You must log in or register to comment.

Toadfinger t1_j661nq2 wrote

See? I told them they should have had the affair on camera!


Attacuss t1_j67y8zh wrote

Doesn’t count if it’s on camera everybody knows that


reddig33 t1_j66gtil wrote

Sounds like the next season of “The Morning Show” has new material to pull from!


EntertainerNo3007 t1_j67f1lx wrote

Yeah proud cheaters probably are not good for ratings when your main audience are family’s getting ready for the day.


cmVkZGl0 t1_j69lpl2 wrote

What about when your main audience are cheaters getting ready for cheating?


Dianagorgon t1_j69hnrr wrote

That might not be true. They could have waited to see the impact on ratings after a few months before deciding if they should be replaced. I don't watch GMA but I heard Robach was very popular.

I don't know people say they were "proud" cheaters or that they were acting smug when they returned to the show after the scandal was revealed. They couldn't exactly cry and get angry on the show. They were filmed without their knowledge. Yes it was stupid to be out in public together but they might have already privately separated from their spouse or at least talked to them about ending the marriage but stayed living together for the sake of the children.


waitmyhonor t1_j690z4r wrote

I really can’t take ABC serious as a family channel given their channel (compared to Fox, NBC, CBS) has the most raunchiest and mature rated shows


im_a_dick_head t1_j6650u9 wrote

y tho?


GarlVinland4Astrea t1_j66etz7 wrote

Because it became a public scandal, it was awkward for audiences watching the show after it came out, and ultimately they got replaced and the show didn't miss a beat because Robach and Holmes aren't stars.

So it was just easier to throw the problem away and run their show like normal.

It's not the fairest thing, but in the entertainment business your value and star power and how much your employer will put up with are on the same line and they just weren't that important to ABC for the unwanted attention it was getting


[deleted] t1_j66uurk wrote



GarlVinland4Astrea t1_j66v3yf wrote

If it becomes a scandal that distracts from the company mission, then no they can't.


im_a_dick_head t1_j670bau wrote

Why would it become a scandal?


Far-Engineer-5530 t1_j672h07 wrote

Because they were both married. And apparently Holmes had sex inside is office with another junior employee a few years ago.


Dismal-Past7785 t1_j672cab wrote

Well they were both married to other people, that usually does it. Reporters aren’t meant to be the story.


im_a_dick_head t1_j674dua wrote

Oh. This information was unknown to me. I take it all back lol


Dismal-Past7785 t1_j674h4f wrote

LPT: when a relationship is referred to as an “affair” it’s because one or all of the parties are married to someone else.


cohrt t1_j696wvd wrote

Because they were both married to other people while the affair was going on.


Vestalmin t1_j6aiqqo wrote

“Why?” isn’t even the right question because it did become a scandal.


im_a_dick_head t1_j6b56kf wrote

Dude chillax I didn't know they were married. I'm getting so many downvotes for not knowing information very sad


Mr-Pugtastic t1_j68n7b0 wrote

Plenty of employers have rules or restrictions on relationships between coworkers. Plus ABC is trying to sell “wholesome” and “family centric” as their brand so yeah I can understand


Coosaw t1_j68nuxr wrote

They fucked with the money. Don’t fuck with the money.


russdb t1_j69p6bg wrote

Depends on the company, many discourage fraternizing and you gotta report it to HR.

Unless you're at Dunder Mifflin, then it's fair game.


Xalbana t1_j68n6m5 wrote

Username checks out.

Relationships in the workplace is a contentious issue.

Many companies don't care as long as it doesn't affect power dynamics or it doesn't negatively affects the company publicly.


mountainhighgoat t1_j6670zi wrote

Because they cheated on their family and showcased how proud they were about it…?


rtseel t1_j667pwi wrote

That must be one of these American things that I can't understand. Why would that be the company's business or ground for termination?


CrassDemon t1_j66874q wrote

It's not really an "American thing" most large companies around the world have a morality clause. Gotta keep up the company image when you represent the company.


LABS_Games t1_j66il7w wrote

I'm not American, but I'm tired of the superiority showboating people do in the thinly veiled guise of "asking an honest question".


