What do you think?
Rate this book
Unspeakable Things: Silence, Shame, and the Stories We Choose to Believe
A powerful and personal examination of our most persistent and dangerous misunderstandings, myths and stereotypes about sexual harassment and assault
In 2017, Brooke Nevils made a confidential HR complaint about one of the most powerful and familiar faces in media. Twenty-four hours later, the highest paid morning news anchor in history was fired, stunning millions of Americans in one of the MeToo era’s defining stories. Demanding answers—and the intimate details of the most personal and painful humiliation of her life—the press soon discovered her identity.
But hers was not the kind of black-and-white story the media knew how to tell. There’d been no explicit threats. She hadn’t screamed, fought, or gone to the police. Instead, she returned to her abuser again and again in a frantic attempt to “fix” an impossible situation that threatened her livelihood and the people closest to her. Yet as MeToo unfolded, Brooke learned that messy stories like hers were far from the exception, and that nearly everything she’d believed about sexual harassment and assault—and how victims react to it—was wrong. She began a yearslong effort to confront and understand her own experience, not simply as a woman reckoning with her past, but as a journalist confronting the critical questions that MeToo asked but ultimately left unanswered.
Through groundbreaking interviews with leading clinicians, forensic professionals, attorneys, and frontline researchers, Unspeakable Things challenges our understanding of consent, power, and the lingering, often misunderstood effects of trauma and shame. Despite its rarefied setting at the height of fame, power, and American media, Brooke’s story serves as a textbook example of an all-too-common scenario that continues to devastate lives and enable abusers. This book is a powerful re-examination of everything we think we know, the start to a new conversation, and—for anyone who has ever felt ashamed, hopeless, alone, and afraid—a light in the dark.
In 2017, Brooke Nevils made a confidential HR complaint about one of the most powerful and familiar faces in media. Twenty-four hours later, the highest paid morning news anchor in history was fired, stunning millions of Americans in one of the MeToo era’s defining stories. Demanding answers—and the intimate details of the most personal and painful humiliation of her life—the press soon discovered her identity.
But hers was not the kind of black-and-white story the media knew how to tell. There’d been no explicit threats. She hadn’t screamed, fought, or gone to the police. Instead, she returned to her abuser again and again in a frantic attempt to “fix” an impossible situation that threatened her livelihood and the people closest to her. Yet as MeToo unfolded, Brooke learned that messy stories like hers were far from the exception, and that nearly everything she’d believed about sexual harassment and assault—and how victims react to it—was wrong. She began a yearslong effort to confront and understand her own experience, not simply as a woman reckoning with her past, but as a journalist confronting the critical questions that MeToo asked but ultimately left unanswered.
Through groundbreaking interviews with leading clinicians, forensic professionals, attorneys, and frontline researchers, Unspeakable Things challenges our understanding of consent, power, and the lingering, often misunderstood effects of trauma and shame. Despite its rarefied setting at the height of fame, power, and American media, Brooke’s story serves as a textbook example of an all-too-common scenario that continues to devastate lives and enable abusers. This book is a powerful re-examination of everything we think we know, the start to a new conversation, and—for anyone who has ever felt ashamed, hopeless, alone, and afraid—a light in the dark.
416 pages, Hardcover
First published February 3, 2026
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 130 reviews
May 19, 2026
"The book you are holding in your hands is my survivor mission. It's an attempt at restitution for my failures as a journalist. It's an act of atonement for my complicity in Matt [Lauer's] abuses, and to those I hurt. More than all of that, it is a mother's desperate, determined effort to do all that she can to ensure that none of this ever happens to her children, or anyone else's. It has consumed years of my life, and just for the mere possibility of change, it has been worth it." -- on page 282
In 2014 Brooke Nevils was in her late 20's, a member of the production staff for NBC's Today, a morning TV talk/news series that has been on the air since 1952. While overseas during the show's coverage of the Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia she relates that she was sexually assaulted by the popular and highly paid lead anchor of the show, and said behavior continued over the next two years after they had returned home to the U.S. She reported the offenses to the network in 2017 - with soon numerous other women at NBC also alleging similar experiences - causing an abrupt cancellation of the anchor's $20 million-a-year employment contract (although I believe no legal proceedings were initiated and/or determined as of 2026). Ms Nevils now documents her traumatic experiences in the memoir Unspeakable Things, an excellent examination of how a young or junior employee can become trapped in a psychologically and/or physically abusive situation. However, she ambitiously also speaks with various attorneys, physicians, researchers and other professionals in a sort of larger scientific and legal overview about the on-going or even 'open secret' issues of sexual harassment / assault in the American workplace. Although it feels disingenuous to review this work, I found her frank narrative to be equally alarming, illuminating, and (perhaps most of all) informative.
