Katie Couric’s memoir reveals a deeply unpleasant person who hates women?

Katie Couric attends the 2020 Vanity Fair Oscar Party Celebrating the 92nd Annual Academy Awards hos...

Katie Couric has written a tell-all memoir called Going There. The book comes out in late October, and she’ll do an eleven-city book tour. Which should be pretty funny, because Couric is apparently burning a lot of bridges with this book. The Daily Mail has exclusive coverage, and Couric comes across as very old-school. As in, she doesn’t believe in supporting women or mentoring women or respecting the women who came before her. It’s remarkable that these are her own words too, it’s not like this is an unauthorized biography! She’s saying this sh-t with her whole chest, at least if the Daily Mail’s coverage can be believed. It’s possible that the Mail is putting a spin on some of the book passages because they have their own misogynistic agenda. Or it could be that Couric and the DM editors are birds of a feather. Here are some highlights from this Daily Mail exclusive.

On Deborah Norville: Among the most striking passages is Couric explaining how she didn’t stick up for other women at work because she saw them as a threat to her own career. She admits that she had bad feelings for Deborah Norville even though she replaced her hosting TODAY in 1991. Norville took two months off for maternity leave and Couric filled in – when Norville didn’t return Couric got the job permanently. Couric claims there were ‘residual bad feelings’ towards Norville for her obvious differences with Jane Pauley, her former TODAY co-host who left in 1989 under acrimonious conditions.

Couric thinks Norville was too perfect: Couric writes that Norville had a ‘major relatability problem’ because she was too perfect at a time in the morning when people were still getting ready for the day. One colleague supposedly told Couric that ‘with Deborah, people feel like they need to get dressed before they turn on the TV’.

Protecting her turf: Couric admits that during her time at TODAY she was unwelcoming to other women because she felt like she needed to ‘protect my turf.’ She writes that she was aware that ‘someone younger and cuter was always around the corner’ and singles out Ashleigh Banfield as an example. Couric writes: ‘For a minute there, Ashleigh Banfield was the next big thing; I’d heard her father was telling anyone who’d listen that she was going to replace me. In that environment, mentorship sometimes felt like self-sabotage.’

She hates Martha Stewart too: She had little affection for Martha Stewart and at an awards ceremony in 1996 Couric roasted her with a snarky poem which said that ‘anything I can do you (Stewart) can do better.’ Stewart was unamused and Couric writes that it took a ‘some healthy humbling (prison will do that . . .) to develop a sense of humor.’

On Prince Harry: Among the celebrities that Couric takes potshots at are Prince Harry, who she met at a polo match in Brazil during his ‘wild-oats sowing phase.’ She recalled that the smell of cigarettes and alcohol seemed to ‘ooze from every pore’ in his body.

On Prince Andrew & Jeffrey Epstein: Couric was among those who attended the infamous 2010 dinner at Jeffrey Epstein’s house when Prince Andrew was also there. She describes Epstein’s $75million New York townhouse as ‘Eyes Wide Shut with a twist – creepy chandeliers and body-part art’. Guests ate lasagna out of shallow bowls and Epstein ‘held court’ in front of the fireplace to the likes of Chelsea Handler and Woody Allen and Soon-Yi Previn, George Stephanopoulos and Charlie Rose. On the way home Perlin remarked how young the women were who took their coats. Couric writes: ‘I couldn’t imagine what Epstein and Andrew were up to, apart from trying to cultivate friends in the media. Which, in retrospect, they must have figured they’d need when the pedophilia charges started rolling in.’

[From The Daily Mail]

The Mail is obviously interested in the Harry and Andrew stuff, but I found Couric’s admissions about female coworkers really upsetting. It’s true that when Couric was making a name for herself in television journalism, there was not this “women supporting women” energy or conversation. It was dog eat dog and Barbara Walters likely felt much the same way about her rise throughout the 1960s and 1970s. But Couric writes as if she’s proud of herself for that mindset, like she has no regrets about freezing out younger women and relishing the fact that she succeeded in pushing out Norville. I mean, she did what she felt she had to do in that competitive world. But holy sh-t, she sounds like a deeply unpleasant person.

Melania Trump Hosts an Interagency Meeting

Photo courtesy of Avalon Red.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

138 Responses to “Katie Couric’s memoir reveals a deeply unpleasant person who hates women?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. H says:

    I’ve never liked her. However, I still watch Deborah Norville on Inside Edition. Katie always seemed fake along with Matt Lauer.

    • Minnieder says:

      I have never liked her either, especially after she aired her colonoscopy. This just makes me dislike her even more!

      • GirlMonday says:

        In her defense, her first husband and great love did die of colon cancer, so she probably felt strong about it.

      • Barrett says:

        I was wondering if she was trying to point out the dog eat dog world. I wonder if she condones it now or is glad things changed. I want to hear what she thinks now. Has she evolved? I hate what she says but I was like whoa! She’s honest! She really is letting us know she didn’t help, was mean and cold to females in work environment!

      • Minnieder says:

        Fair point GIRLMONDAY. I support encouraging people to get screened, I just disliked the idea of her televising it.

      • minx says:

        I gave her props for doing that. It helped demystify colonoscopies and treat them in a matter-of-fact way, when they’ve been a source of snickering and disgust. We all have that plumbing. But this book…I’m just really puzzled why she would burn so many bridges and trash people this way. She’s the one who comes off looking bad.

      • Willow says:

        Yes, her husband died very young and rapidly. It was a huge shock. I was watching the Today show regularly at that time and remember when she came back. You could see how hard it was on her. I think they had young kids too. At that time there wasn’t much awareness about that form of cancer or how aggressive it is. It was probably healing for her to try to prevent other families from going through what she did.

