Hello Willem, after the revelations about DWDD you wrote about transgressivebehavior last month NOS Sports. Can you tell us about what you are workingon right now?
‘After the publication about DWDD we received dozens of tips from allcorners of society. Many came from the media world, especially publicbroadcasting, but not only from there. In many workplaces, people feel thatthings are happening that don’t belong.
‘We are now making a selection between all the tips. When you start a newinvestigation, you know that it will take a lot of time to find out properly.That’s why we ask each story if it can add something to the discussion. Bee_DWDD_ for example, was it about the system around it, which allowedmisconduct to take place for fifteen years, at the expense of people.’
So you received a lot of tips from the public broadcaster, what are youcurious about in the research that is currently taking place there?
“That investigation stems from the revelations about DWDD , I am primarilycurious whether the dynamics we saw there also play out elsewhere. Bee _DWDD_success came before everything and managers ignored signals aboutinappropriate behavior in the workplace. The presenter seemed untouchable andwas not corrected. I suspect that this plays a broader role within publicbroadcasting, but on what scale?
‘I am also curious whether the victims will report to the investigators atall, and tell them what they have experienced. There is distrust towards theNPO board, which is also around DWDD played a remarkable role and is nowcommissioning the research. We know of a number of people involved in _DWDD_that they have a problem with. You want it to be an independent investigation,which can also be about the functioning of the NPO.’
In the past year, we have seen more of these types of studies go wrong. Do youalready see a learning curve there, or is it still difficult to do somethinglike this well?
To be honest, I don’t really see it getting any better. It starts withavoiding the appearance of a conflict of interest. Otherwise, a large group ofpotential sources will drop out. That is a risk in the NPO research.
‘In addition, it remains the case that a client can decide for himself whatwill or will not come out of the research, as in the case of former PvdA MPGijs van Dijk, for example. This is a difficult decision in which theinterests of the victim and perpetrator play a role, and often also theprotection of one’s own image. Colleague Ariejan Korteweg wrote an excellentseries of reporters’ columns about it.’
In 2022, much attention will be paid to the role of bystanders and to non-sexually transgressive behaviour. How could the discussion develop in 2023?
‘I think it is good that we continue to discuss what we consider acceptable ornot. This can be about transgressive behaviour, but also, for example, aboutexploitation that employers commit against employees. I wouldn’t be surprisedif more attention is paid to the latter in 2023.
‘Another aspect that has our attention is the settlement agreements and non-disclosure agreements that ensure that abuses remain private. For example, wesuspect that there is quite a lot going on in the Zuidas that we as a societydo not consider normal, but that remains under wraps due to non-disclosureagreements. I find that undesirable: it prevents abuses from coming out.
‘Moreover, you trap people: they can’t open their hearts to anyone. We haveseen several situations where someone gets into huge trouble in this way. Thatis why I would certainly like to focus on the role of the non-disclosureagreement this year.’
What insight about transgressive behavior do you hope will penetrate in 2023?
‘I find the discussion about canceling interesting. In reaction to these kindsof stories, there is always a group of people who think that the articleshould not have been published because a main character is canceled that way.I understand that fear in itself, but I think it is more nuanced, and there isa difference between bringing out an abuse and canceling someone.
‘If someone really loses their stage, I think it is often more due to thereaction of that person than to the publication about their behavior. I thinkthat many Dutch people are forgiving when someone repents, expresses regret tovictims and takes responsibility. But that reflection is often missing.
‘Around the publications DWDD it was visible in a bizarre way. PresenterMatthijs van Nieuwkerk absolutely did not want to talk to us. On the daybefore publication, he eventually wrote several statements, which sounded moreand more regretful. This turned out to be mainly due to pressure from thebroadcaster. Of course, if you’re not sorry, you don’t have to say sorry. Butthen you shouldn’t be surprised if people are done with you for a while.’