In 2014 Brooke Nevils was in her late 20's, a member of the production staff for NBC's Today, a morning TV talk/news series that has been on the air since 1952. While overseas during the show's coverage of the Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia she relates that she was sexually assaulted by the popular and highly paid lead anchor of the show, and said behavior continued over the next two years after they had returned home to the U.S. She reported the offenses to the network in 2017 - with soon numerous other women at NBC also alleging similar experiences - causing an abrupt cancellation of the anchor's $20 million-a-year employment contract (although I believe no legal proceedings were initiated and/or determined as of 2026). Ms Nevils now documents her traumatic experiences in the memoir Unspeakable Things, an excellent examination of how a young or junior employee can become trapped in a psychologically and/or physically abusive situation. However, she ambitiously also speaks with various attorneys, physicians, researchers and other professionals in a sort of larger scientific and legal overview about the on-going or even 'open secret' issues of sexual harassment / assault in the American workplace. Although it feels disingenuous to review this work, I found her frank narrative to be equally alarming, illuminating, and (perhaps most of all) informative.
February 4, 2026
Dear Matt Lauer,
I hope you spend your remaining years paralyzed by shame and an overwhelming sense of self pity and regret for your actions. I hope your 3 children read this book and recoil in disgust from it. I hope someday men like you no longer exist.
Sincerely,
Audiobook Listener
I hope you spend your remaining years paralyzed by shame and an overwhelming sense of self pity and regret for your actions. I hope your 3 children read this book and recoil in disgust from it. I hope someday men like you no longer exist.
Sincerely,
Audiobook Listener
June 9, 2026
Heartbreaking memoir of woman whose accusation of sexual assaults led to the firing of Today Show anchor Matt Lauer. But its also about the culture at NBC and other organizations that allow men like him in power to get away with it and people just looking the other way. She herself admits she was a part of it and how she blamed herself and why many women do so to protect their jobs, career and relationships. More complicated is why many victims like her still return to their abuser. She interviews several assault experts to try to understand why.
February 7, 2026
Rare is a 5 star rating from me. This memoir deserved it, brave, authentic, informative, well researched. I highly recommend.
February 8, 2026
So much to take away from this book. First, if you have a daughter, do yourself a favor and read this. What happened to Brooke Nevils is not the entirety of this book. It is more about understanding what sexual assault and sexual harassment are and how that trauma is life long. It is rarely "textbook rape". You always want to say "why didn't they just leave?", "why didn't they report it sooner?". It is so easy for us to judge until you are in that situation yourself. Second, rich and powerful men that take advantage of any "weaker" female - whether it be a news anchor, coach, teacher, business owner, actor - whoever, I really hope there is a hot place in hell for these people. It is hard not to grow my rage when reading books like this when Epstein is in the news almost daily.
Third, these are some quotes that had the biggest impact on me:
1)"Why should the own-ness be on women to navigate men's advances, and not on men to stop making them?" - because "boys will be boys", right? Are we just to excuse these men because they cannot control their impulses? The entitlement of these powerful men is maddening. (And, honestly - its not always powerful men).
2) "Again and again Matt's argument isn't an assertion of innocence, but a deflection of blame".
3) "Anyone who chooses to hold a position of power is accountable for not abusing those who have less power. Period. Desire and attraction have nothing to do with it. As it stands today, we leave victims alone and ashamed."
Highly recommend.
Third, these are some quotes that had the biggest impact on me:
1)"Why should the own-ness be on women to navigate men's advances, and not on men to stop making them?" - because "boys will be boys", right? Are we just to excuse these men because they cannot control their impulses? The entitlement of these powerful men is maddening. (And, honestly - its not always powerful men).
2) "Again and again Matt's argument isn't an assertion of innocence, but a deflection of blame".
3) "Anyone who chooses to hold a position of power is accountable for not abusing those who have less power. Period. Desire and attraction have nothing to do with it. As it stands today, we leave victims alone and ashamed."
Highly recommend.
February 12, 2026
I think this is an important book to read. It covers the topic of consent and how it’s not as black and white as we might think. It made me question my own thoughts on the definition of sexual assault.
I wish she had focused more on her story and less on all of the legal/scientific aspects. Some is important but there was a bit too much in my opinion.
I wish she had focused more on her story and less on all of the legal/scientific aspects. Some is important but there was a bit too much in my opinion.
March 8, 2026
So well-done. This could've easily been a straightforward memoir about the author's allegations against a celebrity (NBC "Today" host Matt Lauer) — I've certainly read enough of those: a little biography, the warning signs, the assault, the aftermath, the hopeful epilogue.
This is so much better. The author reports on her own case as a journalist would. She publishes Lauer's 4,000-word takedown of her allegations in full. She interviews the expert who testified for the defense in the cases of Harvey Weinstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Bill Cosby and Jerry Sandusky about the unreliability of traumatic memories.
She seems to always keep her audience in mind: She's writing to her younger self and all women in the workplace who must deal with a superstar performer whose power the employer and her colleagues depend upon. She examines every argument she's had thrown at her, usually finding an expert to talk through the angles. She is open and unflinching about her own actions.
And there's a brief but heart-wrenching passage in the epilogue when she writes about her father who has memory loss and must learn over and over for seemingly the first time about her alleged sexual assault by Lauer.
I use the word "alleged" because Lauer was never convicted but consider the facts stipulated by both sides: He's a $25 million a year celebrity journalist covering the Olympics in Russia; she's a $30,000-a-year assistant. He buys her round after round of vodka shots, asks her to come to his hotel room and then sodomizes her, covering the bed in blood. He says consensual; she says she said no repeatedly and finally relented to get out of the room.