ChesswiththeDevil t1_j692ajj wrote

Are you serious? People ask that way because it’s hard to convey intent over the Internet and people want to ask a question without seeming like they are trolling.


rtseel t1_j66m92t wrote

If you're referring to my comment, there's no superior affectation at all in my intention. I'm just from a country that has routinely re-elected presidents who were known for having affairs, and where terminating employees for having affairs would result in lawsuit and massive compensation from the courts. So, yes, I'm honestly asking because I just can't understand it, why would a company fire people for having affairs (between adults)?


CrassDemon t1_j66yfgr wrote

They would fire them because they broke their contract. Whether or not the public cares, the employer does and they have people sign contracts saying they won't do whatever behavior they find unappealing. The people would lose a lawsuit because there are contracts in place. This isn't just American companies, futbol teams all over the world have the players sign similar contracts. Politicians are elected officials, they aren't beholden to corporate standards or contracts even in America (just look at Trump or Clinton).


rtseel t1_j6als49 wrote

TFA doesn't mention any contract being broken.

Also, show me a football club in Europe where players can't have affairs otherwise they'll be fired? I think the courts will have a field day with that.


CrassDemon t1_j6aus8j wrote

They absolutely had a contact in place. Futbol teams have morality clauses that don't necessarily include affairs as an offense. Every company is different.


Dismal-Past7785 t1_j672sze wrote

Because they’re public facing individuals whose job is to report the news, not become the news. Elections are one thing, that’s the people selecting a government. Public representation of your corporation is another thing, and if you fuck that up in any way in a public facing role I’m sure you can still be fired in your country, even if the reason you fucked it up (like having an affair) is apparently normally protected.

Like if Jim from sales and Pam from administration have an affair I’m sure that’s totally fine. But if your two lead anchors have an affair and become the story instead of presenting the story, then I’m sure that’s still a problem no matter the work place protections. They’re not being fired because of the affair. They’re being fired for the public fallout of the affair reflecting badly on the parent company.


whatsarobinson t1_j67ph4h wrote

If Jim from sales and Pam from administration had an affair then we’ve got ourselves a multi Emmy award winning television series


rtseel t1_j6ammxd wrote

And yet Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski weren't fired, and their story didn't embarass or harm their company, quite the contrary.

Also, TFA mentions that this could be legally tricky for ABC:

> ABC News may have to thread a needle, proving via legal means that the pair behaved unprofessionally at work.

So any legal reason is just a retroactive attempt at justification.

> and if you fuck that up in any way in a public facing role I’m sure you can still be fired in your country, even if the reason you fucked it up (like having an affair) is apparently normally protected.

Sure, for all sorts of reasons. Except having an affair. That's nobody's business here (France) and a private matter between the two people and their families. And that's why I can't understand it, and so far none of the explanations have been convincing and are contradicted by TFA, since it's neither a legal reason, nor a contract reason. It's purely a cultural reason.


GhostRobot55 t1_j6bgkds wrote

Because it means they're shitty human beings lol.

Fuck off out of here.


rtseel t1_j6frx5s wrote

So what? That's their business and the business of their family, who are the only ones harmed. Why do you care who they're sleeping with, if they're not your spouse?

If shitty human beings was a criteria, not a lot of people would find work.


ChesswiththeDevil t1_j69248l wrote

I love that interoffice relationships are included in the morality clause, but corporate ethics vs. profit mandates or not. In other words, it’s really important that you always make the company appear to be moral, but let’s look the other way when it comes to doing the right thing, even if it means affecting profits a little.


rtseel t1_j66lebl wrote

In many countries an affair wouldn't affect the company image at all. People just won't care.


matty_nice t1_j66acgw wrote

He also had multiple affairs with people at work, including an intern. Instant no no.


rtseel t1_j66lgm2 wrote

That's a more serious allegation, but I haven't seen that in the article.


mountainhighgoat t1_j668ztu wrote

Because who wants those kind of people working for their company?


tsh87 t1_j669fnz wrote

Yeah, to me if you want to have an affair that's your business I guess.

