Yes I saw and read it.
I’m choosing to believe the motivations of those involved, in spite the poor optics of them being from another network (and even quoting what “they” pay as an example of “good” companies), were an attempt to be morally just. That is to say, I have no ill will towards the author, their editors and everyone who contributed.
To be clear; if Rusty Quill has treated employees poorly they should be held accountable, I say if not as a way to not believe those affected but because “alleged” is used more than a dozen times in the article.
Additionally, no employer should ever yell at an employee. Again, if that happened, they should apologize and do better.
That being said…
I don’t appreciate articles speaking on behalf of me or, frankly, trying to rope me in without my consent or request. I recognize they weren’t attempting to give me a voice, just those who are affected, however the author has only now allowed shows to reach out, after the damage has been done and chose to speak for me nonetheless. Additionally, the article says that if I remain silent, it’s because I can’t speak out - which is just nonsense.
From my experience; I’ve had nothing but great experiences with Rusty Quill. They’re a network. They host my show. What else do I need them for? Contracts, NDA’s and all the legal aspects that the article seemed to make such a big deal about… are very normal. I think this is part of not understanding how large companies work.
For example; I saw tweets upset that people shouldn’t have to sign an NDA to look over a sample contract which… is exactly what you do when you’re looking over a sample contract.
I was a General Manager of a small rental company for 10 years prior to trying my hand at Audio work and renting a water cooler had more stipulations than RQ’s agreement. Contracts are meant to be all encompassing. If you don’t agree with stuff, you cross it out and ask it to be changed. If you’re upset at the way large companies work, your fight is misdirected with addressing just one company.
The article also mentioned something about “Taking Money Upfront” and stuff like that, which failed to mention you don’t HAVE to take money upfront - furthermore - most shows on RQ did not do that.
In any case, this isn’t meant to be a dismantling of the article. I don’t want to invalidate anyone’s experiences or frustrations. Who knows what more may come to light, all I can speak of are my experiences and frustrations.
So why I’m frustrated? Well, I saw a few tweets and posts boycotting RQ shows, which included mine. So that sucked.
Overall however, I think the article was done in poor taste and felt like virtue signaling more than something trying to be helpful. I think, personally - and I say this with all the genuine sincerity - it seemed written from a perspective of inexperience and naivete. It is not the Watergate scandal people think it is.
And for the people who are upset that “peoples lives were ruined” when they were let go… yes I’m sorry people lost their jobs. I lost the aforementioned GM position as well when the owner of the company sold the company out from under me. Not because I did a bad job or because I made a mistake, just bad luck. It sucked, sometimes people lose their jobs. That doesn’t mean I can’t have an opinion on what I feel is an article meant to stir the pot. After all, shouldn’t I express my perspective as a show on RQ (which, like, isn’t that what the article was meant to be about?).
Anyway, those are my thoughts. For what it’s worth I think you should still read the article! It has some great thoughts…
…but with all things, read it with an informed opinion; remembering that it was written by the Director of Marketing for another Podcast network, who references their own network within their “expose” as an example of a network with “good practices”, during a time that they’re recruiting for new shows and that every single show on that Network has openly supported the article - retweeting it almost instantly, during the final days of their competitors successful Kickstarter.
The disclaimer on the article about the Authors association with F&F wasn’t put until AFTER they were called out. Odd that an expose on uncovering the truth would be less than transparent when posting…