At this point, the book delves into all the myths that surround rape and how "common sense" actions by victims are not the norm. She discusses other high-profile cases that she or Lauer worked on at NBC such as Elizabeth Smart and Bill O'Reilly. She delves into the defense arguments and testimony of prosecution witnesses in the Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby and Brock Turner cases.
I found the whole thing interesting and I learned some things, like how police interviews often conclude the victim isn't credible because she doesn't remember details like the color of the carpeting in the room where she was attacked. (She has an expert explain how trauma victims focus on more important things, generally related to their own survival.) I also think the book will help anyone who's been victimized by a powerful person by explaining the different, very common reactions of people in their shoes in a way that will dispel at least some self-doubt and self-loathing.
This is not a plucky, inspiring self-help book, though. This is tough, thoughtful journalism.
Some excerpts:
* After mentioning how Weinstein endowed a faculty chair at Rutgers in Gloria Steinem's name: When the abuser has taken great pains to make sure they are seen as a good and trustworthy person, the onus then falls on the victim to convince the world otherwise. This is a built-in advantage for the abuser that most victims can never overcome, adding to their confusion and isolation in the aftermath of the abuse.
* In a formal study of fifty offenders in her program, Valliere found that in 83 percent of cases, the people close to the offenders believed in their innocence, even when the offenders confessed or were caught in the act.
* To the media, I was either a coward if I chose to stay silent or an opportunist if I chose to speak for myself.
Even the acknowledgments are worth reading. In it, she mentions having coffee with someone who'd suffered abuse as a child. That person told her: At least the person you reported is famous, otherwise no one would care what happened to you.
Damn.
This is so much better. The author reports on her own case as a journalist would. She publishes Lauer's 4,000-word takedown of her allegations in full. She interviews the expert who testified for the defense in the cases of Harvey Weinstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Bill Cosby and Jerry Sandusky about the unreliability of traumatic memories.
She seems to always keep her audience in mind: She's writing to her younger self and all women in the workplace who must deal with a superstar performer whose power the employer and her colleagues depend upon. She examines every argument she's had thrown at her, usually finding an expert to talk through the angles. She is open and unflinching about her own actions.
And there's a brief but heart-wrenching passage in the epilogue when she writes about her father who has memory loss and must learn over and over for seemingly the first time about her alleged sexual assault by Lauer.
I use the word "alleged" because Lauer was never convicted but consider the facts stipulated by both sides: He's a $25 million a year celebrity journalist covering the Olympics in Russia; she's a $30,000-a-year assistant. He buys her round after round of vodka shots, asks her to come to his hotel room and then sodomizes her, covering the bed in blood. He says consensual; she says she said no repeatedly and finally relented to get out of the room.
At this point, the book delves into all the myths that surround rape and how "common sense" actions by victims are not the norm. She discusses other high-profile cases that she or Lauer worked on at NBC such as Elizabeth Smart and Bill O'Reilly. She delves into the defense arguments and testimony of prosecution witnesses in the Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby and Brock Turner cases.
I found the whole thing interesting and I learned some things, like how police interviews often conclude the victim isn't credible because she doesn't remember details like the color of the carpeting in the room where she was attacked. (She has an expert explain how trauma victims focus on more important things, generally related to their own survival.) I also think the book will help anyone who's been victimized by a powerful person by explaining the different, very common reactions of people in their shoes in a way that will dispel at least some self-doubt and self-loathing.
This is not a plucky, inspiring self-help book, though. This is tough, thoughtful journalism.
Some excerpts:
* After mentioning how Weinstein endowed a faculty chair at Rutgers in Gloria Steinem's name: When the abuser has taken great pains to make sure they are seen as a good and trustworthy person, the onus then falls on the victim to convince the world otherwise. This is a built-in advantage for the abuser that most victims can never overcome, adding to their confusion and isolation in the aftermath of the abuse.
* In a formal study of fifty offenders in her program, Valliere found that in 83 percent of cases, the people close to the offenders believed in their innocence, even when the offenders confessed or were caught in the act.
* To the media, I was either a coward if I chose to stay silent or an opportunist if I chose to speak for myself.
Even the acknowledgments are worth reading. In it, she mentions having coffee with someone who'd suffered abuse as a child. That person told her: At least the person you reported is famous, otherwise no one would care what happened to you.
Damn.
Read
February 10, 2026I don’t know how to rate this one. It’s very well written and has important messages. However, halfway through reading I learned that the author is married to a political consultant who helped Trump get re-elected (you may recognize Trump from the Epstein Files or famously “grabbing women by the p*****). The author being okay with that makes her messaging on sexual assault (aside from her own experiences, I have no place to judge those accounts) feel ignorant or inauthentic or both.
February 17, 2026
I am thankful for her courage to report and then share her story as difficult as that must have been (and will always be). The research from psychological experts provided depth and insight into the complexity of these issues. My only critique of the book was more around organization and the need for some editing to tighten up some redundancy. It could have been about half the length and still made all the same important points.
February 5, 2026
Extremely tough but important read.