      • Eleanor says:

        I’m really grateful she aired her procedure and called so much attention to the entire subject. I’ve never been a regular viewer of morning tv; I doubt I’ll read the book. But the colonoscopy stuff got some family members to address their symptoms and may have saved a life.

    • MMadison says:

      Let’s be very clear: NO ONE LIKED DEBORAH NORVILLE at the time. When Jane Pauley left the Today Show it was a huge deal. It seemed like Pauley was being replaced by someone with less experience, younger and beautiful. Her co anchors at the time (Bryant Gumble) and the entire Today crew hated her and let it be known. She was made fun of daily on national TV for all to see. I’m not sure if it was deserved or not but I can say that Katie was received with open arms in comparison. I just wanted to add historical prospective about Norville. What I found interesting over the years is that Norville never was able to get a job reporting the news on a major news channel.

      • EllenOlenska says:

        True. And a guy would have had multiple chances with other networks. The powers that be decided America hated her, full stop, end of story. America has “hated lost of other (male) anchors who got multiple chances.

        One of my biggest bugbears is we need to remember to judge people by the times they lived in and consider context. Katie tells no lies here about Ashleigh. Anything younger was a threat. That’s not Ashleighs fault, there was only room (in those days ) for one woman. Is her behavior ideal? No, of course not. But if she hadn’t managed to hang on herself networks would likely have decided Jane Pauley was an exception and replaced Katie with a guy. Jessica Savitch was dead by then I believe.

      • Isabella says:

        Bryant Gumble was very much to blame, since he was calling the shots at the time and wanted a hot new blonde at his side. He wasn’t at Today very long, either.

      • CapPhD says:

        Gumble hosted Today for 15 years.

      • Rongela Redmond says:

        Yes, that is what happened!

    • Concern Fae says:

      I had a boss who was (probably still is) friends with Norville. She goes by her married name in her private life and apparently is a perfectly normal wealthy lady, hanging out with her peers, and doing all sorts of stuff at her kid’s school. My boss was fairly cool and didn’t suffer fools, so I’m guessing Norville isn’t an awful rich lady. Apparently she really does knit, because that’s how my boss got talking to me about her. I’m a knitter and she was curious about my knitting because apparently Deborah and I are the only knitters she knows! Yeah, I was amused.

      Yeah, Couric was lucky to pair off with Lauer, because he was so obviously awful that she came off looking good. But, makes sense that she didn’t get along with or support women, because she wouldn’t have been successful at NBC if she were.

      • E.B. Mann says:

        I mean, it sounds like Couric’s bragging about playing a man’s game like a man. Who knows how she would’ve turned out if she’d been given a hand-up by a supportive female mentor. (I’m only assuming she didn’t have that.) The patriarchy nods approvingly when women scrap with one another—it’s just so much easier to control people when they’re powerless and desperate.

    • Me says:

      I remember the Jane Pauley/Deborah Norville fracas. Today publicly dumped Pauley for Norville because she was getting ‘too old.’ Blondes are completely fungible as we all know; no other characteristics matter at all. Needless to say Norville, with that clueless-producer baggage, was pretty much loathed by the audience from the start. Also, Norville is not ‘too perfect’—she just doesn’t have Pauley’s easy warmth and comes across as rather chilly. Paired with a rather sharp-edged Bryant Gumble, it was a recipe for disaster in any case. Today would have known this had those in charge actually used their big brains for five minutes.

      I have no opinion of Katie Couric.

    • PinkestSlip says:

      I’m from Australia and live in India, both of those making US local talent and news a distant thing…Katie Couric is nobody outside of the US, but of course on news and talk sites you see her name. And the only energy I’ve ever picked up on in everything I’ve seen on her is “absolute hard-hearted b!tch.” Seems I was right.

  2. atorontogal says:

    She reminds me of Reese Witherspoon (don’t you know who I am?) All big smiles and girl next door vibe until you dig under the surface, only to find the actual mean girl.

    • Renee says:

      +1,000 Same!

    • SuSuSusio says:

      Well spotted. She’s always been that person. Always a big fake smile, always making her segments about herself.

      What does it say that she and Lauer were the face of that show for so many years? Even before his offscreen behavior was well known, onscreen he was always cold and arrogant.

    • DuchessL says:

      Seriously, dog eat dog world is what it used to feel like for me in the 90’s and early 2000’s. Today, it isnt like that anymore and thank god our daughters will probably not have to go through our sh*t.

    • superashes4 says:

      I’ve always held out hope that Reese is decent, but I can’t really fully commit to the idea after Kevin Smith gave her the moniker “Greasy Reesy” (somewhat unfair, but also in some respects totally fair if what he said about how she acted to Joey was accurate)

    • josephine says:

      I will say this — that’s exactly what it took to be successful at the time. Women needed to hide their ambition, their grit, even their intelligence. To keep her job she needed to appear likeable. Men are allowed to be disliked by viewers, women are axed if there is even a whiff of distaste. Even now, only men get to openly display arrogance or even confidence and get away with it. And I would not describe her actions as openly mean – she doesn’t admit to sabatoge or dirty tricks (that I know of). Sure, I like it when women support women, but in business, only women are called out for not being mentors and supporting other women enough. Men are allowed to be exactly as ambitious and selfish as they want to be, and the world applauds them for being so focused and successful.

      Without seeing more of what she wrote, what she wrote comes across as brutal honesty. I’m no fan – I never thought her reporting was that great, but I think some perspective is needed.

    • GC says:

      Well, she was a cheerleader in school from what I have heard. Lol … guess she (Katie) got her “training” early. She appears to be more of a “mean girl” than the “sweet girl next door.” I have always had my suspicions.

  3. Sarah says:

    I saw her interview an author once and she clearly knew nothing about the book. It was upsetting to see her ask stupid questions that made no sense. I felt badly for the author who was gamely trying to answer them. That’s the only time I ever saw her show and it made me never want to watch again.

