• yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    4 months ago

    several independent investigations were not able to substantiate the claims.

    Tyson was investigated by National Geographic and Fox to protect the shows they were producing starring him. I suppose the Natural History Museum looked into it enough to decide not to fire their star celebrity academic.

    So the investigations had massive conflicts of interest actually. And none of them had an interest in his actual guilt. An none of them were victim advocates.

    The accusations against Tyson are credible and they’ve never been properly investigated.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Apparently the museum used outside investigators, and Fox / Nat Geo used internal investigators.

      It wouldn’t surprise me to have a media company’s bias being toward protecting their content investment. That person’s face is in every show set to run, rerun, and stream. A museum is kind of different. It’s the in-person exhibits that are the main draw, and a their bigger risk is probably the litigation from substantiated allegations.

      I work in this risk / ethics space, and I’m not surprised that the museum was more motivated to look into the claims, as opposed to simply saying they looked into the claims.

      And that said, I’m also just some rando on the internet.

    • Illuminostro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I know, right? He’s just so uppity. You know his ‘doctorate’ is just honorary from Morehouse, right? Good thing I get my facts from Matt Walsh and Charlie Kirk.

      /SARCASM