May 13, 2026
Combination of audio (Libby) and physical (hardcover, owned). I dare you to read the introduction to this book and NOT feel compelled to read the rest. The author's voice is thoughtful, genuinely invested in trying to understand how the narratives we tell ourselves can be both truthful and misleading. Her journalistic instincts are what make this book so valuable for our present time. She asks the reader to consider their own biases, shares example after example of how victims of sexual assault struggle to not only understand what happened to them but how to convince others that the assault was not their fault.
This is not a story of "what Matt Lauer did to me"-- that's not a story I'm interested in, quite frankly. This is an investigation into the stories we tell ourselves. Filled with interviews and research, I could not devour this book fast enough. The subject matter is difficult, and it will make you a bit ragey, but it will also fill you with a sense of determination to help others see the world with more perspective.
I really don't understand why this book isn't being talked about more. It makes me wonder if there's some unspoken pact amongst media outlets to not promote a book by the woman who got Matt Lauer fired. It is definitely going to be one of my top reads in 2026. I want everyone to read this book.
This is not a story of "what Matt Lauer did to me"-- that's not a story I'm interested in, quite frankly. This is an investigation into the stories we tell ourselves. Filled with interviews and research, I could not devour this book fast enough. The subject matter is difficult, and it will make you a bit ragey, but it will also fill you with a sense of determination to help others see the world with more perspective.
I really don't understand why this book isn't being talked about more. It makes me wonder if there's some unspoken pact amongst media outlets to not promote a book by the woman who got Matt Lauer fired. It is definitely going to be one of my top reads in 2026. I want everyone to read this book.
July 10, 2026
A heartbreaking, important book.
April 20, 2026
13.39 hours on Audible. Shocking but excellent read.
March 25, 2026
My biggest takeaway from this book is that Matt Lauer is the biggest jerk (as if I didn’t know that already).
February 7, 2026
I am inspired by Brooke’s complete commitment to sharing a painful and highly personal story with the world. Matt counted on her silence and she did something exceptional by shattering it. I’m not crazy about books where theory is integrated into a memoir. I skipped around most of that and stuck with her story. Both of her parents would be so proud of her. She has absolutely nothing to be ashamed about and everything to share to help others who have been through similar experiences. I have nothing but admiration for her. She may have been a convenience to him at the time, but now she is of great inconvenience to Matt to the delight of all of us reading it. Way to go, Brooke! Enjoy your hard-won beautiful life and thank you.
May 3, 2026
This is not an easy book to read. It is graphic, brutal, sometimes shocking, but also really thought provoking. If you have ever wondered why women, especially young women, fail to come forward and report sexual abuse, you should read this book. If you are a young woman in college or just entering the workforce, you should read this book. If you know anyone that fits into one of those categories, you should read this book. The author doesn’t shy away from her own mistakes, and there is a lot to learn from them. We really need to figure out a way to normalize coming forward. I am not saying automatically believe every accusation, but every accusation needs to be thoroughly investigated and acted upon. In many of these situations, there is a huge power imbalance between the perpetrator and the victim, and a reluctance to kill the golden goose. There is a cost to coming forward that few people consider. AS the author explained, “to claim to be a victim of sexual assault is unfortunately to invite a lifetime of suspicion and disbelief. It is to lose countless relationships, and pay a terrible price. And I can tell you, years after being outed in the press, that walking through the world knowing that a substantial portion of it will always see you as a liar, takes a strange and exacting toll. You come to expect constant and automatic disbelief, even in the most mundane parts of life.” We really need to flip that narrative.
June 4, 2026
I am SO angry about this story. I suppose I should give it 5 ⭐️ because of that. All I am going to say is this: there are usually 3 sides to every story, his, hers and the truth. Only God knows the REAL story. But I don’t believe all of this to be the “truth”.
March 17, 2026
This book prompted profound moments of clarity and understanding. I listened to the audio book and lost track of the times I rewound to hear something again. Some parts explained actions and behaviors I didn't know were textbook. I bought 2 copies to give to women I love.
April 2, 2026
I hope this book finally silences every single asshole who thinks Matt Lauer was treated unfairly and deserves to have a career in journalism again.
March 5, 2026
This book made me reflect on how often people in power abuse those below them. This young woman was sexually harassed by Matt Lauer. She suffered in silence for years. Even when she spoke out she still suffered. Victims are often not believed. Trauma can often destroy someone if they don’t seek help and support.
Power goes to some peoples heads and they don’t care who they hurt.
Power goes to some peoples heads and they don’t care who they hurt.
February 11, 2026
What bothered me most about this story (at the time) was how news journalists everywhere were exploiting the author for sensationalism. It was most certainly a very traumatizing experience for this woman.
What was evident at the time Lauer was finally being exposed, was how no one seemed to care about Nevils' career. A bunch of people tossed money at her and talked about the bad, bad men but what about her career? She was forced to give up her dreams and goals and change job industries. Why? Not a single hero stepped up and said "Hey Brooke, this wasn't something you should have experienced. Let's make it up to you by helping you achieve the goals you had when you first entered broadcasting." No one helped her. That industry is filled with a lot of sick individuals, 99% of the sickos are men suffering from delusions of grandeur.