  4. Jan90067 says:

    Guess she has more than enough bank to not care how many bridges she’s setting fire to at this point. Does she think this is going to get her those prime time interview specials she’s said to want to do?

    So much for the “sweet girl next door” image. POOF! Up in smoke.

    • Maria says:

      The Courics owned a cotton plantation in Alabama and owned many slaves, which made them rich and part of Alabama high society. When the Today show followed everyone’s roots and Couric visited her ancestors’ plantation cemetery, she said that “slaves lie in unmarked but well-tended graves.” Didn’t mention the slaves were actually bought & sold by her family. So yes, she is rich, both from her NBC pay and generational wealth from her slave-owning ancestors, a history she glosses over.

      • MMadison says:

        @Maria…. 1000 pinocchios

      • Maria says:

        MMadison:

        Nope, no Pinocchio here. Its mentioned in this Washington Post article. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1999/08/08/white-girl/1987bd6e-fc69-4186-961c-1e71fee71d13/

        If you can’t access it from behind the paywall, here’s the quote: “For a week, the “Today” show devoted a segment to tracing family histories. And Couric’s roots go back to Alabama. When cotton was king and the Courics were part of the ruling family.

        You could buy fertile land cheap, the segment said. And the Courics did. The family prospered and included a Civil War governor and a member of Congress.

        Couric toured the family cemetery and recounted the stories behind the headstones. Then she said, “Slaves lie in unmarked but well-tended graves nearby.”

        That was it. No acknowledgment that these “slaves” were people her family bought and sold. That some of them might be her kin. That no matter how smart or talented or hard-working she is, her privilege was codified, her head start generations long. That it came at the expense of somebody else’s freedom. No mention of any attempt to trace those other lives to see how they fared. Maybe that would have been too much to hope for. But how about an expression of regret. A mea culpa. An “I’m sorry–wish you were here.”

        Genealogy is about “our simple stories, not forgotten,” Couric said. Interesting choice of words. Black families have stories, too. Ones we don’t forget. That get passed down to our kids.”

        Now, stop accusing people of lying before doing your research.

      • Betsy says:

        I can’t comment on the particulars of what Couric said on air or in a voiceover, but the rest is correct. https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1999-06-20-9906220484-story.html

  5. TIFFANY says:

    Why the question mark?

    When she went on the bomb on anchoring Evening News, the writing was on the wall. While I would love to see a woman at the desk, she was and still ain’t it.

    Also, Denzel knew. *sips tea*

    • Roo says:

      What is the story about Denzel?

      • Tiffany says:

        Hi Roo.

        Click on Katie’s name for the stories about her. There is a story about it.

      • SofiasSideEye says:

        DW was promoting the Manchurian Candidate, and KC was interviewing him. She brought up politics and asked what he thought about people saying actors should stick to acting and stay out of politics. He said, “I’m not an actor, I’m a human being.” He also said “I don’t know any “Hollywood” people. He seemed to feel she was reducing him to what he did for a living rather than understanding he’s a person, husband, father, etc as well as an actor. And she wouldn’t drop it after he was really clear he didn’t like the line of questioning.

        From what I remember from over the years Denzel doesn’t like being thought of as “Hollywood.”

        Also, Katie really played up the, white woman terrified of a black man trope at the time.
        ETA: Tiffany, I didn’t see your post when I was posting! lol

    • fishface says:

      DW is the epitome of grace, intelligence and sophistication. What an insult to treat him like that.

  6. OriginalLeigh says:

    @they must have figured they’d need when the pedophilia charges started rolling in.” ???

    This is revisionist history as the charges had already rolled in… Epstein was a convicted sex offender when she chose to attend a party at his home in 2010.

    None of her revelations surprise me a bit. She has been signaling that she’s a straight up Karen for years. She was “terrified” of Denzel Washington but perfectly comfortable attending a party given by a known predator? Utterly ridiculous.

    • popsicle_vp says:

      @orginalleigh – 💯 agree. It all sounds like revisionist history. Catty Couric’s comments on Harry were not necessary, just seemed like pointless name-dropping. I never liked her – her personality always seemed put on. She seem to lack depth and just gave me white woman privileged vibes. When she had the nerve to drop Denzel’s name out of her mouth, it validated everything I thought about her. She has been irrelevant for years and clearly is taking it hard. This memoir seems to me as a desperate attempt to use her last breath of notoriety to embiggening herself and score points.

    • Becks1 says:

      That stood out to me too. Why were you there in 2010? People knew who epstein was by then.

    • terra says:

      @OriginalLeigh: Entirely in agreement over here too. Not surprising she’d try this tack – gaslighting is among the tactics most often employed by a Karen. Why change what has worked for so long, right? People’s feelings? Don’t be silly.

      I hated The Today Show, even as a child. I think growing up in a deeply dysfunctional environment caused me to develop a decent radar for creeps even as a kid and Matt Lauer and Katie Couric, separately and individually, always gave me the creeps.

      Couric strikes me as being the same type of Karen as my mother, to a certain degree – very concerned with their public personas while terrorizing anyone unlucky enough to cross their paths behind the scenes.

      No, thank you. Hard pass.

  7. Twin falls says:

    Did not see Katie Couric coming for Martha Stewart but I’ll admit to not being a morning tv watcher so maybe that’s a long time feud. My money is on Martha.

    • Persephone says:

      +1
      Martha all the way.

    • Emmitt says:

      Martha Stewart is still relevant. Karen Couric is not.

