Why the Variety Article on Terry Crews & Adam Venit is Utter Nonsense

Reading the article from Variety which details WME's Adam Venit being on leave following sexual assault allegations from an incident with Terry Crews, one quote in particular jumped out at me.

It’s unclear if Venit’s alleged intent was overtly sexual or if it was aggressive horseplay that crossed a line. 

Is this seriously a question Variety's editors and writers are pondering?

When Trump commented about grabbing women "by their pussy," people were outraged, yet this is precisely what Adam Venit is accused of doing, only to a man.

 Terry Crews, Adam Venit, Variety article offensive comment. Hollywood sexism.


Male sexual assault isn't a joke and shouldn't be treated lightly.

Are you telling me that neither of the authors on the post, Cynthia Littleton and Justin Kroll, nor any of the editors that undoubtedly read this article before it was posted realize that there's no such thing as "aggressive horseplay" in this context?  

First-off, the term horse-PLAY implies consent and that the actions were mutual. Horseplay is generally used to refer to kids messing around.  According to Crews' account there was nothing mutual or friendly about it.

So how and why does this Variety article even position this as possible?

Although the article says: 

Reps for WME and Venit declined to comment, as did a spokeswoman for Crews.

The article says reps declined to comment.  That only means they declined to comment on the record.  But when I read this article, here's what it sounds like to me. At a minimum, the authors were desperate to say or do anything possible to stay on WME's good side.

That's obvious by the way the article is written and the framing of the conversation.

Despite the article being about Adam Venit being on leave becuase of allegations of sexual misconduct, there are 3 paragraphs about Venit's accomplishments.  Why is that even relevant here?

 adam venit bias for variety


Do we care about Trump's accomplishments when we're discussing his "pussy grabbing" antics.  Did those articles mention how although he might talk about sexually assaulting women, he also builds skyscrapers and employs thousands of people in the process? Nope. Not relevant to the topic at all.

Is the name-dropping, and resume listing a way to undermine the severity of Venit's alledged actions by deflecting attention onto all of positive things he has done? Is this supposed to get us to forgive his alledged penis-grabbing and have us write it off as guys being guys, or just as innocent "horseplay"? 

Think again Variety.

But Why Would Variety Work So Hard to Excuse Venit?

This is a no-brainer. Venit works at WME which is a powerhouse in Hollywood.  The last thing any Hollywood publication would want is WME executives angry with them.

That's because when Variety wants to interview a client, or get inside information about a story they want to write, the last thing they want is to be on someone's bad side. 

This is why even when you read Variety or other big Hollywood "news" articles, it's essential to look with a critical eye and not buy everything you read...

Note: I spent several years working in television news, reality television and also nearly 3 years working at WME before I quit Hollywood to travel and create my own videos online.