But if you're too dumb to properly hide it, that I can't tolerate.

These two were anchors on a national morning show and yet they ran around like nobody would know who they were. That's too stupid to remain employed.


GhostRobot55 t1_j6bgqwg wrote

When an affair exposes the spouse to risk of stds they didn't consent to I tend to see it as a form of sexual assault.


otherestScott t1_j689cg1 wrote

There’s a suggestion here if you have an affair you just should be unemployed which is way overly harsh. At that point you might as well just send people to jail for having an affair


GhostRobot55 t1_j6byhkk wrote

Exposing someone to the risk of an std without their knowledge and gaining consent to sex under the fraudulent pretense of monogamy seems like it should carry some weight behind it. This is assuming you continue a sexual relationship with the original partner.

It takes a level of sociopathy to hand waive cheating. That's not hyperbole. I'd rather be mugged than be cheated on especially if it was for an extended period of time in a relationship. That can amount to years of your life being fundamentally a lie.


Similar-Collar1007 t1_j66a0n4 wrote

Also they are co workers if he had been in a role above her weird power dynamic shit would come into play and you don’t wanna send the message that’s okay


ihatecovid2020 t1_j66ug1k wrote

They both have big contracts. In these types of roles, networks are better off cutting and running when something happens so they can move to the next ones and pay them less.


HuntMore9217 t1_j67mj11 wrote

Not a good image for the company to coddle openly cheating professionals. Maybe if they kept it hidden and wasn't outed in the public


HPmoni t1_j67rwe2 wrote

Would be cringe to watch them now.


Proshop_Charlie t1_j6bx5gi wrote

You had the guy also fucking interns. That was probably the final nail in the coffin for them.


Volcano_Tequila t1_j6ajzi1 wrote

I'll never understand why anyone would so jeopardize their hard-won, odds-against-success careers like this. I know, I know, the heart wants what the heart wants, but there were so many ways these two could have handled this, and they chose the worst option, a lose-lose for everyone including themselves, their families, their show.


Vegan_Harvest t1_j67xn31 wrote

I'm remarkably unmoved by this story.


Mrrobotico0 t1_j67p0h6 wrote

The best decision. Professionalism is dying.


ArkyBeagle t1_j6asnra wrote

The scathing take on these sorts of shows from "Don't Look Up" is reference-grade. I'm sort of surprised that name stars actually participated. Perhaps there is hope after all.


walker1555 t1_j6blhz3 wrote

They weren't particularly knowledgeable, they were just there to look good and read the teleprompter. Those folks are easy to replace.


seekingbeta t1_j6c8m0w wrote

I’d argue they were excellent on-screen and people at that level are hard to replace. Just watch any local news program to see what mid-level on-screen talent looks like. These two were at the top of their game. I’m actually bummer they’re leaving because I liked them on GMA and I don’t watch it for the morals.


Brilliantnerd t1_j6dfe6i wrote

The real brains in the room made the call bc although they’re cheating romance was unsavory, this was one of many for TJ and beyond the cringey tension it would create on-air, they are dodging the bullet of the inevitable meltdown or the next cheating episode that makes everyone look stupid for keeping them on. Cheaters are gonna cheat end of story


The_Original_Gronkie t1_j6h0k7r wrote

They broke up with their spouses months before this. Then they started openly hanging out in bars and restaurants in Manhattan. They aren't idiots, they knew they'd be outed. They wanted it.

Most Americans had no idea who they are, now all of Americs knows them. They are already rich, and now they are out of their contracts. This widespread notoriety will make them far richer in the long run. Soon there will be the TJ & Amy show, and they will be the Executive Producers.


33LivesAloneHas3cats t1_j6kbt9g wrote

Do they get severance in instances like this?


The_Original_Gronkie t1_j6l2auz wrote

These people operate at a level far above mere severance packages. Ever since the news broke, the show they host has been continues to be called "GMA3, with your hosts TJ and Amy," which tells us that they weren't out yet. Surely their lawyers were fighting it out with the network's lawyers, and if the shows intro hadn't mentioned them, it probably would have been seen as firing them, thus violating their contract.

