And so for Steve Biegel it seems suing Dentsu for forced participation in hot tub action isn’t enough. He’s now adding religious discrimination to his list of apparent transgressions foisted upon him by the ostensible monsters who run Dentsu. Biegel claims he and other Jewish Dentsu employees were discriminated against based on their religion.
In a statement regarding alleged treatment of Dentsu America President Doug Fidoten, Biegel said, “Defendants have openly discussed firing Mr. Fidoten, as well as removing his responsibilities. Mr. Fidoten is quite literally a token Jew, presented as a fig leaf to hide the simple fact that Mr. Andree and his fellow gentile managers have in one year eliminated every Jew in the creative department at Dentsu.”
Furthering his complaint, Biegel adds, “Even though he remains technically employed as Dentsu’s president, in reality, he has been stripped of his powers. Mr. Fidoten himself has become aware of his precarious position, and has been talking to others in the industry about the possibility that he may lose his job,”
Of course, Dentsu is denying all of this claiming Biegel was a difficult employee, acted “vulgar and rude” toward fellow employees and almost caused Canon to terminate a campaign Biegel headed because it was unhappy with the work he did. Oops.
UPDATE: A comment from Mr. Biegel’s legal attorney, Andy Dwyer:
“I am the attorney representing Mr. Biegel in his suit. This posting on your blog by Mr. Hall is another example of the media’s persistent failure to accurately report this case. It is also a sad example of why so much on the blogosphere is unreliable. We did not “add” anything to our case. We have alleged for a year that Mr. Biegel was fired (a) because he is Jewish and (b) because he was being retaliated against for his complaints. This was in the original draft complaint sent to Dentsu a year ago. There is nothing new. This was in our originally filed complaint, filed with the federal court on 10/31/07. In response to our complaint, Dentsu filed a motion to dismiss. We have responded to the motion, explaining why the motion should be denied (as is our right). One of the claims they have sought to dismiss is the claim that Mr. Biegel was discriminated against because he is Jewish. In responding to this argument, we explained why the claim that Mr. Biegel was discriminated against is valid. It is not a new argument. And it does not displace or replace our other claims — it is three pages out of a 25 page brief. I repeat, this is not a new claim; it has been there all along.
I find incredible that Mr. Hall feels qualified to post on this case when (a) he has obviously never read any of the filings in the case, even though they are all publicly available on the internet, and (b) he has never bothered to speak to anyone involved on the side of the plaintiff, even though they can all easily be reached. Mr. Hall erroneously relied on an article in another publication, and then bought their spin hook, line and sinker. Had Mr. Hall made even a minimal effort to research this issue before he posted, he would have realized that his statements were in error. But Mr. Hall spent more time looking for a cute graphic for his post than he did bothering to make sure that what he was saying was the truth.
Is there anyone in your industry who is willing to take the time to read the court file in this case before they publicly express an opinion? Or is that too much to ask? If folks in the blogosphere ever want their writings to rise above the level of graffiti, they are going to have to work a little harder at getting their facts straight before they post.”
Apparently, Mr. Hall is an idiot. We agree and apologize to Mr Biegel and his attorneys for reporting this mis-information.
