I certainly wasn’t the first journalist to write about Paula Deen and The Lady & Sons, but I think I was the first to write about the ambitious move from the small location on Congress Street to the much larger former White Hardware building a few blocks away at the corner of Congress and Whitaker.
I haven’t talked to Deen in years, but I have a lot of affection for her and her sons. They’re nice, hardworking people who have made it big. Good for them.
So I’m not jumping on the Paula Deen bashing bandwagon in this post, but I’m also not interested in kneejerk defensiveness.
Deen has become a major public figure; she has been deposed in a high-profile lawsuit; this is simply news that can’t be ignored by those of us who track developments about Savannah’s image.
Much of the press the last couple of days has focused on Deen’s admission of past use of the N-word. In the deposition, she provides some context for that use, makes a few comments that could lead some to believe she still has significant biases, and largely relies on the argument that times have changed. CNN cites this public statement about the deposition:
Her company issued a statement Thursday saying Deen used the epithet, but in a “quite different time” in American history.
“She was born 60 years ago when America’s South had schools that were segregated, different bathrooms, different restaurants and Americans rode in different parts of the bus. This is not today.”
Even though we could find plenty of 66-year old Southerners who never used the N-word and many of Deen’s age who joined civil rights protests as early as the 1960s, I’m inclined to give Deen a pass on this one.
If only the past use of the N-word were the only issue.
When I began reading the transcript of Deen’s deposition, I started with the assumption that Lisa T. Jackson’s lawsuit about treatment of employees at Uncle Bubba’s might be groundless — that it might just be a money grab.
But it’s clear even from Deen’s testimony that some of the basic facts of Jackson’s allegations are true and were even admitted by Deen’s brother Bubba Hiers.
Just one snippet:
Q: Did any of the things that your brother admitted to doing, including reviewing — reviewing pornography in the workplace, using the N word in the workplace, did any of that conduct cause you to have any concerns about him continuing to operate the business?
A: No. My brother and I, 25 years ago, quite by accident, each started a business and we each had $200 to start that business. My brother built the most successful long-service [“lawn” presumably] business in Albany, Georgia with his $200. My brother is completely capable unless he’s being sabotaged. […]
I suppose some could admire Deen for putting personal loyalty above legal commonsense, but any HR manager would see the details about comments and actions of a sexual and racial nature as huge red flags. The deposition even suggests an allegation of assault. And the lawyer’s questioning suggests that multiple witnesses have testified about the behaviors in question.
The details seem to me to be fairly damning — and I’m basing that solely on Deen’s comments, which in theory mount the best possible defense.
In portions of the transcript, Deen provides some context for the working environment at Uncle Bubba’s. For example, this passage regarding one employee at The Lady & Sons being called a “monkey” in a 2010 incident (emphasis added):
Q: Okay. Using racial slurs in a workplace, would you —
A: To them. If you were doing it against a Jewish person and constantly talking about — bad mouthing Jews or lesbians or homosexuals or Mexicans or blacks, if you continually beat up on a certain group, I would think that that would be some kind of harassment.
Q: Okay.
A: I don’t know. We don’t — we don’t do that, I don’t know.
Q: Did you consider what Dustin Walls was accused of doing to constitute racial harassment?
A: I understand — I understand the pressure that goes along with the restaurant business. When that dinner bell rings at 11:00, it’s like you and your team go to war. You’re fighting a war to get everybody fed, every customer happy, and I know in the heat of the moment you can say things that would ordinarily not be said. The restaurant business is just so stressful, so stressful.
Deen is absolutely correct that sometimes wildly inappropriate things are said or done in restaurant working environments. I worked in restaurants off and on for several years back in the 80s, and lines routinely blurred in problematic ways. I know restaurant owners here in Savannah today who would have little defense if words spoken on the fly on the job appeared in a legal deposition.
However, when one reaches the stature and wealth of Paula Deen and her businesses, there would seem to be an expectation of more professional management or — at minimum — an awareness of how some behaviors could spawn legal action.
There’s just not much of a legal defense that can be mounted if subordinate employees object to a restaurant owner or manager showing them pornography on the job.
I also have to say that this is another puzzling PR decision by Deen and her team. Deen’s widely criticized handling of revelations about her diabetes and her endorsement of a particular drug led a publicist to quit working for her in 2012.
In this case, Deen and her team should have known exactly what types of questions she would be asked in the deposition. It should then have been pretty easy to imagine how bad some of those details would sound.
Settling the case seems like it would have been the best thing all the way around.
Here’s the transcript, which was apparently obtained by Talking Points Memo:
Transcript of the Testimony of Paula Deen Date: May 17, 2013 by tpmdocs
UPDATE:
Here’s a video released this afternoon by Deen, apologizing for missing her Today show appearance and apologizing broadly to anyone who may have been hurt. This replaced another video that briefly appeared on YouTube before being taken down:
The Food Network has announced this afternoon that Deen’s contract will not be renewed.
2 comments for “A few thoughts on the Paula Deen controversy (transcript embedded)”