I know it is easy for us to sit here and say that the paper should have immediately gone to UM administration with this issue, but think what would have happened if the paper would have unilaterally taken action without some sort of agreement or consent of the female reporter. She would have to have been put in another assignment, perhaps one she didn't like or wasn't suited for, and it could have put her employer in a position of negative liability relative to her future career as a journalist.
I think this was a tough situation for her employer. The paper probably did the right thing, they were likely advised by their legal and/or HR departments about the best way to handle it, and they decided it was best to give the reporter some input and say in the matter. The fact that other women may have been victimized in the interim is unfortunate, but that was Teague's fault, and in my opinion, UM administration's fault because I have a hard time believing that the recent incidents were the first instance of NT's abusive behavior.
I give this reporter a lot of credit for stepping forward and telling her story, it was probably not an easy thing to do.
