I Read Matt Lauer’s Article So You Don’t Have To

On May 19th at 4:00 PM, Matt Lauer published an opinion article titled “Matt Lauer: Why Ronan Farrow Is Indeed Too Good to Be True”. This article is in response to the speculations brought to light in Ben Smith’s New York Times article published just two days prior. Smith’s article was highly critical of Farrow’s reporting and journalistic standards and practices, especially as it pertained to his work published in regards to the #MeToo movement.

Smith’s article was published in view of Farrow’s 2019 book Catch and Kill, in which Farrow recounts the challenges he faced while uncovering Harvey Weinstein’s decades of alleged abuse to women in Hollywood. The book goes on to mention famed #MeToo predators including Les Moonves, Brett Kavanaugh, and Matt Lauer.

In his article, Matt Lauer responds to allegations against him that he feels were wrongfully published in Farrow’s book. Lauer goes on to rebut Farrow’s claims that all allegations published in Catch and Kill were personally fact checked. Lauer states in his article, that he had specifically reached out to the sources mentioned in the book himself to reveal they had never been contacted by Farrow to confirm said allegations were actually factual. If Farrow had, in fact, checked with these sources he would become aware that the allegations made by Brooke Nevils, the alleged victim of abuse at the hands of Lauer, could not be confirmed by the sources mentioned. According to Lauer’s article, he personally reached out to these sources to confirm that the allegations Nevils made involving them were not accurate.

A key rumor that was debunked once again in this article was the narrative about Lauer having a secret button in his desk that locked his victims in his office. NBC has deflated this rumor stating that such buttons are common in executive offices to open and close doors, however they do not possess the ability to lock doors. Lauer also wrote a similar statement in his open letter published in October of 2019 stating “Despite numerous erroneous reports in the past, there was not a button in my office that could lock the door from the inside. There was no such locking mechanism. It didn’t exist. NBC confirmed this fact publicly following my termination.”

In his article, Lauer also states that not only were the stories published in Farrow’s book false, but he had used manipulative language to purposely sway readers into believing allegations that were simply not true. He refers to this manipulation as “words games”, and quotes a statement in Farrow’s book that exemplifies this claim, “Over the course of 2018, I’d learn of seven claims of sexual misconduct raised by women who worked with Lauer.”

Lauer discredits this allegation by stating “He intentionally writes that there were ‘seven claims of sexual misconduct raised by women who worked with Lauer,’ not by women against Lauer, in an attempt to manipulate readers into believing there were seven allegations relating to me. There were not.”

Lauer later mentions in his article that perhaps Farrow had a deeper motive in publishing such work. “.. and he (Farrow) was rarely challenged as he dropped salacious stories in a daily marketing effort designed to create media attention for his book.”

Since Matt Lauer’s article was published, Ronan Farrow has responded via Twitter with a tweet reading “All I’ll say on this is that Matt Lauer is just wrong. Catch and Kill was thoroughly reported and fact-checked, including with Matt Lauer himself.”

Twitter has unanimously responded unfavorably to Lauer’s article. Many verified users have commented on this matter, including comedian Whitney Cummings with a tweet reading “Imagine caring about what Matt Lauer thinks about anything”.

Some additional tweets mention the alleged button on Matt Lauer’s desk while working at NBC, disregarding the claims mentioned in the article itself in which this theory was debunked. This poses speculation that perhaps many users are in such opposition of Lauer that they have refused to believe, or even read, the article itself.

Overall, it is fair to say that Matt Lauer has dug himself into a deeper hole with his newest published article. However, this article does provoke some key questions to ponder upon. Were Farrow’s journalistic practices indeed ethical or not? With this newfound accountability in Hollywood, how do we navigate forgiveness in the wake of the #MeToo movement? Is forgiveness even a plausible possibility when taking responsibility has been exceptionally overdue?

With an abundance of “he said, she said” we may never know the exact answers to these questions, but it is of importance that we do not let the opinions and assumptions of others dictate our own beliefs. Though my article was made to give you a brief outline of the article written by Lauer, I urge you to read it in full to decipher your own opinions as well as the the credence of the article itself.