What was evident at the time Lauer was finally being exposed, was how no one seemed to care about Nevils' career. A bunch of people tossed money at her and talked about the bad, bad men but what about her career? She was forced to give up her dreams and goals and change job industries. Why? Not a single hero stepped up and said "Hey Brooke, this wasn't something you should have experienced. Let's make it up to you by helping you achieve the goals you had when you first entered broadcasting." No one helped her. That industry is filled with a lot of sick individuals, 99% of the sickos are men suffering from delusions of grandeur.
May 26, 2026
Verbose and overwritten attempt by a supposedly objective "journalist" to prove that she was assaulted by Matt Lauer by using outside sources and the comparable experiences of others. It tries hard to convince us but ultimately fails due to the author's incredible bias and overstated interpretations.
The book is totally subjective in its manipulation of data and others' stories. In her lengthy explanation of what happened in that hotel room the first time with the highly-paid TV morning show host, she proves herself guilty and accidentally relieves Lauer of wrongdoing for everything the two did other than maybe pushing for an uncomfortable love-making position.
The follow-up to the initial event is even more murky--within ten days she initiates contact with Lauer "to talk" and voluntarily goes to his apartment where they get physical again, admittedly without her objection. But twelve years after the event she's now filtering it as being non-consensual despite her own evidence proving otherwise. Nevils claims the newsman "should have" thought or done things differently, but again it's understandable how Lauer is reading her acceptance and responses, though the guy really is a creep who takes advantage of situations with a naive younger coworker.
Nevils' heart is in the right place, and she says she wants to do a serious examination of how women can be mistreated by men in the workplace, but the author is dishonest in her definitions, stereotyping and drawing conclusions. This book shows how warped a TV news employee can be in accumulating all sorts of information to prove her pre-conceived conclusions while refusing to see the other side that may change the results of her story (though she claims she tries to understand the other viewpoints).
This happens every day at every new outlet in modern America, from the biggest to the smallest, and in this overlong book it stands out as an obvious abuse of her own journalistic power to mislead her audience, even if her honest attempt was to be fair.
The biggest concern is that Nevils believes (and claims it to be factually correct) that ANY dating or physical interactions between a boss and subordinate are "always sexual misconduct...that's an abuse of power too." Every single time? Yes, that's what she claims, no matter how innocent or flirty or mutually consensual.
She goes out of her way to try to support her point but she's simply delusional. There's nothing wrong, morally or legally (unless it breaks company policy), when an office relationship leads to friendly banter and sharing a meal and dating and eventually enjoying each other physically. It all can be very innocent and acceptable. It shouldn't be automatically assumed to be "misconduct" nor misinterpreted decades later by an upset scorned woman to assuage shame.
History is filled with couples that met in the workplace and often one has a position of power. It doesn't always have to turn out to be bad nor be interpreted negatively. There are many people in America who are running around today because their parents met at work, so to claim it's always "misconduct" and "abuse" is bigoted woke stereotyping.
It's how the two employees interact and how the powerholder uses his or her seniority that decides whether it's appropriate or not. But for Nevils to make a blank statement that ALL cases are wrong is absurd and makes her lack credibility.
Then there's the little problem that Matt Lauer was NOT Nevils "boss," a word that she uses for him at times in the text. She worked for the other anchor Meredith Vieira (not for both anchors) and he was clearly Nevils' co-worker. Did he make over 250 times as much money as she made? Yes. Would she as Vieira's assistant be expected to respect his requests if asked? Sure. Does she use the pages to try to explain why she considered him so powerful that she couldn't say no to his requests? Yes again, but without total success.
"The anchor of Today isn't just any coworker but a leader, the moral and professional ballast of the show." Despite Lauer's star power and influence over the entire operations, her illogical reasoning that he was her "boss" despite not having that title is her excusing away her own bad choices and rewriting factual history.
I won't rehash specifics here, but a credible argument can be made by Matt Lauer that he was responding to Nevils' flirting. He didn't mislead her or force to do anything she didn't want to do, other than possibly how he entered her body a few times (and even that is murky, since she admits she didn't fight him but went along with it).
The author indicts herself admitting that in the initial night together it all started when she patted the seat next to her, inviting him to sit close despite her typically distant attitude, that he said out loud, "Why are you suddenly being so friendly?" That's followed up with her voluntarily going to his hotel room where nothing happens, sending him cutesy texts when she returns to her room a few minutes later, and her going right back to his place when he texts her an "all-inclusive" offer to return.
Any normal guy would see the formerly unemotional Nevils as flirting and willing to have fun.
This is all difficult to discern because the author's oversharing often muddies her case against him. She on one hand claims she said "no" to a specific act in the middle of some hookups but she had initiated contact for their private time together, went along with his subtle suggestions, and her friends said she was "glowing" after some of her encounters. Lauer interpreted her as being like any other booty call who might have said "no" to an act in the middle of passion but just needed a little convincing that it was okay.
That's not to say Matt Lauer isn't guilty of his own dumb decisions and inability to keep it in his pants. Nor does it negate that he allegedly harmed many other women who worked at NBC or directly under his supervision. And it doesn't mean Nevils doesn't have legitimate long-term emotional harm from the incident.
