Paula Deenâ€s Cook Tells of Slights, Steeped in History

Severson obviously spent hours trying to understand the world of Dora Charles, “the queen of Deen kitchens” for 22 years. So Charles’ work with Deen predates by a decade the years of fame. Clearly, Deen and Charles were very close on many levels, but their relationship echoes many traditionally southern ones between white employers and black employees.

Charles is “not expecting any money,” but she does claim that Deen used racially offensive language at times. But the story isn’t really about legal issues. It’s just a story — a sort of sad and touching one.

One snippet:

For a black woman in Savannah with a ninth-grade education, though, it was good steady work. And Ms. Deen, she said, held out the promise that together, they might get rich one day.

Now, Ms. Deen, 66, is fighting empire-crushing accusations of racism, and Mrs. Charles, 59 and nursing a bad shoulder, lives in an aging trailer home on the outskirts of Savannah.

“Itâ€s just time that everybody knows that Paula Deen donâ€t treat me the way they think she treat me,” she said.

The relationship between Mrs. Charles and Ms. Deen is a complex one, laced with history and deep affection, whose roots can be traced back to the antebellum South. Depending on whether Mrs. Charles or Ms. Deen tells the story, it illustrates lives of racial inequity or benevolence.

Even though we could find plenty of 66-year old Southerners who never used the N-word and many of Deenâ€s age who joined civil rights protests as early as the 1960s, Iâ€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 Deenâ€s deposition, I started with the assumption that Lisa T. Jacksonâ€s lawsuit about treatment of employees at Uncle Bubbaâ€s might be groundless — that it might just be a money grab.

But itâ€s clear even from Deenâ€s testimony that some of the basic facts of Jacksonâ€s allegations are true and were even admitted by Deenâ€s brother Bubba Hiers.

And now WSAV here in Savannah has posted a copy of Bubba Hiers’ deposition. In it, Hiers admits to taking cash from his restaurant’s deposits, looking at pornography on two different computers at Uncle Bubba’s, and using the N-word multiple times, in different contexts. It seems clear that other folks in management, including the plaintiff in the lawsuit Lisa Jackson, tried to get Hiers to step away from active management and become more of a figurehead. In one of the odder moments, Hiers notes that the money he took from the restaurant was simply reported as taxable income and that he received a raise when he ceased taking cash from the deposits.

From the deposition, it’s hard to know how often Hiers engaged in these various behaviors that would be any HR manager’s nightmare. Despite the length of the deposition, it’s tough to get a sense of the frequency of anything because of the vagueness of Hiers’ responses.

Despite the general ugliness of this latest document, I’d say it’s possible that Deen and Hiers might even win this lawsuit at a trial largely on the grounds that Jackson was not truly harmed by the behavior she had to deal with.

But, really, why would anyone on the Deen legal team or PR team think this lawsuit was worth fighting? As I’ve said in previous posts, it should have been glaringly clear to any dispassionate advisor just how ugly this whole mess would get if Hiers’ and Deen’s depositions became public.

With Hiers’deposition now available, it’s easier to see where Deen was coming from in her deposition, as she repeatedly tried to normalize and justify her younger brother’s actions.

So now we’re about to get another round of media scrutiny that goes beyond Deen’s use of the N-word. The inevitability of such additional news surely played some role in the collapse of endorsements and other deals.

For a look at this whole mess from a business perspective, I’d highly recommend Businessweek’s For Paula Deen, Management Mess Leads to Career Meltdown. From that piece:

The swiftness with which Deen was abandoned by her corporate partners is a reminder of the sensitivities that continue to surround issues of race and class. Yet her story is only partly a cultural one. A look at the rise and fall of Paula Deen Enterprises demonstrates the particular perils of building a business empire based on the distillation and heavy promotion of one personâ€s life story. Over the years, Deen lent her name, aura, and visage to an unwieldy menagerie of products, services, and people—including her own brother—over which she exerted little control. Once the foundation of her reputation came under scrutiny, the edifice crumbled.

The analysis has an interesting passage about the effectiveness of selling a downhome personality and comfort food after 9/11. The whole piece is well worth a read.

According to the WSJ, Deen has also “parted ways with her longtime agent Barry Weiner.” For those who want to see Deen recover her career, the WSJ piece gives considerable hope:

Chris Shigas, a vice president at public-relations agency French West Vaughan, who helped to repair the image of National Football League player Michael Vick after Mr. Vick served 18 months in prison on dog fighting and conspiracy charges, said he believes Ms. Deen can recover from her crisis. […]

“The American public is very forgiving. If she could really learn empathy, I think she could salvage her career. If she does, in earnest, work to make amends with the American public and have an open dialogue with groups who are working to educate people every day, I think that would be a good thing for America, and she would create a new brand,” Mr. Shigas said.

