9 and 10 News Anchors Edge Out Amid Firings Over Harassment Allegations

In a sweeping shift reshaping broadcast journalism, two veteran anchors at 9 and 10 News have been dismissed following formal internal investigations into harassment claims. The firings mark a critical moment for the networks, underscoring growing scrutiny over workplace conduct in media environments long viewed as bastions of professionalism. While details remain under non-disclosure agreements, credible reports confirm the departures stem from allegations of ongoing hostile behavior, triggering industry-wide conversations about accountability and response protocols.

Sources close to the matter indicate the investigations began after anonymous reports of toxic interactions surfaced during the third quarter. Internal HR reviews reportedly documented patterns of inappropriate email exchanges, unwelcome comments in shared workspaces, and a breach of tone expected from senior journalists. According to a senior network executive—who requested anonymity—“We took the allegations seriously, launched a full review, and concluded that behavior inconsistent with our core values and professional standards occurred.” The decision to remove both anchors reflects not only the seriousness of the claims but the networks’ commitment to eradicate persistent workplace misconduct.

The Allegations: Inside the Claims That Sparked the Falls

complainants, primarily fellow staff members, described a pattern of repeated harassment that created a hostile atmosphere. Memos and recorded communications reportedly reveal instances where one anchor made demeaning remarks about gender and work exhaustiveness, while the other allegedly retaliated with dismissive or condescending behavior toward reports. One employee noted, “It wasn’t isolated—it was systemic.

Whitened behavior normalized discomfort, and leadership was slow to act.” While the network declined to name individuals or disclose the exact incidents, internal investigation transcripts cited “a culture of reluctance to confront conduct” that allowed issues to fester. The allegations extend beyond direct verbal abuse. Audience feedback and union representatives highlighted concerns over body language, exclusionary practices at editorial meetings, and inconsistent response to harassment reports.

One former producer described an environment where speaking up was met with deflection rather than resolution. “When concerns were raised, they were swept under the rug—no follow-up, no accountability,” said a source familiar with production culture. The firings underscore a broader reckoning within broadcast news.

In recent years, harassment claims against journalists have intensified, with high-profile exits at major networks exposing vulnerabilities in oversight and response. For 9 and 10 News, the moves signal proactive damage control to restore credibility amid public skepticism. Media analysts emphasize that protecting staff and ensuring psychological safety are not just ethical obligations—they are foundational to reliable journalism.

“This isn’t merely a personnel change,” stated a veteran communications consultant. “It’s an institutional reckoning. When leadership reacts swiftly to harassment, it sends a clear message that no one is above the code.

That commitment is essential to rebuilding public trust in news reporting.” In the days following the announcements, 9 and 10 News have issued a public statement reaffirming their zero-tolerance policy for harassment and launching a third-party audit of internal HR practices. The audit will examine reporting mechanisms, training protocols, and escalation pathways, with findings set for release by year-end. The networks have also pledged enhanced transparency, committing to share aggregated data on complaints and resolutions moving forward.

An industry-wide response has begun, with journalism unions calling the firings a corrective step while urging systemic fixes. The episode renews calls for mandatory ethics training across newsrooms and stronger protections for whistleblowers—measures seen as necessary to prevent future crises. For anchors whose tenures ended amid this storm, the absence highlights the personal costs of institutional failure.

Yet for audiences, the firings present an opportunity—one where accountability, when enforced, restores confidence in the very institutions tasked with informing the public. In an era where trust in media faces constant test, the response to harassment may well define the future of broadcast journalism’s integrity.