    • Meghan says:

      Just from the excerpt above and my own, vague, fuzzy memories….. wasn’t Martha like that before prison? She did everything perfectly and better than you can imagine was her whole shtick there for a while, right? And then she did lighten up after prison and when she started doing the segments with Snoop and people loved it she leaned into that and became a woman that you felt like you could speak to at the store instead of running away from her because she wouldn’t dare speak to peasants. Or at least that is the vibe I had of pre-prison Martha. (And still, Martha would destroy Katie Couric)

      • Sass says:

        Im just gonna say I think Martha is awesome and her having attitude is part of that love. Never change, martha! 😘

  8. This might be an unpopular opinion, but the only thing worse than a man displaying toxic behavior towards women, is a woman being a gender traitor and displaying toxic behavior towards other women. I despise women like this.

    • Kristin says:

      I agree with you. I’ve come to, sadly, expect it from men and am always relieved and pleasantly surprised when men are great. But when women are toxic to other women? That’s heartbreaking to me. I guess I’m one of those “sisterhood” types that takes friendships and mentorships with women very seriously and it’s always a betrayal when a woman stabs me in the back.

    • Pusspants says:

      I hope that’s not an unpopular opinion! I think it’s really important to support women, especially women of color. I try to do it in my professional & personal life. We need something to balance bro culture.

    • Emma says:

      It is the saddest and most frustrating thing to see when a marginalized person buys into the BS that if they internalize their own oppression enough and are good enough little *insert pejorative here,* the oppressors will accept and love them. Newsflash, it only perpetuates the problems and they will never really accept you anyway. This is why she didn’t see what Lauer and Epstein were up to (and she’s supposedly a top notch investigative journalist!), because she had internalized rape culture and misogyny. Hate to see it. No excuse for it.

    • Sid says:

      It’s sad to see, because boy oh boy men will generally support each other through all sorts of foolishness and f*ckery. The worst of the worst man will still have a group of men who will defend him to the death, especially if he is going against a woman. I’m not saying we should necessarily just automatically support any and every woman no matter what, BUT, it wouldn’t hurt for us to have a little more of that “I’ve got your back” energy with each other in certain situations.

      • Twin falls says:

        Possibly because there is always (generally speaking) a group of (white) men around to support each other. Much easier to always side with your group when there are enough of you to make a team.

    • Rob says:

      Yasss! Pink Flamingo! Hit that nail on the head!

    • fishface says:

      This is an interesting area to me, having been subject to toxic female bosses twice in my life (I was not alone in being victimised by both women – all the women in our teams were targeted). Yes, I think that women are victims of the patriarchy and it can result in this kind of behaviour. But given that many women I’ve worked with have been fabulous and supportive, there’s a part of me that thinks that the women who try to crush other women are just plain horrible humans, end of. And ultimately the fact they are female is both a coincidence and irrelevant.

  9. Merricat says:

    Not a Katie fan, and this memoir sounds like it’s unlikely to change my mind.

  10. ItReallyIsYouNotMe says:

    I don’t know, I don’t get the impression from these snippets that she is proud of not sticking up for other women? More like she is explaining her thinking back then but realizes that the world is different now? In any event, I will blame the white male power structure in media for making it so that women didn’t feel like they could support each other because there could only be one female anchor in any show. Her comment about mentorship being self-sabotage speaks volumes about the culture in the news media at that time.

    • MissMarirose says:

      This. Also, given the way the popular Jane Pauley was shoved out of the way simply because she was turning 40, I can understand why Couric would be nervous that there was someone younger and prettier coming to take her job.

      We should definitely focus on the misogynistic culture that created this type of self-sabotaging competition between capable women anchors.

      • Kfg says:

        Sorry, no empathy for yt women who support the patriarchy. She benefitted from that system and continues to benefit from her yt fragility and infantilization.

      • Tisme says:

        @missmarirose…totally agree. It doesn’t excuse her shitty behaviour but it does explain where it stems from.

    • Same says:

      Self sabotage really rang a bell for me as well , as a female in the work force that is north of 50, I very much recall the 80-90s and even early aughts where looks and bust size were far more important than qualifications and there was ALWAYS someone younger or… more willing …
      Training your replacement is no fun. I will read this for context before I form an opinion.

    • Kviby says:

      Thank you for explaining it well. I feel the same way. In most industries men getting to be at/ near the top means being friendly with the men already at the top, they are the default choice. The vast majority do not wish it was half women half men up there. They like being d-bros together. In result some less privileged people decide to do whatever it takes, (and some don’t “push” and stay an un -privileged statistic) but those who act ruthlessly to succeed did not create the game that gave them only that option.
      I’m not interested in her but I’d much prefer she tell the truth without sugar coating

    • RoyalBlue says:

      That is exactly how I saw it too.

    • pottymouth pup says:

      I’m with you and, frankly, I think it’s good that she acknowledges that she didn’t support other women and at least some of that lack of support was because she was in direct competition with them. Unless she was actively kneecapping other women to get the upper hand that is. I think the context of all the excerpts probably matters

    • josephine says:

      I said the same above – a little perspective is needed. Women were supposed to gladly, openly and happily train their younger replacements, with a smile on their faces. All while doing their own dang job. Really sick of women attacking other women for not being supportive enough. Women should be allowed to have ambition. If she went out to say that she set out to wreck their careers, different story But from these small snippets, I don’t see the outrage.

  11. Nina says:

    She’s unfortunately a product of a deeply misogynistic industry and time

  12. Izzy says:

    I thought it was pretty well known that she’s an ahole. But good on her, I guess, for putting it in writing.

    • Green Desert says:

      Haha love “But good on her, I guess, for putting it in writing.” :)

      I think those of us on a site like CB who like to dig a little deeper knew. I don’t think the more conservative-leaning women who love to watch morning shows without a critical eye knew, however.

    • Truthiness says:

      The one and only time Couric was interesting was when she was at an event and left her cell phone on her dinner table while chatting with others. Amy Schumer grabbed it to text Couric’s bf/husband something like “I really need to get out of here, want to try an@l tonight?” And then they left shortly afterward.

      Since Couric doesn’t support women, I’ll return the sentiment.

