Reporters have a duty to report what they find out after they verify that it has a certain degree of credibility. To shine a light on the dark corners. That is what the media did about the allegations against Dr Tyson. I was a part of that process. Given what was revealed by three women serious scrutiny was called for. Without dispassionate news reporting that would not have occurred. While it certainly brought no pleasure to anyone who covered that, Tchiya Amet, Dr Katelyn N Allers, and Ashley Watson, deserved and still deserve to be heard.
In the case of Neil D. Tyson, the only investigation done was by the very media networks which market him to the general public. They investigated, and without releasing the full results of the investigation, n they have resumed doing business with him. That is not the same as, in the words of Whoopi Goldberg on “The View”, being “cleared”. At best, we can guess at what was found or not found.
Most likely they did not have enough evidence of any wrongdoing that any adverse actions could be taken against Dr Tyson.
That is not very satisfying, that is not a verdict one way or the other. People want to give Tyson a white hat or a black hat. We want our role models to be either all good, while our villains are purely evil. Real life does not work that way. Scientist like any other group of people can be both good and evil, at the same time, or at different times in their lives.
The truth is we don’t know, so we can only move on.
We don’t know for certain what went on between Neil Tyson and the women who accused him. The father back in time the less information we would have. Evidence naturally degrades, memories fade, physical evidences are lost.
In the absence of evidence, we can only treat him as innocent until proven guilty.
He should be able to prosper and make his documentaries as if this wasn’t even a thing. That is what being treated as innocent until proven guilty means. Anyone can accuse anyone of anything, but until there is a full examination of facts and evidence nothing could or should be done.
However, as thinking people, the public should see whatever evidence there is and be able to make up our own minds.
I could be asked, am I sorry to have written the blog post I did. No, had I known of those allegations, verified basic elements of Amets story, then buried it that would’ve been unethical. Not reporting on something just because the subject is popular or powerful is not ethical. That would not be the action of any outlet worthy of being called news.
Suppose it turned out to have a mountain of solid tangible evidence…the proverbial blue dress with… DNA on it? To have had that in a shoebox or a closet waiting for someone to take a serious look at it, only to be ignored because the man is popular. That would’ve been a tragedy. As far as anyone knew that could easily have been the case.
Barring such a find, we who were not there in the Early 80’s in Texas, or at that party, or in that apartment, will never really know. All we can do is move on until more evidence, if it exist, comes to light.
Please consider signing a petition to get a full account of the Fox/NatGeo investigation released. Then no matter how you feel about Neil D. Tyson, you can make up your own mind, based on actual evidence, not on innuendo, or preconceptions about how a possible rape victim should be (even long after the attack).