“It would be Paula Deen 2.0. I don’t know what that would look like or what it would become, but it would be a new generation of her brand,” he added.

The difference of course is that, at the end of the day, Michael Vick did not have to sell his personality.

Why, a mere week from the expiration of the current contract, had Paula Deen and the Food Network not yet signed a new contract?

The lack of a new contract seemed to me an indication that this whole story was a little more complex than it appeared.

The Wall Street Journal addressed the issue of the contract today with Paula Deen’s Other Problem: Stale Ratings. From that piece:

For several weeks before the controversy blew up last week, Ms. Deen’s agent had been negotiating with the Food Network to extend her contract, which ends June 30, the people said. One issue complicating the negotiations: her ratings had slid substantially over the past season.

“Things were not going as planned,” said one person familiar with the negotiations, noting that an unresolved contract extension so late in the game was unusual. […]

The Food Network, majority owned by Scripps Networks Interactive Inc.didn’t cite a reason for its decision to drop her. But people close to the show and the food-television industry say the decision comes as the kind of “dump and stir” instructional food shows in which Ms. Deen and others, like Martha Stewart, specialized have fallen out of fashion. […]

Ratings for Ms. Deen’s show “Paula’s Best Dishes” were down 15% in total viewers—and 22% in the 18-49 demographic that advertisers care most about—for the 2012-13 season, compared with last season, according to Nielsen ratings provided by Horizon Media.

The article also notes the Food Network’s move toward “food-themed reality shows and cooking competitions” — a sharp departure from Deen’s programs.

And this:

As ratings declined, the cost of Ms. Deen’s show became too high for the network to support, according to people familiar with the matter, particularly as the network itself faced prime-time ratings declines of 17% in the target demographic and 15% in households for the 2012-13 season as of June 20, according to a UBS analysis of Nielsen ratings.

As noted in the piece, the ratings decline occurred after Deen announced that she had diabetes and was promoting a diabetes drug. The timing is not necessarily proof of a causal connection but I think there probably was a significant relationship.

Then again, the decline in Deen’s ratings seem broadly similar to the decline in the network’s ratings as a whole.

I have previously speculated that Americans’ changing tastes in food — the growing emphasis on fresher and more local ingredients — might have played a role in the Food Network’s decision. Given what’s noted in the WSJ piece, I was probably wrong about that. However, those changing tastes might have also contributed to the decline in Deen’s ratings over the last year or so.

I feel badly for Paula Deen this week, but my mind is boggled by the series of bungled PR decisions that began over a year ago and just kept intensifying.

But today it seems worthwhile to note a few of the journalistic takes on the evolving controversy.

Here I’m just going to cite three significant pieces and make a few comments about them.

The AP had a major article yesterday: PAULA DEEN FANS VENT THEIR OUTRAGE AT FOOD NETWORK. From that piece:

Angry messages piled up Saturday on the network’s Facebook page, with many Deen fans threating to change the channel for good. “So good-bye Food Network,” one viewer wrote. “I hope you fold like an accordion!!!”

The decision to drop Deen, whose daytime shows have been a Food Network fixture since 2002, came two days after disclosure of a recent court deposition in which Deen was asked under oath if she had ever used the N-word. “Yes, of course,” 66-year-old Deen said, though she added, “It’s been a very long time.”

And this:

The fallout may not end with Food Network. At least two other companies that do business with Deen say they’re keeping a close eye on the controversy. Las Vegas-based Caesars Entertainment Corporation, which has Deen’s restaurants in some of its casinos, said Friday that it “will continue to monitor the situation.” Publisher Ballantine, which has a new Deen book scheduled to roll out this fall, used similar words.

As I noted in a short post on Friday, I’d guess that the Food Network’s decision-making extended well beyond the confines of the narrow question of Deen’s past use of the N-word.

The general public is largely assuming that the Food Network’s decision was based solely on that one issue, but one would hope that, in the absence of a broader statement from the Food Network, media coverage would try to provide a broader context for the decision.

The New York Times has a typically interesting piece: At Georgia Restaurant, Patrons Jump to Defend a Chef From Her Critics.

The accompanying image online is one of the pre-lunch line at The Lady & Sons — a photo dominated by a number of overweight women. I’d say that this is purely manipulative, but it’s clearly just a random shot on the street.