  13. locamg says:

    None of this is surprising to me. I feel she’s been giving off that vibe for years. I never have liked her.

  14. Mai says:

    I think whoever did her cover feels the same way because someone thought it was okay to give her photo big Joker vibes.

  15. Amy Bee says:

    I always got a fake vibe about Katie. So it’s not all surprising that she saw others as a threat. Maybe because it’s a British publication but to me her views about Matt Lauer are important than what she thought about Prince Harry. I don’t know if the Daily Mail thought they were doing something by including her thoughts about Harry. Everybody knows what Harry was like in those days and the Daily Mail has been one of publications decrying the fact Harry has stopped smoking and drinking.

  16. Bettyrose says:

    The Jane Pauley/Deborah Norville/Katie Couroc debacle was traumatizing at the time for us budding young feminists. It never would have occurred to me that Katie Couric was anything but an Aunt Tommie. She’s not wrong that young women were a threat to her career, but she’s an asshole for not using her platform to address misogyny from inside the system.

  17. remarks says:

    I think I would need to read the book in full to get a sense of her perspective, but I found the quotes kind of honest about the kind of person you need to be to reach the top. She didn’t really sugar-coat the fact that you need to be out for yourself (not a good attitude, but it is what it is at the top, I suppose). It’s matter-of-fact rather than pretending there’s an ideal utopia that exists. For people in broadcast journalist, the book probably uncovers the veil.

    That said, I’ve never really understood Couric’s popularity. Broadcast journalism is visual, and appearance-wise nothing about her stands out. She looks like she’d blend with the crowd — or is that the point?

    • Pusspants says:

      Katie’s average girl-next-door look was likely part of her appeal. She wasn’t too attractive to threaten anyone but also not unpleasant to look at. Add to that, she goes by “Katie” and not “Kate” or “Katherine”, which reinforces the belief she’s non-threatening and just like a friend delivering the news. Little did we know what else she was.

  18. Tom says:

    In the ‘90s, every other female Communications major wanted to be Couric. She was the It girl for News. At that point, I wouldn’t expect her to shine the spotlight on anyone else.

    But later … say, the famous Sarah Palin interview, those old reasons not to help female colleagues should have faded for her.

    Jane Pauley is like nails on a blackboard.

    • canichangemyname says:

      Wow, Tom. That’s all I got here. Yes, women were and are just so silly and dumb. Double major with honors of communication and Eng Lit, minor in Spanish. 2 years into a law degree. Journalist for years. But yeah, Katie Couric’s picture was hung right next to my NKOTB poster.

  19. Haylie says:

    No wonder she got on so well with Matt Lauer. They’re both despicable people.

  20. lucy2 says:

    I have heard some unpleasant things of her in recent years, and this sort of confirms that.
    I get that TV news is hugely competitive, and there’s always someone younger and less expensive waiting in the wings to take your spot, but a LOT of that comes from the male dominated system pitting women against each other, to protect their own male power. the really sad part is she doesn’t seem to recognize that, and seems to take pride in continuing that to this day.
    Geez, between her being a complete mean girl and Lauer assaulting women, the Today show must have been a truly horrific experience for many to work on.

  21. Ines says:

    Well, South Park famously coined a “Couric” as a unit of measurement for sh*t. “It is noted that one Katie Couric is 2 and half pounds of excrement.”

  22. Case says:

    She always gave off a “fake nice” vibe, so this doesn’t surprise me. Kind of shocking for her to admit to being such a crummy person, though!

  23. Plums says:

    wow, those quotes. Actually, not surprising. I imagine a lot of people who are in that industry are pretty cutthroat behind the scenes. National news media, Hollywood, big business, politicians- unless you benefit from nepotism, you have to weed out a lot of scruples to get to the tops of those fields.

  24. teehee says:

    Hmm, more like, insecurity and high competition, in a very biased environment (all work environments are, pretty much). Not that she’s outright hating on women… but that she feels scared like all of us do.
    I’m pretty convinced lately, that we have been fed the lie and the illusions of the world as it is for men. We, are women, and life for us is very different than a man experiences it and paints it.
    However we are punished for not buying what men sell and trying to go along with it– to the detriment of our own reality.
    This is one of those instances.

    • Sandii says:

      Yes… this is pretty much how I see it, too. Sometimes I feel like I am taking crazy pills when I try to describe the different realities.

    • Bumble says:

      This is extremely spot-on and eloquently said. It’s also why I wish women were in power. The world would be extremely different. Not to say perfect, as everyone is human. But the proclivity to violence and cutthroat tactics seem pretty male. Not to mention the fact that they keep using scads of money better spent on feeding, housing, and caring for humanity just to send phallic rockets into space for their ego.

  25. mellie says:

    Yep, she sounds like a big old a-hole. I’m not a CEO or anything like that, so I certainly don’t know what it means to be a women in power and I’ve dealt with my share of mean girls in the work place. Right now I work around a bunch of male engineers (at least pre-Covid) when we were in the office. They are a breath of fresh air compared to working with women!

  26. janey janey says:

    Can I just say GOD BLESS THIS WOMAN.

    She said it OUT LOUD. I’ve been in the workforce for so, so long and there is so much affinity bullshit and you know what they don’t say? The worst offenders, the people who will happily knee cap a woman, a person of color, a woman, a gay person, a trans person, a working mother, a person with an illness, or anyone marginalized are white women who clawed their way through the toxic bullshit to find a perch to sit on. Aunt Lydias are ‘effin everywhere.

    I am going to go on a tangent, but I am just like YES. This is how so many of these women get to where they are. Let’s call it for what it is.

    Now, are their exceptions? of course. But exceptions for exceptional people are not the norm in my experience in cut throat industries. If there is any way to knee cap your competition, racism, sexism, being the “cool girl” who hates working with women, etc., they’ll do it without hesitation. This is such a well worn tactic. I warn people about it all the time.

