John DePetro said he was suspended until Monday for talking to me about the sexual harassment lawsuit brought against him, he said in an email to me today.
Here is the email he sent me in its entirety:
I have been suspended for my part in the story that appeared about me this morning. I have already denied the allegations against me, and I should not have discussed the matter beyond that. To make things worse, the quotes that were attributed to me were not entirely accurate. I hope it is clear that I do not speak on behalf of Cumulus with regards to the investigation or any other Company employment matters. I have learned from my mistake and look forward to returning to the air on Monday. Going forward, I shall have no further comments about this matter.
On Tuesday, DePetro called me after reading a post I wrote imploring WPRO to replace him with a more suitable talk show host. Without asking for the conversation to be off the record, he told me what he thought about the allegations brought against him.
I also got an email from new WPRO Program Director Craig Schwalb, 15 minutes prior to getting the email from DePetro. He did not mention DePetro being suspended and could not be immediately reached for comment. Here’s that email in its entirety too:
Our usual policy is not to discuss pending litigation or confidential employment matters with the media. That said, we must correct statements that were attributed to Cumulus earlier today. Cumulus did a prompt and complete investigation of the concerns that Ms. DeQuattro raised with the Company. Cumulus encourages employees to report these type of concerns and we are glad she did so. By its nature, this sort of investigation focuses on whether specific allegations can be confirmed or refuted. In terms of the results of this particular investigation and the actions taken by the Company, we will continue to respect the confidentiality that should be provided to internal employment matters.
The lawsuit has nothing to do with WPROs day-to-day operations and will be resolved through the court system. Dee DeQuattro continues to be a valuable part of the WPRO team and we all continue to work together to provide WPRO listeners with the very best news and commentary.
So the allegations against him are not enough to get DePetro suspended, but talking about the allegations is? Is suspending DePetro really a punishment, given that WPRO will be the one to take the ratings hit (if there is one)? I wonder why DePetro’s employers are so afraid to have him talk about this. What are they trying to hide/cover up? Are these questions I’m asking unfair? Should a public person hide behind a corporate gag order if they have nothing to hide? Imagine if this story were about any other public figure in Rhode Island. Who would be leading the charge, asking these very questions on the air for three hours?
Oddly, I respect the fact that John spoke to RI Future about the subject, maintaining his innocence and speaking his mind. I don’t know how this will all play out in the courts, but I hope for a fair resolution and for justice to be done.
I have a feeling the comments section is about to go bananas.
Someone play the “little guy” clip…”Memories John are unbelievable.”
www.630wpro.com/FlashPlayer/default.asp?SPID=18074&ID=2336716
Best of luck there ”Little Guy” Depetro. You reap what you sow.
“I wonder why DePetro’s employers are so afraid to have him talk about this. What are they trying to hide/cover up?”
That answer is easy…lawyers. I’m sure the company lawyers wants him to clam up.
“Should a public person hide behind a corporate gag order if they have nothing to hide?”
Is he really hiding? Please don’t mistake this comment for support of DePetro. I have little use for his ilk but he’s a public figure without the obligation of answering to the public. In other words, he’s not an elected official so his only obligation is to his bosses.
“he’s not an elected official so his only obligation is to his bosses.”
He’s on the radio, however, and radio waves are a public good.
“He’s on the radio, however, and radio waves are a public good.”
I’m not sure how that relates to his obligation to answer to the public for these allegations.
“I’m not sure how that relates to his obligation to answer to the public for these allegations.”
Everyone who uses a public good uses it at the pleasure of the public, and the public may–and does–place restrictions on the use of that good.
Why do you think you can be fined for saying the f-word on the radio, but not for writing it in a magazine?
DePetro’s employers may be private, but his medium is public. I’m not saying he has a legal obligation to answer to the public, but he certainly has a moral obligation to answer to the people who provide him with the means he uses to make a living.
“he certainly has a moral obligation to answer to the people who provide him with the means he uses to make a living.”
I have no use for talk radio in general, these folks are (trying to be) entertainers, they are not really interest in any sory of civil discourse 0 which is why they say some of their more outrageous things.
That being said, simply because he makes working for a private compnay by talking on a radio spectrum that is leased by the US government to that private compnay should not make all of his actions subject to some sort of moral obligation for full disclosure. Certainly, if it was somehting he said over the airwaves or of he worked for a public radio station, there might be an argument that he as a moral obligation to explain his actions. However, this is a non broadcast related wrong that was committede by someone who happens to have a radio show.
“if it was somehting he said over the airwaves or of he worked for a public radio station”
Not so. As has been widely acknowledged, DePetro feeds off of precisely this sort of story. Questions of public morality are precisely his bread and butter, and the public provides the dish he serves it on.
DePetro owes his entire professional career and his entire social status to the beneficence of the public. He is in the public debt. He owes us.
To put it another way, he wished to be a public figure, and the public granted his wish. All wishes come with a price, and it’s time for him to pay.
Or he can stop suckling on the public teat.
Good point, but I think that takes the public airwaves aspect out of of it - he owes the public an answer because morality has been his bread and butter issue. i think the obligations goes from the bottom up – the public listens to his radio, which allows WPRO to sell ads, which pays his slarary. He should have the same obligation if his medium was a written coloumn in a magazine.