But in this case, he was not Nevils' boss, he did not initiate the initial encounters, she not only continued to have physical interaction with him but initiated contacts after the first physical interaction, and he merely took advantage of what she appeared to be offering. An objective person can read her story and conclude that she was a starstruck innocent who both was flattered by Lauer's attention and then afterwards felt shame after she gave in. That same objectivity can see Matt Lauer as a disgusting pig who considers himself a playboy and loves getting away with secret office flings. Someone needed to stop him, but this may not be the best case to base it on.
I understand her view after reading the book, and it represents so many women who chose to do things (or go along with things) they later became ashamed of, taking their anger out on men who often were just responding to cues they thought were consensual (and this author admits it could be perceived that she gave a type of consent, though she now wants to argue over that word). But to use over 350 pages to rationalize why she shouldn't be held accountable for any of her choices but he should, by bending definitions and bringing up all sorts of one-sided research or others' stories, just proves that the writer isn't really a fair objective journalist after all.
And admittedly so. What does she state at the start of the book? "I question whether any journalist who does not live in a vacuum can ever offer a truly unbiased perspective...It's fair to ask whether I, or any reporter, can objectively cover issues that affect them so personally."
Then there are the two major flaws in the author that she fails to address adequately.
--1) She grossly overdrinks alcohol, and did so that first night before she was in bed with Lauer. How can her recollection of so many details be precise when she was, as she admits, almost drunk (even using the word "intoxicated" to describe herself that evening (though she was sharp enough to send a thank you email to the newsman)? She spends a dozen pages near the end of the book defending her drinking through research studies, believe it or not, that seem like a desperate attempt to get rid of the guilt of her decisions. But her drunken times don't explain her sober periods where she was initiating texts to Lauer to get together again.
--2) She lies. Often to her colleagues in order to cover up what's really going on. Even after Lauer is fired, she "skirts the truth" in order to protect her identity. She has plenty of excuses for doing it, mostly to cover her shame, but this is supposed to be a truth-telling "journalist" who often pushed others to reveal their shame publicly. It's more than disturbing when the last chapter of the book is subtitled "honest liars." She asks a supposed expert "How can anyone be believed?" due to our faulty memories and receives the response, "That's up to society to figure out." Society gets to decide what is true as a group exercise? Well we know that will fail since most people base truth on biased reports from media employees like Nevils!
If this book proves anything it's that you can't trust anyone who calls themself a journalist to actually be telling you the truth anymore. They may report "their truth," but not "the truth."
I'm a longtime trained journalist who believes in the old-fashioned fundamentals of the free speech profession as they used to be practiced (long before the CNN- and MSNow-style of lop-sided subjective #fakenews that permeates all the media today). Journalists can attempt to be unbiased in presenting facts in the proper context without personal opinions included that could sway the consumer's interpretation. Often it's done with just the choice of a word or the inclusion of one story while not including a story that would contradict. In this woke era, most storytellers (like Nevils) start with a lop-sided viewpoint they want to proclaim to the community, then attempt to accumulate data and stories to support their own biased beliefs.
Brooke Nevils fails to successfully provide an objective story in this overlong attempt to convict Matt Lauer, and as the text goes on she becomes almost hysterical in her mental reimaging of what occurred between the two. After Lauer is fired she admits to being in a psych ward and at one point after her identity was released to the public says, "I was a woman losing my mind."
Based on the facts she presents in this case, Lauer would probably be acquitted of her claims that their so-called "affair" was actual abuse. The author has tried to give different sides but ultimately turns the sad events of her life into blame-shifting and rewriting history based on a "power figure" that she consented to have a physical relationship with. Again, that doesn't mean Lauer is blameless, only that this diatribe is a perfect example of what's wrong when a story is told subjectively with a goal to propagandize and get back at someone you dislike. As we know, most media do that today with the U.S. President instead of just stating the facts and letting consumers decide.
I'd welcome someone else to write a better book that would try to prove Lauer to be guilty of taking advantage of women who did not go along with his advances. The unspeakable things that happened need to be voiced publicly, but often when that's done objective readers may choose to believe that the other side has legitimate points and the writer failed to prove her biased conclusions.
The book is totally subjective in its manipulation of data and others' stories. In her lengthy explanation of what happened in that hotel room the first time with the highly-paid TV morning show host, she proves herself guilty and accidentally relieves Lauer of wrongdoing for everything the two did other than maybe pushing for an uncomfortable love-making position.
The follow-up to the initial event is even more murky--within ten days she initiates contact with Lauer "to talk" and voluntarily goes to his apartment where they get physical again, admittedly without her objection. But twelve years after the event she's now filtering it as being non-consensual despite her own evidence proving otherwise. Nevils claims the newsman "should have" thought or done things differently, but again it's understandable how Lauer is reading her acceptance and responses, though the guy really is a creep who takes advantage of situations with a naive younger coworker.
Nevils' heart is in the right place, and she says she wants to do a serious examination of how women can be mistreated by men in the workplace, but the author is dishonest in her definitions, stereotyping and drawing conclusions. This book shows how warped a TV news employee can be in accumulating all sorts of information to prove her pre-conceived conclusions while refusing to see the other side that may change the results of her story (though she claims she tries to understand the other viewpoints).