    And don’t get it twisted. Skin folk ain’t kin folk. I’m a black person. And yes, I’ve seen this happen so many times where ONE black person will not say a peep in the face of racist bullshit because they are benefitting from being the one. They will moan about unqualified black employees, who can’t write well or whose hair is distracting, etc.

    Same story with the only gay in the village. Seen that show too (guess the reference).

    I know my opinion isn’t popular, but I’m just relieved to not be gas-lit yet again. (See: S. Sandberg).

    • remarks says:

      “I am going to go on a tangent, but I am just like YES. This is how so many of these women get to where they are. Let’s call it for what it is.”

      That’s what I came away thinking too.

    • Eurydice says:

      Yes, we used to call it “The Queen Bee Syndrome.” On Wall Street you pretty much had one token woman in each group (and she usually got stuck selling all the weird and crappy products). But she was the one who palled around with the boys, who learned how to play golf and who took only the afternoon off to have her baby. The attitude was “These are the dues I had to pay, why should it be easier for you?” Any encouragement I ever got was from a few forward-thinking men, never from the women.

    • Willow says:

      Exactly! She described how women in a male dominated industry make it to a top position and then stay there. Except you have to sell your soul to the devil to be able to do it.

      • Eurydice says:

        Well, there was no other way, really. It was hard enough to get your own voice be heard, let alone speak for others. And you had to choose your battles – did you want to strike a blow for all womankind and end up out on your ass, or did you want to make a living (albeit half of the what the men were getting) and fulfill a little bit of personal ambition. As it was, women had to do twice as much work anyway, so there wasn’t a lot of time to take up social causes, there were no HR remedies for discrimination and sexual harassment, and if you had a family on top of that – well, there went the 24 hours of the day.

  27. Lizzie says:

    Initially she was okay on the Today show but over the years the show became all about her to the point it was unwatchable for me. My biggest turning point was how she was in anyone who suffered a tragedy’s face asking ‘can you describe how you feel’ with concern voice, yet when her husband died she demanded ‘privacy’. Nobody was ever allowed to ask her the same intrusive questions she relished asking everyone else.

  28. Becks1 says:

    I’ve always found her okay-ish but never really understood her appeal. (I feel the same way about Savannah Guthrie, who my mom adores lol.) I do wonder what the full context is about not wanting to help other women. I can kind of see it at the time – why would you want to help someone so they can take your job? TV jobs like the one Couric had were once in a lifetime positions and considering how TV was towards women back then, I can understand her desire to guard her turf, so to speak. It shouldn’t be that way, but some environments are definitely like that.

    But, does she wish it wasn’t that way? Does she talk about how she wishes she had helped more women, as she wishes she had been helped? Does she talk about the toxic environment that meant there was only room for one female anchor at a time? etc? Or is it just “yeah I did what I had to do, COME AT ME?”

    That said -if she really is going there, and is going to say all this with her whole chest – I will probably read this because I am sort of sick of celeb memoirs about how nice everyone was and coded language about “differences” and everything. Give me the real dirt, even if it makes you look like a shitty person.

  29. Angelica Schuyler says:

    Katie Couric is nowhere near the “nice girl” she came across as on the Today Show. I had a brief encounter with her several years ago at the gym. She was using the locker next to mine and was cordial to me, but then along came one of her assistants to bring her some towels and discuss their schedule for the rest of the day and I was shocked. Katie was so rude, condescending and downright obnoxious to the poor assistant. It was appalling. Then she turned around and bade me a good day so sweetly. I was stunned. It was Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. I haven’t been able to watch anything with her in it since then.

    I do believe Katie about Martha Stewart. As they say, ‘It takes one to know one’. I also had a brief encounter, through work, with Martha Stewart, who made Katie look like an amateur in the Karen department.

    • Ann says:

      With Martha, though, it’s kind of part of her persona. Yes, she presents herself as a domestic goddess,, but not as a sweetheart. It’s been known for decades that she’s difficult and demanding and she embraces it. At least she does now.

      • Angelica Schuyler says:

        I can see what you’re saying. I guess it’s that Katie is just SO fake. I can deal with someone like Martha, who own’s it, better than someone who misrepresents themselves like Katie. With Martha you’re expecting her to be a diva and difficult. Katie just turns it on and off like a switch. The phoniness is surreal.

    • oopygoopy says:

      oh my god please tell the martha story!!!!

  30. Catherine says:

    She gave an exclusive to the Daily Mail. That says everything about her standards. Nothing else needs to be said. As for her Harry comments. That interview was a really good interview. His comments about Diana having the best seat in the house for the wedding were particularly poignant. She should point that out. So it sort of highlights what Harry said about how he was privately suffering and self medicating while publicly filling the role. The tabloids are trying to shame him for this. But it reveals that he was speaking the truth about his private vs public struggle. I don’t think it was out of bounds for her to bring it up but if on her tour she continually brings up that one interview in order to capitalize on the Sussexes current prominence then I will have a problem with that. As for her comments about other female reporters. Obviously, extremely problematic.

  31. Charm says:

    Look at her on the cover of her book. Ive always hated her smile and felt kinda bad that I might hv been doing her a disservice by not seeing her wide, cheeky grin as a pure reflection of a good soul (instead of the opposite) especially during, after (& how) she lost her first husband.

    But in this moment, seeing that same smile, I feel kinda justified that I never liked what it said of her and that I wasnt doing her a disservice but was seeing her for the c*nt she is.

  32. WithTheAmerican says:

    Republicans (conservatives, e.g., Daily Mail) still mad at Katie for asking Sarah Palin what she read.

    Add in the Harry bashing and they’re all in.