I don’t like an obligation from the top down, i.e. the public owns the Airwaives, WPRO licenses the airwaves, DePetro uses the airwives licenses by WPRO to make a living, because that would wrap in nonpolitical radio personalities, e.g. Jeff Gelman, to have a moral obligation to disclosue non radio related info, simply because they are using public airwaves to make a living, which in turn, would create an obligation for anyone used a public means to make a living.
“which in turn, would create an obligation for anyone used a public means to make a living. ”
What’s wrong with that?
“I don’t like an obligation from the top down, i.e. the public ”
How is the public the top, rather than the bottom?
The public owns the airspace, pilots make a living traveling through the airspace. Do I think that creates a moral obligations a pilot to publically disclose private matters unrelated to filing a plain? No, but thats just me.
That is just how I structured it in term of where the obligation flows from, plublic listeneres are the end users, at the bottom. Public ownership of the airwaves it the means of distribution, at the top.
“The public owns the airspace”
Radio waves are different from airspace. Travel is different from communication.
It’s not hard to make different rules for different situations. Nor should it be hard to understand why different situations call for different rules.
“Public ownership of the airwaves it the means of distribution, at the top.”
I simply don’t see how it is possible to characterize the rule of the people as governing from the top.
SUSPENDED FOR TWO DAYS………….HAHAHAHA, that’s called a two bit radio stunt to bump up the ratings for early next week. The only thing with less credibility than John DePetro is the radio industry itself.
C’mon, kids. We should all know the deal here, Depetro most of all. When you’re under investigation or plaintiff in a lawsuit, you keep your freakin’ pie-hole shut. These are the basics.
Good on you, Bob, for getting him to talk. Bad on him for talking.
The turbo twist is on again. The only way DePetro can be held accountable is either by listeners not listening or his bosses firing him. He has no obligation, moral or otherwise, to explain his actions to the public. I am not a fan of his but no matter how you twist it turbo, the obligation is not there.
“The turbo twist is on again.” What is that supposed to mean? Why open with a personal attack?
You don’t see me opening with something like, ‘Oh my, more incoherent thought and incoherent expression from Dog “You’re point is mute” Diesel.
“He has no obligation, moral or otherwise, to explain his actions to the public.”
This is simply a statement, not an argument.
Are you offended? Of course it’s not an argument. It’s a statement of fact not needing any further argument. Choose to argue if you must but in the end, that statement will stand.
“It’s a statement of fact”
Excuse me?
“He has no obligation, moral or otherwise”–this is a statement of fact? It’s demonstrable? You can demonstrate a lack of moral obligation as a matter of fact???
“that statement will stand”
Where? Where will the statement stand? Your position is absurd. There are any number of moral systems that would demand that DePetro answer to the public. Several brands of Christianity are only several of them. The case I made, based on the debt DePetro owes the public, because the public provides him with the means to make a living, is only one of a number of secular moral systems that place an obligation on DePetro.
For your statement to be true, you would have to show that there is a single source of all moral obligations, and that this single system says that DePetro owes nothing.
Well, what system is that? And what happened to all the other morals?
A statement of fact?!? The only thing more mind-boggling than this this ridiculous position of yours was the moment when you told that weird pseudo-leftist that you have “dualed” with her, and it almost made sense as a pun, because you both stink at written English.
I don’t even know what to make of all this.
turbo = Gobbledygook
It’s the “dualed” thing, right? You have no idea why that’s funny?
Or maybe it’s the other of your greatest hits I referred to: “You’re point is mute”? Still haven’t caught up to that one?
Ah well.
At least, one thing is clear: on the matter of “gobbledygook”, from your point of view, yes, I am sure that is exactly what you perceive.
In any case, thanks for clarifying that ‘there is no moral obligation’ is an axiom.
At the risk allowing you to obfuscate the point like you often do, it’s a blog. Not a spelling test. Not a grammar test. It’s a blog. The typical response of a troll on a blog is to point out spelling and grammatical errors. But I’m sure you know that already.
My first year College English professor said spelling errors are mistakes but the English language is analogous to a living organism. There is no real right or wrong as long as the communication is understood the way it was intended from the sender. Get it?
I am no the one making a blanket rule that those using “the public good” to make a living owe some moral obligation to the public. Do I think the air and traffic update guy on 790am has some obligations to the public as DePetro? No. Does DePetro have an obligation to discuss this because he holds him self out a moral authority? Yes.
When the public owns the airways, then they are the owners – at the top. When the public listens to the programming, they are the end user, at the bottom. I don’t know an easier way to explain it.
Irony is a progressive blog wanting to hold some knucklehead shock jock talk show host accountable for something that happened in his private life all the while fighting to remove any accountability for one of the most influential people in childhood development while in the classroom.
These guys always get a free pass after being called knuckleheads once or twice. Carcieri blew half of the EDC monies on 38 Studios, the knucklehead.
Then the press went to his daughter’s house, where pious Dad was piously helping her with furniture moving, and he was unavailable for comment. The knucklehead.
NEXT!!
This story is over. Just called the attorney general. He’s on the back nine with Don, even as we speak. The knucklehead.
Well, what’s next?
A bigoted disc jockey who talks like a Puritan and acts like an O’Reilly or a Limbaugh?
No lasting hypocrisy there–just knuckleheadedness. Got a teacher or janitor to attack??