This happens every day at every new outlet in modern America, from the biggest to the smallest, and in this overlong book it stands out as an obvious abuse of her own journalistic power to mislead her audience, even if her honest attempt was to be fair.
The biggest concern is that Nevils believes (and claims it to be factually correct) that ANY dating or physical interactions between a boss and subordinate are "always sexual misconduct...that's an abuse of power too." Every single time? Yes, that's what she claims, no matter how innocent or flirty or mutually consensual.
She goes out of her way to try to support her point but she's simply delusional. There's nothing wrong, morally or legally (unless it breaks company policy), when an office relationship leads to friendly banter and sharing a meal and dating and eventually enjoying each other physically. It all can be very innocent and acceptable. It shouldn't be automatically assumed to be "misconduct" nor misinterpreted decades later by an upset scorned woman to assuage shame.
History is filled with couples that met in the workplace and often one has a position of power. It doesn't always have to turn out to be bad nor be interpreted negatively. There are many people in America who are running around today because their parents met at work, so to claim it's always "misconduct" and "abuse" is bigoted woke stereotyping.
It's how the two employees interact and how the powerholder uses his or her seniority that decides whether it's appropriate or not. But for Nevils to make a blank statement that ALL cases are wrong is absurd and makes her lack credibility.
Then there's the little problem that Matt Lauer was NOT Nevils "boss," a word that she uses for him at times in the text. She worked for the other anchor Meredith Vieira (not for both anchors) and he was clearly Nevils' co-worker. Did he make over 250 times as much money as she made? Yes. Would she as Vieira's assistant be expected to respect his requests if asked? Sure. Does she use the pages to try to explain why she considered him so powerful that she couldn't say no to his requests? Yes again, but without total success.
"The anchor of Today isn't just any coworker but a leader, the moral and professional ballast of the show." Despite Lauer's star power and influence over the entire operations, her illogical reasoning that he was her "boss" despite not having that title is her excusing away her own bad choices and rewriting factual history.
I won't rehash specifics here, but a credible argument can be made by Matt Lauer that he was responding to Nevils' flirting. He didn't mislead her or force to do anything she didn't want to do, other than possibly how he entered her body a few times (and even that is murky, since she admits she didn't fight him but went along with it).
The author indicts herself admitting that in the initial night together it all started when she patted the seat next to her, inviting him to sit close despite her typically distant attitude, that he said out loud, "Why are you suddenly being so friendly?" That's followed up with her voluntarily going to his hotel room where nothing happens, sending him cutesy texts when she returns to her room a few minutes later, and her going right back to his place when he texts her an "all-inclusive" offer to return.
Any normal guy would see the formerly unemotional Nevils as flirting and willing to have fun.
This is all difficult to discern because the author's oversharing often muddies her case against him. She on one hand claims she said "no" to a specific act in the middle of some hookups but she had initiated contact for their private time together, went along with his subtle suggestions, and her friends said she was "glowing" after some of her encounters. Lauer interpreted her as being like any other booty call who might have said "no" to an act in the middle of passion but just needed a little convincing that it was okay.
That's not to say Matt Lauer isn't guilty of his own dumb decisions and inability to keep it in his pants. Nor does it negate that he allegedly harmed many other women who worked at NBC or directly under his supervision. And it doesn't mean Nevils doesn't have legitimate long-term emotional harm from the incident.
But in this case, he was not Nevils' boss, he did not initiate the initial encounters, she not only continued to have physical interaction with him but initiated contacts after the first physical interaction, and he merely took advantage of what she appeared to be offering. An objective person can read her story and conclude that she was a starstruck innocent who both was flattered by Lauer's attention and then afterwards felt shame after she gave in. That same objectivity can see Matt Lauer as a disgusting pig who considers himself a playboy and loves getting away with secret office flings. Someone needed to stop him, but this may not be the best case to base it on.
I understand her view after reading the book, and it represents so many women who chose to do things (or go along with things) they later became ashamed of, taking their anger out on men who often were just responding to cues they thought were consensual (and this author admits it could be perceived that she gave a type of consent, though she now wants to argue over that word). But to use over 350 pages to rationalize why she shouldn't be held accountable for any of her choices but he should, by bending definitions and bringing up all sorts of one-sided research or others' stories, just proves that the writer isn't really a fair objective journalist after all.
And admittedly so. What does she state at the start of the book? "I question whether any journalist who does not live in a vacuum can ever offer a truly unbiased perspective...It's fair to ask whether I, or any reporter, can objectively cover issues that affect them so personally."
Then there are the two major flaws in the author that she fails to address adequately.
--1) She grossly overdrinks alcohol, and did so that first night before she was in bed with Lauer. How can her recollection of so many details be precise when she was, as she admits, almost drunk (even using the word "intoxicated" to describe herself that evening (though she was sharp enough to send a thank you email to the newsman)? She spends a dozen pages near the end of the book defending her drinking through research studies, believe it or not, that seem like a desperate attempt to get rid of the guilt of her decisions. But her drunken times don't explain her sober periods where she was initiating texts to Lauer to get together again.
