TV Blackbox Podcast season nine episode eleven

Molk and Robbo do better when Rob is not there.

I think it's difficult to hear the criticism of your employer and not have a passionate say. But it's not yours to defend, it's yours to contribute. Love the pod but it's a conversation, not a trial. We know you're in their corner and with an expert opinion. But hold the defence.

Interesting to see two blokes - Mulc (?) and the chap with the beard minus glasses (Robbo?) - know very little about how courts work but that doesn't stand in the way of offering an opinion. Bullshit nails it.

I thought the second half was actually better than usual. Much more relaxed to the listener without fear of triggering people who don’t like arguments.

Long time pod listener, and I came here specifically to comment. Rob, you're in the wrong here. You have to let alternative opinions air, because this isn't the Rob McKnight Podcast (and if it was, I wouldn't listen). And a criticism of your employer is not an attack on you personally. I enjoy and value and appreciate the contributions here - also I acknowledge that this whole thing exists because of Rob - and banter is great, but the bickering and constant interruptions that ARE DEFENSIVELY COMING FROM ROB, are killing this show. I don't want this show to die. Side note: Robbo, never stop the triple, double, and single entendres.

This could have been a great episode with insights into a big media story but sadly TV Blackbox was not capable of an intelligent articulate discussion. Instead, we have Rob defending the undefendable by bullying and talking over everyone, then spitting the dummy and storming off.
There are indisputable facts:
Auerbach was the senior producer responsible for securing the Lehrmann interview and was in constant communication with Jackson/LLewelyn. They all worked together.
Seven withheld documents including an invoice that showed a charge of $750 from Lehrmann for production services that Auerbach claimed was for Cocaine and Sex Workers.
Auerbach resigned following the misuse of the Seven credit card for massages. His resignation was not accepted and Seven found a way to hide the charges.
There were multiple documented financial incentives Seven made too Lehrmann beyond the $105,000 in rent including $10,000 in massages that Seven chose not to disclose
Beyond this, we saw that Spotlight operated under a toxic masculine environment fuelled on booze and white male privilege which is in stark contrast to the image Seven portrays.
All matters worthy of discussion on the future of this program.

Robbo was the the dick on this occasion, Rob wanted to make a point (even though he interrupted) & just because it pertained to 7, Robbo just rudely dismisses him just because it related to 7 even though he had no idea what Rob was about to say. That is incredibly arrogant, to invalidate someone because you assume what they might say without actually hearing them. Pull your head in & get over yourself.

Long time listener of the pod and now watcher. Please don't stop doing this pod/show.

A pretty disappointing display from Rob. And a dubious summary of the evidence. That could have been an interesting discussion.

Gee this episode is cringe….. it’s okay to disagree but to talk over others when they are trying to make a point just makes a host look childish. I understand Rob is in a compromised position because of who he works for. What i will say is channel 7s news in melbourne has taken a hit in the last year where channel 9 has quickly gained ground on them.

Long time listener of the show and what I saw here was Rob once again not liking being called out for his behaviour and had a Rob hissy.

Discussions are just that, discussions where everyone gets to share a thought, comment, view, opinion/s and then everyone has a right to reply.

However Rob has a massive tendency to always have the last word and constantly butts in on others and cuts them off. This becomes very irritating and turns into a one sided view point and that is Robs. Some times I find myself skipping past segments because of it.

Reply and disagreement are of course needed over topics and not everyone will agree 100% of the time and that’s ok. But when it’s done with a I know best attitude, cutting others off or as we saw here a condescending aggression dummy spit…. Frankly it’s not a good look for someone who’s had so much media experience.

I’ve heard Rob defend the networks and shows he’s worked on vigorously and disregarded others views on topics. So perhaps if it’s something that’s close to being a conflict topic I think Rob should excuse himself from the discussion and return afterward to continue with the next topic.

Honestly I found the second half the podcast more enjoyable after he had left on this occasion.

Generally still an enjoyable podcast. Great work everyone.

So, umm. A difficult watch to be honest. Unsure what to comment here for fear of offending