  33. Emmitt says:

    Black people knew what Karen Couric was all about when she claimed to be threatened & scared by Denzel Washington when he gave her an answer to a question she didn’t like. Now Karen Couric is showing her true colors to everyone else. Never ever trust anyone who is always “perky” on the outside …the perkiness hides a multitude of darkness.

    • Green Desert says:

      Thank you! As others have said, Denzel knew.

    • Jaded says:

      That was unconscionable of her to do, and Denzel didn’t “threaten her”, he simply and clearly stated his point. What a rapacious industry she’s in, it seems to either attract or promote the worst in people. I won’t be reading her stupid book.

  34. Margo says:

    Well, at least she is being honest! All the happy horse-sh** of how women supporting and helping each other to get ahead, especially in the 1990′s and early 2000′s, is just that – horseshi**. Today, I think (hope!) it’s different, but back then, if you didn’t protect your turf you were going to lose it.

    • EllenOlenska says:

      Yes, you did. And you weren’t always replaced with a female if you did lose your spot. Even today in many industries the only high level position in the C suite that are held by Women and POC’s are the diversity officer and/ or head of HR, head of marketing and about 50% of the time general Counsel. Usually an Asian CIO/ head of technology otherwise a white dude.

      If you really want to see how little has changed, pull up 25 Fortune 500 companies and see how many fit this mold.

      And I guarantee other than the tech guy, none of the others are making what the CFO or head of sales or any of the other white males are.

      • Margo says:

        Truth!!!! I give it up to the women and POC in those roles who at least have a seat at the table, but it’s very tough. And if they do move on or are pushed out, the replacement is often someone who looks like the rest of the team. Frustrating!

  35. Murphy says:

    I wonder what she has to say about Nora O’Donnell, who has been much more successful as CBS Evening anchor. .

    • Angelica Schuyler says:

      Me too. I really like Nora O’Donnell as an evening anchor. She presents a serious persona and doesn’t even try that perky, “I’m so cute” nonsense. Katie’s schtick did not work at all as an evening anchor.

  36. FluglyBear says:

    I was a big Jane Paley fan and was upset they replaced her with Deborah N. And then Katie Couric came on and seemed so disingenuous I just didn’t buy her ‘“oh, I’m so nice and perky’ persona. Where do they find these women ‘journalists’ with their Jimmy Choos and legs up to my boobs. I’d rather listen to Anderson or Ronan. But the news division’s turned into ‘entertainment’ in the 90s and that drove a lot of bad change. I’d rather do six month with Martha Stewart vs Katie ‘cutie’ Curic. Ughhhhhhhh…..

  37. Stan says:

    I used to interview celebrities for a magazine about their travel experiences. Hands down, the worst celebrity I encountered was Katie Couric. Not only was she awful but her assistants were obnoxious. We always knew what we were in for when the assistants were allowed to be rude and disrespectful to the writers. Katie Couric is truly awful.

  38. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    I’ve always thought she was a major bitch, and now she admits it. Props I guess? I mean she solidified what I’ve always known and took away any need to further roll my eyes at her. So she’s a mature bitch. Yay.

  39. Savannah says:

    Her sweet girl attitude always turned me off and now I know why. I love Debra Norville!

  40. thaisajs says:

    Maybe it’s because I used to be in media and have friends who have gone on to be on cable news, but what Couric is describing here is pretty common. There’s always someone thinner, prettier and younger around the corner. Women who make it to the top jobs in broadcast news fight like hell to stay there.

    I’m not saying any of this is good and I’m not defending it. But from these excerpts, it sounds like she’s just being very honest about what it’s like to be in the broadcast news industry.

  41. Ann says:

    Ugh, I had a rather toxic female mentor of sorts at my first job as a lawyer. She was a senior associate and she just seemed out to get me. And it wasn’t that she expected me to work hard, because I had always done that and was more than willing to. It was that she seemed to deliberately pile on unnecessary things just to see if I’d crack, and she offered no good advice or real mentorship. After I chose to leave some of the associates who had also worked with her (male and female) said she’d driven me out, which was partly true. It wasn’t the right job for me, but she sure didn’t help.

  42. damejudi says:

    My sister has interacted with Couric over the years and had stories about how mean she was to her first husband, Jay. Sister was shocked at the grieving-widow-colon-cancer-crusader stuff after his death.

    When Couric was dating Tom Werner, my sister and her family shared a box at a Red Sox game on more than one occasion. Said Couric was extremely unpleasant, every time.

  43. Callie says:

    I worked at Gap Kids years ago when I was in college and she would shop the sale rack at our location for her kids; her check wasn’t approved when it was processed for authorization. She threw the biggest fit, screaming she had over $200,000 in her account and had my friend in tears over it. She is not a nice person.

  44. nina says:

    Never liked her. When she pulled that stunt on Denzel she confirmed her assholery for me. She needs to go away already.

  45. Flying Fish says:

    Couric not only hates women, she hates black men as well.

  46. Onomo says:

    I keep a running list of celebs who snarked on Meghan Markle on Instagram and I think she and Sarah Michelle Gellar were constantly egging on Gary Janetti when he posted about her.

    She tries to seem like an instagram cool kid and snark everywhere but it is honestly a bad look for a journalist to do so on her official profile.

    • Tangerinetree says:

      So she gave an exclusive to the Fail, unnecessarily rudely commented about Harry from years ago, and was gunning for Meghan through trashy Janetti? Duly noted.
      Update: I just researched the Denzel interview-smh. What is with her and Ellen Pompeo? The arrogance.

  47. L4Frimaire says:

    She is pissing off a lot of people. Ashleigh Banfield called her out and Black Twitter is reminding us of how she shaded Denzel Washington. I also remember how mean the press around Norville was at the time and she was mom-shamed for nursing and taking leave. Also she seems to be defending Matt Lauer. The swipe at Martha Stewart seems unnecessarily spiteful as well ( I love Martha’s Dutch Baby pancake recipe). Anyway, she’s had these little revelations of her unpleasantness leaking here and there for years, and now it’s all in one place.

