In November 2017, the #MeToo movement had gained traction. A month earlier, a New York Times investigation that outlined sexual harassment claims against Harvey Weinstein inspired more and more women to come forward with their own stories.
So when three reporters, Cara Buckley, Jodi Kantor and Melena Ryzik, covered sexual misconduct allegations against the comedian Louis C.K., the reactions came swiftly.
A day after the article was published, Louis C.K. released a statement saying the claims were true: He had masturbated in front of several women. He also said that he would “step back.” He returned to stand-up less than a year later.
The women who had come forward about Louis C.K. were criticized and even mocked by his fans. And Dave Chappelle joked about one of the accusers in a 2017 Netflix special.
The fallout and Louis C.K.’s subsequent comeback are explored in a new documentary, “Sorry/Not Sorry.” Directed by Cara Mones and Caroline Suh and produced by The Times, the documentary features interviews with three of the women who spoke about Louis C.K. and with comics, critics and others who discussed whether more should have been done to address the open secret about his behavior. (Louis C.K. declined requests to appear in the documentary.)
The film presents the audience with a difficult question: Why were the women made a punchline, whereas Louis C.K. was able to return to the stage?
To mark the film’s release, Ms. Buckley, Ms. Kantor and Ms. Ryzik, all of whom were consulted on the film, looked back on their reporting. These are edited excerpts of their separate interviews in person and via phone and email.
The initial reporting
JODI KANTOR: In the wake of the Weinstein story, I got a tip about Louis C.K. Rumors about him had swirled around for years. It seemed like this was a window where we could tell the real story. What I remember about the Louis C.K. story was how fast it moved. The Weinstein investigation took about six months. This was really just a matter of a few weeks.
MELENA RYZIK: It was one of the first reporting projects we worked on in the immediate aftermath of the Weinstein investigation. Given the confidentiality and urgency, it was a very intense few weeks. When word got out that we were working on the story, and Louis canceled his appearances and a movie premiere of “I Love You, Daddy” without ever actually responding to our many requests for comment, that was a first for me. The story was trending on Twitter before ours was even published. I was still getting the final sources on the record and it was already a worldwide thing.
The backlash against the women
CARA BUCKLEY: Backlash against the women was definitely a concern. I didn’t think it would blow up the way that it did. I was really surprised by the pushback against the women. They’re talking about something that happened to them that was deeply upsetting, about an imbalance of power. So why are they getting roasted? It still makes no sense whatsoever.
KANTOR: They were really aware of the risks. But they were also trapped in a gray zone. Some of them had actually told the story for years and had never really been silent about it.
How this story was different
KANTOR: Usually the accused says, maybe under the advice of a lawyer, “Nothing like that happened” or “She totally misconstrued it.” What was striking about this story was that Louis copped to it, publicly, almost immediately. That makes it really different from other #MeToo stories because it meant there was no factual dispute.
BUCKLEY: Very few people spoke out in the comedy world because they really liked Louis. There was a marked generational difference in how people responded. Younger people who were fans of Louis were heartbroken. People older than us were like, “What’s the big deal?” It goes to show, historically, how much women put up with. There was a way lower tolerance for it among young people.
Why this topic remains relevant
RYZIK: The comic personas that Louis had pre- and post- these revelations are very different, as is some of his fan base. And we have still not sorted out, culturally, how to square all of that with what he did, and how he’s using it now. As the film makes clear, he has continued to flourish, while some of the women have had a much harder time. I’m glad the filmmakers asked men in the industry about all this, too.
KANTOR: To me, this is a lasting story. All these years later, the controversy about Louis C.K. is how can he be so successful when we all knew he did those things. That’s for other people to make up their minds about. But what matters to me is that these women came forward and told the truth. He acknowledged they were telling the truth. And because they had the bravery to do that, the comedy world is never going to be the same.
Before 2017, there was more of an attitude of, “This is accepted, this is inevitable, this is part of the culture. It may be unfortunate, but it’s the way life works.” That sense has changed. What Louis C.K. did and what the women did in response shouldn’t be forgotten.
The post Documenting a #MeToo Investigation Seven Years Later appeared first on New York Times.