The network would have cited the rite to cancel the contracts under the "moral turpitude" clause, and the stars' lawyers would have reminded them that simply having an adult relationship while separated from their spouses wouldn't have qualified as a violation of moral turpitude.

So the network wanted them gone, but were bound by their contracts, and the stars' lawyers have been busy negotiating golden parachutes for them.


oldmrdeebs t1_j6m997v wrote

They're both horrible on TV though. Who cares if they're fucking?


cmVkZGl0 t1_j69lt4q wrote

Yawn. This is just try guys V2 or maybe Adam Levine v2


33LivesAloneHas3cats t1_j6kbpj8 wrote

What does v2 mean


cmVkZGl0 t1_j6kn8ky wrote

Version 2.

Who really cares about this off camera affair? The public has already got their fix recently.


Few_Channel_9967 t1_j6680kd wrote

Hopefully they make an OF. He’s a freaky one


Yufle t1_j677n8f wrote

I don't get why this is affecting their jobs. I am not saying cheating is okay but that is a private matter and it only concerns their families. What does this have to do with their jobs. I just hate how fucking puritanical America can get.

They can't be the first tv hosts who were doing the dirty while co-hosting a show.

MSNBC's George Scarborough and Mika B cheated on their spouses and then divorced them and they didn't get fired. I only know about this because the Vulgarian who somehow became POTUS ranted about them in 2016.


SafetyMan35 t1_j689xjd wrote

ABC is owned by Disney. Disney is a company that likes to promote traditional wholesome family values. Two mildly rising stars in your news organization who both cheated on their spouses doesn’t support that image, and if/when they split it will cause drama on air, especially as the show they were on was light hearted and celebrity news. Not good having your anchors be the news. It is best to cut your losses and break away from the drama and move on.


Yufle t1_j68m8ak wrote

Thank you for sensibly and respectfully making a valid point. This makes sense to me from the perspective of the corporation. But the reaction from the public (just basing it on folks Reddit and their strong outrage) still doesn’t make sense to me.


SafetyMan35 t1_j68vx47 wrote

Morning news anchors want to present a strong family picture. The core audience after all is stay at home moms. If the cute blonde anchor that you thought was sweet and innocent and had her life together and had a life that was wonderful and happy and the handsome muscular man wearing a perfectly put together suit turned out to both be lying cheating bastards, you would turn away. They broke the image of the perfect family (The Today show was for a long time using the tag line “America’s First Family-TODAY on NBC”).


davidreiss666 t1_j6f24og wrote

Anyone who has to present a strong family picture to tell me about the news is somebody I DON'T WANT to hear from when it comes to the news. For the very fact that they have supposedly strong family values is what makes them incapable of presenting the news balanced fairly and accurately. All it makes them is stooges for right wing Republican bullshit. It makes them the enemy of all truly morality. Family values is and always and forever will be total bullshit!


RamonChingon t1_j678i8z wrote

This comment really fell apart in the last paragraph. Started off so strong, too.


OneGoodRib t1_j67glb0 wrote

Would the rapist who somehow became president in 2016 be better?


RamonChingon t1_j67r2zn wrote

Relax. The comment above was edited after I commented. It was word salad with ketchup for dressing. Still is, really, but whatever.


Yufle t1_j68kz46 wrote

What does that have to do with anything. Rape is a crime. It’s not the same as two consenting adults having an affair. It hurts families for sure but it’s none of our business.


HPmoni t1_j67rz7a wrote

Clinton? But bill Clinton was also an accused rapist.


Yufle t1_j68lm6u wrote

I guess, the moral of the story is never to post at 4am. Word salad or not, the point still stands and the fact that all of you are reaching for attacks and insults doesn’t minimize my point.

My bad, these guys should be branded with a scarlet.


russdb t1_j69pkvz wrote

Let's imagine you work as an assistant to Robach, and now you gotta do all this extra work, that isn't in your job description, for Holmes because of their triste.

See how that can become a problem really quickly?

Fraternizing can affect other people in the business in a really negative way, and that isn't fair to them.