show and Bob Barker for wrongful termination and racial discrimination. Jordan has claimed that she was harassed by a producer no longer with the show, but the EW snippet doesn't mention that.

I don't know if this means that Bob Barker was a named co-defendant, but if she's suing the show, she's more than likely suing the production company and the individual producers (including Barker). It's a common tactic used by lawyers to sue as many people as you can so you can scare them into testifying on your behalf in exchange for dropping the suit.

Still, as I've said, I haven't seen a copy of the lawsuit. I did, however, email the editor of The Smoking Gun and ask if they can get a copy. No doubt this would interest their readers as well.

[tvrandywest]

[quote name=\'inturnaround\' date=\'Aug 17 2004, 08:39 AM\'] I don't know if this means that Bob Barker was a named co-defendant, but if she's suing the show, she's more than likely suing the production company and the individual producers (including Barker). [/quote]
 That's the way I hear it is coming down. I'm just surprised it has taken so many months for the excrement to more fully hit the fan since I posted this in June.

http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?show...4602&hl=scandal

The whole continuing backstage drama at "Price" is so sad for many reasons. They include the fact that some truly wonderful and talented people's professional lives have been made far more complicated and less emotionally rewarding, and others have lost or totally missed the opportunity to contribute their talents.


Randy
tvrandywest.com

[chris319]

But they didn't say she sued them for sexual harassment.

I was referring to the other tabloid that DID say she was suing for sexual harrasment and that (rightly or wrongly) quoted her accusing Barker. There was a thread about it here a couple of months back.

Funny how the soap opera in 33 is so much more salacious than the one in 31.

[cmjb13]

I'm more shocked that Bente Christensen is 50!

[MizzouRah!]

I find it slightly humorous that I posted some meaningful info on this topic many weeks ago, regarding a blurb made by Paul Harvey(who I feel is a legitimate source) about Claudia's upcoming suit. My post was edited, then deleted as hearsay, and I was basically shown the door.  Oh well, sometimes us newbies have something legitimate to add. Just wanted to make a point. >>>heading back to the door>>>>

[chris319]

Paul Harvey may well have obtained that information from the same radio prep service everyone else uses, and it would have been wrong. Claudia was not suing Barker for sexual harrasment as it turns out. We can't be repeating slanderous statements here.

[chris319]

[quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'Aug 17 2004, 03:34 PM\'] I'm more shocked that Bente Christensen is 50! [/quote]
 She designed the P+ set 26 years ago, so that gives away both our ages.

[MizzouRah!]

So Chris, what you're saying is Paul Harvey can make a slanderous statement nationwide, but a small online forum won't allow it? Actually, the statement wasn't slanderous, as it only mentioned Bob once again was having model troubles on TPiR and an upcoming suit. All I was doing was passing along info broadcast from a reputable source, not some 2nd rate pulp mag line the Nashunal Enkwirer. Thought I'd better disguise the name so I don't get sued.
  Also, guess who's a proud resident of Missouri? Check my screen name.
  You've got an impressive tag line. One you should really be proud of. Yeah, right!!

[tommycharles]

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

Seriously... let it go man, Chris has to worry about the board getting in legal trouble, Paul Harvey has to worry about Paul Harvey getting in legal trouble. Each can choose how strongly they feel about it.

OBGameshows: the P+ set is far and away my favourite form of a Password set. Actually my favourite incarnation of Password, period. Wish GSN would show *that* again.

[dzinkin]

Maybe Paul Harvey sexually harassed Claudia.  Or Karl Rove did.  Or maybe Paul Harvey sexually harassed Karl Rove.

Maybe I'm just showing how speculation can get out of hand so people don't keep speculating.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'MizzouRah!\' date=\'Aug 18 2004, 08:27 AM\'] So Chris, what you're saying is Paul Harvey can make a slanderous statement nationwide, but a small online forum won't allow it? [/quote]
Wow, would I quit whining about this if I were you. Tommy is precisely correct, our Fearless Leader has no jurisdiction over what Paul Harvey says between an ad for the Craftmatic bed and "Good Day"!, but he does over what's said here. And if he wants to hold us to a higher standard than News And Comment, that's his option.

Page Two.

Also, guess who's a proud resident of Missouri? Check my screen name.

That sound you hear is the rest of the forum saying "So?" If you're offended by that tagline, you're not gonna last long here, your skin clearly needs some thickening.

Oh, and Missouri sucks.

[SRIV94]

[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Aug 18 2004, 01:19 AM\'] [quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'Aug 17 2004, 03:34 PM\'] I'm more shocked that Bente Christensen is 50! [/quote]
She designed the P+ set 26 years ago, so that gives away both our ages. [/quote]
 You look remarkably well preserved for 71.  ;-)

OK, I'll go to the Isolation Booth but please no dragging (I bruise very easily).  

Doug -- and the countdown to 600 continues (maybe)

[MizzouRah!]

Okay, let me see how I can start my final post to the board that welcomes newcomers so well...

First, all I originally posted was a national comment made by a well-known reputable figure in journalism. For this I was ridiculed, then deleted. I must say, if I had hundreds/thousands of posts under my belt, this probably wouldn't have happened.

Next, I'm not thin-skinned, but I don't appreciate all the degrading comments. Okay, the Mo. brother/sisiter comment was meant, I think, as a joke. My reply was intended just for Chris to let him know some people actually live here. The collective forum says "So" comment was, well, rude. I'm a positive person who would love to post here often w/ some thoughts, that at least I think are interesting, but why post when all you get are snide comebacks. Maybe these are the ones that should be deleted. I would like to see Clemon79 make one positive comment about someone's post. I for one just skip by his posts because I usually know their content before reading. Take your Missouri sucks comment--Was that really necessary? I have 4+ million people that might disagree, but I'm getting totally off topic.
  I'll go back to viewing comments about one of my favorite interests, game shows. Obviously many on here think differently than I do(not that there's anything wrong with that), but I can't constantly degrade others. Enjoy your forum. Now I'll wait and see how many 'wow, this guy's a nut' comments I receive.