Uh Oh. John Altaville in Hot Water?

[OldAlum]

"I'm fine with him taking it down, apologizing and moving on."[/QUOTE]

Which seems to be what the rest of the world is doing.

He said something on his work account that many viewed as inappropriate and which offended some of his company's clientele. The company took it down and he apologized. The End. AFAIK, he isn't fired or fined or anything.

But to take issue with the woman who called him on it because it should have been private because "he has a wife and child"!?! Don't get that at all.

 

[lanieer]

I follow Altavilla and have been annoyed by his (I'm sure he thinks he's funny) comments about the blowouts. He usually mentions that he's napping or sleeping or whatever. Sometimes throughout the game that is all he tweets about. He obviously is not happy in his job. I have considered unfollowing him but just never wasted my time. Now after reading his comments and all of the responses after the cheerleader tweet by him ( which I do find sleazy for a media person assigned to the women's basketball program) I'm going to assume that his joking and insults should have been checked by the Courant a while back but they didn't care. Now he figures that everybody understands his humor and loves him he goes a little bit overboard. Regardless what we think I think that Mr Altavilla will be pulling in probably the Wolf Pack gig. He seems like a wise guy to me anyway.

 

[CL82]

Exactly, he shouldn't have been tweeting this sort of thing publicly because he has a wife and daughter.

Well I have a wife and a daughter, and I'm not offended in the least. Now I'm not a huge fan of Twitter and the need to memorialize and publicize every thought, but that comment is pretty mild. Reread Nan's post that you and I liked above and realize that it kind of goes with the territory of being cheerleader in a skimpy outfit. Now if he had made comments to them or tweeted something lewd, that would be a whole different story...but that didn't happen.

Full disclosure: I like John's work and feel like he is a very good beat writer.

 

[meyers7]

Because you mentioned dating !

What? When did I mention dating? What are you talking about?

 

[Wally East]

Well I have a wife and a daughter, and I'm not offended in the least.

That's fine that you weren't offended. Not every one agrees.

 

[CL82]

That's fine that you weren't offended. Not every one agrees.

Nor is everyone offended. Life's funny like that.

 

[ndmb]

I'm not condoning what John A did here, but I do think there's some cognitive dissonance here given that the TV broadcast often makes a point of positioning cameras directly under cheerleaders while they're in the air. If you think the former is a problem, why is the latter ok?

 

[grizz36]

Cheez! I must be getting old (older). Watched the entire game and didn't notice anything special about the UT cheerleaders except the "hookem horns" bit with their hands. Maybe I have a finger fetish.

 

[geneticrex]

At what age does a man have to stop looking at sexy young women? Does a hunk at 20 become a creep at 40?

It depends how rich and/or powerful the man is.

Just ask Hefner and Clinton.

 

[meyers7]

It depends how rich and/or powerful the man is.

Just ask Hefner and Clinton.

Ummm, they are both creepy.

 

[geneticrex]

Ummm, they are both creepy.

No arguement here.

 

[Blue Huskie]

Political correctness and double standards are out of control. The goal of those cheerleader outfits was to garner attention. So when they get it somebody is a "dirty old man" ?

 

[UConnDan97]

I think that HuskyNan summed it all up best.

For those who think that cheerleaders are not to be "leered at", well, the outfits that are chosen for them at every university would suggest otherwise. HOWEVER, when you are a reporter at a sporting event, you are on the job. Regardless of how one of my coworkers dressed, I would not be in the right to objectify her in any way, shape, or form (I CERTAINLY would not be allowed to do it in writing!). John should know better.

Having said all of that, he apologized. I think he knows that it was a dumb move, and I'm sure he wishes he could take it back. That's good enough for me. Yet another reason why I hate Twitter...

 

[calpedaler]

Political correctness and double standards are out of control. The goal of those cheerleader outfits was to garner attention. So when they get it somebody is a "dirty old man" ?

 

[meyers7]

Political correctness and double standards are out of control. The goal of those cheerleader outfits was to garner attention. So when they get it somebody is a "dirty old man" ?

No, more when the "dirty old men" start tweeting about how they are getting turned on by the cheerleaders.

 

[schmendrick]

Amen to that. While in Jerusalem a few years back, I interviewed Charde Houston who was playing for a team just outside the city. I pitched him my story and a little bit about how Charde was doing. (I'm a reporter.) He said thanks, then proceeded to get on the horn, interview Charde himself, and post the story.

Not a big deal, perhaps, to many of you, but I lost quite a bit of respect for him back then.

That's a different issue entirely.

Not to my mind. Goes to character.

 

[Aluminny69]

I think I'm going to have to see more pictures before I can make any further comments.....

 

[McHuskyFan]

I am unable to make any judgement about this matter without seeing pictures.

Danny's got some on his Facebook page ...
https://scontent-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/h...=3c4be17a7dab08d74299ef4030a0504d&oe=55BD3207

Personally I think the whole thing is the Texas team's fault. If the game had been more of a contest, no one would've cared what the cheerleaders were doing ... Why are they even there any way? They don't lead cheers (the band actually does better cheering) ... All they do is wave their pom-poms and climb on top of each other during time outs <sigh>

 

[lne001]

"....tweet about getting turned on." What??? Don't see that at all. I'm a 67 year old male who is quite happy that I'll be leaving this orb shortly, before the 'crime' of offending someone becomes punishable by death in this country. For the record I am not a fan of cheerleaders at all, whether dressed as matrons or pole dancers.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Save a horse, ride a cowboy!

 

[Huskyhoops]

Please clear something up for me. I'm pushing 80, so what women am I allowed to date age-wise? (With my wife's permission and subject to my cardiologist's blessing of course). Also, I admit looking at pictures of the cheerleaders. Will I be condemned to eternal damnation?

Meanwhile, lets forget the whole thing and move on. It's over.

 

[j66kicker]

Please clear something up for me. I'm pushing 80, so what women am I allowed to date age-wise? (With my wife's permission and subject to my cardiologist's blessing of course). Also, I admit looking at pictures of the cheerleaders. Will I be condemned to eternal damnation?

Meanwhile, lets forget the whole thing and move on. It's over.

If you can hang on til 80, then you'll be clear to date women of ANY age - congratulations!

 

[RowdyFan]

Please clear something up for me. I'm pushing 80, so what women am I allowed to date age-wise? (With my wife's permission and subject to my cardiologist's blessing of course). Also, I admit looking at pictures of the cheerleaders. Will I be condemned to eternal damnation?

Meanwhile, lets forget the whole thing and move on. It's over.

Divide your age in half and add 7.

 

[uconnfan68]

No, you missed MY point. Dressing up as a cheerleader as the point of a bet? Think about it.

No, rooting for the team as one of the symbols of the spirit of the school. That was the point.

 

[BigBird]

Geez- I always thought the First Amendment protected all speech, even that which is stupid and insensitive.

You are correct, as far as government or units of the same are concerned. But a private business can discipline or even dismiss an employee for speech that "stupid or insensitive."

While I am admittedly a First Amendment zealot, I'm not as concerned about this incident as some might be. Both the writer and the cheerleaders are performing on a public stage, and as such they are subject to fair scrutiny and critique. As long as that critique is not malicious (within the legal definition of malice) it just isn't a constitutional question.

An apology for creeping out your readers? Sure, but that is a matter of marketing, not a matter of law.