From that piece:

“I donâ€t understand why some people can use it and others canâ€t,” said Rebecca Beckerwerth, 55, a North Carolina native who lives in Arizona and had made reservations at the restaurant Friday.

Tyrone A. Forman, the director of the James Weldon Johnson Institute for the Study of Race and Difference at Emory University, said the use of derogatory words can mean different things to different groups.

“People take a term that was a way to denigrate or hold people in bondage for the purpose of continuing their subordination and turn it around as a way to reclaim it,” he said.

But that kind of subtlety is often lost in a discussion of race.

“That nuance is too much for us,” Mr. Forman said. “We have a black president so weâ€re postracial, right? Someone uses the N-word? Thatâ€s racist. But the reality is there is a lot of gray.”

Some who thought Ms. Deenâ€s words were hurtful gave her a pass for her apparent inability to articulate her evolution on race and her awkward apologies, which she offered in a series of three videos on Friday.

As I noted in my first post about this issue on Friday, I am also inclined to give Deen a pass on her language, even though I find it silly that so many keep insisting that every white Southerner of her age has used the N-word.

The Savannah Morning News has also finally published a detailed look at the allegations and statements regarding Deen’s use of the N-word. I say “finally” because the story started making national headlines on Wednesday. Editor Susan Catron has an interesting commentary — Fast news vs. factual news — explaining that reporter Jan Skutch was doing due diligence and reviewing multiple documents rather than cherry-picking a few controversial quotes. I agree broadly with Catron’s points, but disagree that the paper should have taken so much time before publishing anything of substance. I also disagree with the choice to look only at the very narrow question of Deen’s use of the N-word. The national media firestorm might be focusing on that narrow question, but her deposition contains far more problematic elements.

So the SMN piece today is titled “Paula Deen and the N-word”, according to the link on the home page and the URL. But if you go to the article, the title changes: Plaintiff’s deposition in Paula Deen case: never heard a racist remark.

It’s pretty common for articles’ titles to shift as one clicks through a publication’s website, but I note the distinction in this case because the latter title is not strictly true. Plaintiff Lisa Jackson’s complaint — click here to read it — says that she and “her employees were surrounded in the workplace with the most vulgar and obscene racial comments” and details alleged examples. You can read about those in slightly more detail in Jackson’s deposition, (especially, p. 53).

So the title of the piece simply does not reflect the reality of the plaintiff’s allegations. The SMN coverage says little about allegations that racist language was used by management at Uncle Bubba’s, and the piece says nothing about the allegations that pornography was routinely seen by and showed to subordinate employees. As I noted in my first post Friday, those allegations seem to have been substantiated by other documents.

The SMN article today is a thorough examination of the narrow issue of Deen’s own use of the N-word, but the case is about a lot more than that.

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.

I like it.

I especially like the way that Jordan includes so many small business owners including but not limited to Zia Sachedina of Zia (my cover photo on the homepage), Joni Saxon-Giusti of The Book Lady, Esther Shaver of E. Shaver’s, Gary Hall of Wright Square Cafe, Ruel Joyner of 24e, Jamie Deen of The Lady and Sons, Stratton Leopold of Leopold’s, Ted Dennard of Savannah Bee, Andy and Aileen Trice of Angel’s BBQ, Mike Volen of The Distillery, and on and on — sorry not to mention all of you!

He also puts the focus on public spaces, with apt presenters: John Duncan, Hugh Golson, and Christian Sottile, among others.

The Savannah Music Festival's Rob Gibson with the statue of Johnny Mercer in Michael Jordan's winning video

As one might expect from a video that comes out of a corporate contest, it feels really polished, which could work against it on a platform like YouTube, and there was clearly an amazing amount of work put into this project.

What’s not here that could be?

Well, there’s basically nothing about the beach or waterways — and the recreation they offer. Now, this isn’t a Visit the Lowcountry contest, or a Visit Tybee contest, so there’s a logical argument for the omission.

And, hey, one video can’t do everything.

Also, in its intense focus on Historic District sites and businesses, there’s not nearly as much racial diversity in this video as the city actually has.

Anyway, here it is:

This contest got rolling after Visit Savannah commissioned this widely panned “conga” video, which has now been viewed over 21,000 times on YouTube:

White sheets for ghosts? Really?

As I said above, I love Michael Jordan’s work, and I hired him a couple of years ago to film Pat Conroy presenting the finalists for the National Book Awards in a short ceremony at the Flannery O’Connor Childhood Home on Charlton Street:

On a side note, there might be some other interesting developments involving the Visit Savannah contest. The group of finalists was whittled down to five, but there seem to be a number of questions about why some of the other entries didn’t make the final list.