--2) She lies. Often to her colleagues in order to cover up what's really going on. Even after Lauer is fired, she "skirts the truth" in order to protect her identity. She has plenty of excuses for doing it, mostly to cover her shame, but this is supposed to be a truth-telling "journalist" who often pushed others to reveal their shame publicly. It's more than disturbing when the last chapter of the book is subtitled "honest liars." She asks a supposed expert "How can anyone be believed?" due to our faulty memories and receives the response, "That's up to society to figure out." Society gets to decide what is true as a group exercise? Well we know that will fail since most people base truth on biased reports from media employees like Nevils!
If this book proves anything it's that you can't trust anyone who calls themself a journalist to actually be telling you the truth anymore. They may report "their truth," but not "the truth."
I'm a longtime trained journalist who believes in the old-fashioned fundamentals of the free speech profession as they used to be practiced (long before the CNN- and MSNow-style of lop-sided subjective #fakenews that permeates all the media today). Journalists can attempt to be unbiased in presenting facts in the proper context without personal opinions included that could sway the consumer's interpretation. Often it's done with just the choice of a word or the inclusion of one story while not including a story that would contradict. In this woke era, most storytellers (like Nevils) start with a lop-sided viewpoint they want to proclaim to the community, then attempt to accumulate data and stories to support their own biased beliefs.
Brooke Nevils fails to successfully provide an objective story in this overlong attempt to convict Matt Lauer, and as the text goes on she becomes almost hysterical in her mental reimaging of what occurred between the two. After Lauer is fired she admits to being in a psych ward and at one point after her identity was released to the public says, "I was a woman losing my mind."
Based on the facts she presents in this case, Lauer would probably be acquitted of her claims that their so-called "affair" was actual abuse. The author has tried to give different sides but ultimately turns the sad events of her life into blame-shifting and rewriting history based on a "power figure" that she consented to have a physical relationship with. Again, that doesn't mean Lauer is blameless, only that this diatribe is a perfect example of what's wrong when a story is told subjectively with a goal to propagandize and get back at someone you dislike. As we know, most media do that today with the U.S. President instead of just stating the facts and letting consumers decide.
I'd welcome someone else to write a better book that would try to prove Lauer to be guilty of taking advantage of women who did not go along with his advances. The unspeakable things that happened need to be voiced publicly, but often when that's done objective readers may choose to believe that the other side has legitimate points and the writer failed to prove her biased conclusions.
March 11, 2026
Important topic and the author does an excellent job explaining how men abuse their power and manipulate women. However, there were many times the author got bogged down in the legalities and too many statistics and failed to keep my focus or attention.
April 2, 2026
I have specific criteria for giving a book five stars. It has to be more than just engaging and compelling while I’m reading — it also has to stay with me, popping into my thoughts even when I’m not reading. It must offer some new knowledge, information, or perspective I hadn’t considered before. And most importantly, it has to contribute something positive or healing to the world in a broader sense, leaving the world a little better than it found it. This book met every single one of those standards beautifully.
Despite the title, this is not just a big, sad, awful story. It’s a story of inspiration, bravery, and speaking truth to power in the most important way — a true David and Goliath tale. I felt deep sadness for the author’s suffering, yet immense admiration for her incredible courage. I’m so grateful she was willing to share her experience with such honesty and vulnerability.
Her story is powerful, thought-provoking, and ultimately uplifting. It’s one I’ll be thinking about for a long time. Highly recommended.
Despite the title, this is not just a big, sad, awful story. It’s a story of inspiration, bravery, and speaking truth to power in the most important way — a true David and Goliath tale. I felt deep sadness for the author’s suffering, yet immense admiration for her incredible courage. I’m so grateful she was willing to share her experience with such honesty and vulnerability.
Her story is powerful, thought-provoking, and ultimately uplifting. It’s one I’ll be thinking about for a long time. Highly recommended.
May 18, 2026
4 Star, audio, a bit long for my taste. What happened to the author was horrible. I found myself frustrated with her about halfway through this book. My frustration is about my personal feelings regarding how to fight back and not letting someone take your power away despite how unfair the situation is. She does a wonderful job explaining trauma and the responses that follow. I learned so so much from this book. I feel bad judging her from my perspective because unlike me, not everyone has the ‘the fuck you will’ fight in them. This book was very educational.
February 23, 2026
Brooke Nevils has such a sharp style of reporting, I am so thankful for her words. I appreciate her footnotes, this for me is a reference guide and I am recommending it to everyone. I am looking forward to more books by her!
March 3, 2026
Truthfully I bought this book for more gossipy reasons. What happened between Brooke and Matt? I quickly realized that this was far more than a “tell-all”. It was educational but in a relatable manner. It was well worth the read and makes you rethink everything you thought you knew.
April 24, 2026
Brooke’s story is so clear, articulate, & well researched. Thank you 🫶🏻
April 26, 2026
This deserves more than 5 stars. Read this book
Read
July 9, 2026Really eye opening on how power can be used to abuse.
No rating - I don’t feel I should rate someone’s story. I will say I thought about this one quite a bit and had to talk about it.
No rating - I don’t feel I should rate someone’s story. I will say I thought about this one quite a bit and had to talk about it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 130 reviews