  48. Ari says:

    Thank you for saying if the DailyMail spin is to be believed!!!! This is one of those stories where I think they have most of the words right but miss part of the meaning. First, I think what Katie is saying about not helping other women is predominantly about on-air personalities. I know many women directors, producers, writers and others who worked with her at WRC/NBC in DC and loved her and think they owe their careers to her. If she said she didn’t mentor any women, I think many would dispute that. However, at the time most women who were in her trajectory were not lifting other women up in regards to being on air in Network News. The reason why was there were few women spots and the atmosphere was misogynistic; you would be training your replacement. It was for survival. Plus most men in the higher positions openly said and I’ll quote a news director when I worked in Network News, “women have a shelf life of 2-3 years on air then they sag and get fat and it’s time to find another hotter one.” Just an aside he said it in front of me and I think he thought he was being good cause he didn’t curse. Oh back in the day. I hope the actual book puts it in context and she doesn’t sound proud of the fact she tried so hard to control her turf. This was and probably still is a case of where the system needs to change first in order for others to feel comfortable to help other people and not stay in your cocoon.

    Second as far as Deborah Norville, she had internal rumor baggage that came with her. Some of the usual crap but more nicely put Deborah was thought to be hired not cause she was a great journalist or earned it, but because she was a pretty young face. I heard she was really green and didn’t understand a lot when she came to Today, and a fair amount of people were upset about Jane being fired. Which she was by the way, Bad combination. Katie isn’t wrong either Deborah is really attractive to this day, and from a marketing standpoint I see her point. Whose perfect and gorgeous at 7am. Women didn’t want to see that, and the men watching obviously cared less about whether a host was attractive than the news directors.

    Finally, I know so many people who Martha Stewart didn’t get along with, Katie’s comments don’t surprise me in the least. Just imagine doing a shoot with Martha. All the nit picky things she tells people to do at a dinner party really make a shoot hard. She is definitely hard to work with in that aspect.

    I’m curious how this book really is. Cause Katie doesn’t usually burn bridges, but maybe she doesn’t care anymore. Honestly though Deborah, Martha, Prince Harry-who admitted he drank to self medicate his grief in the Apple show, and definitely Epstein and Prince Andrew are easy pickings. I want some other stuff. Gumbel had some great rumors in the day and others. Could be a great book.

  49. NotSoSocialButterfly says:

    The misogyny and (for KC) the internalized misogyny of the day in plain sight. I wonder if she ever apologizes for it in the book, or thinks her confessions are sufficient. She’d do best to sprinkle in some hindsight and acknowledge how she now sees she was an active participant in a toxic & misogynistic environment.

  50. canichangemyname? says:

    I’m not particularly bothered by any of the excerpts here, tbh. She’s spilling her tea and these are just little clips. Hopefully over the years, she’s grown and learned. But I have to be honest, I’m not sure I’d be thrilled at the idea of mentoring my replacement either. It’s a thin line to walk in some situations. I don’t think I’ll buy it, but I’m sure I’ll check it out when it hits the library. I honestly don’t have any big opinions on her one way or the other – it’s been forever since I’ve seen her. I’ve never watched morning shows, I’m just not a morning show person lol

  51. Monica says:

    This tea is old and stale.

    • canichangemyname says:

      Well, I think that’s part of the point of a memoir – it’s old. It’s not meant to be current. Just from these excerpts, I’m still withholding judgment. She was deep into television journalism when I was a teenage, back when people were mad at Hillary Clinton for keeping her maiden name as her middle name and not baking cookies. I’m interested in her experiences.

  52. lena horne says:

    Way back in the day as a young sales rep on the road-i would watch Jane Pauley in the mornings when i was at a hotel .I liked her and hated Deborah Norville. Then Katie came and I liked her , then her husband died and she was billing herself as the plain chick, When he passed, she started trying to get really stylish and the men she dated Hollywood. She just seemed like such a fake and I switched to GMA.

  53. Well Wisher says:

    Katie confirmed the information from an article in New York Magazine, it was published as an exclusive as she was in negotiations with NBC for the last time. She was being presented as brutal towards the younger staff, by undercutting their self confidence. She was triggered by the way they dressed, as it would seem unbecoming if she dressed as they did due to her age.
    The said article was responsible for her going to CBS to do the news, because she claimed at that time NBC did not intervened to stop it from being published. Apparently they made the right decision.

  54. Annetommy says:

    Neither of the women bosses I worked for had any interest in mentoring women. They had a couple of favourites who they indulged, and then went out of their way to be unpleasant and obstructive to some very competent women. They were both pretty terrible all round. Maybe I’ve just been unlucky.

  55. Florencia says:

    I think I”ll withhold my judgment on her/her statements until the book actually comes out and we can see the context of these anecdotes . It’s very possible she’s admitting to them while saying she terribly regrets them, not sure why anyone would take The Mail’s assessment as gospel given their blatant misogyny in so many other contexts.

  56. Rebel says:

    KC is a phony and always has been a bitch. She was in a position to stand up and bring other women along, but didn’t. Don’t blame men for her self serving attitude. She was out for herself and associated with any person that she could get benefit from including sex perverts. KC is a “has been” and this ugly book she wrote about herself will not make her relevant. Good riddance to ugly KC.

  57. Jack says:

    Let’s be honest Katie Couric doesn’t do o anything that doesn’t benefit Katie Couric whether it’s having a colonoscopy to pretend that she’s promoting cancer prevention or having dinner with human trafficking pedophiles like Jeffrey Epstein.

    Katie questioned who Diane Sawyer had to “blow” to get an interview. The better question is who did Katie Couric “blow” to stay on the Today Show for so long. I’m sure the list is long and noteworthy.