Zelda Perkins and Rowena Chiu

This flow follows two colleagues from a 1998 crisis and restrictive settlement to separate paths through silence, solidarity, and disclosure.

increasingBearing stren­gth in each eventdecreasing

A Colleague Seeks Help

A Colleague Seeks Help The Venice trip Zelda Perkins and Rowena Chiu worked together in the London office and traveled with Weinstein to the Venice Film Festival. Perkins had warned Chiu to be careful around him. A protective response After Chiu described an alleged assault, Perkins confronted Weinstein and stood with her colleague. The two resigned together, with Perkins describing herself as Chiu’s shield.

A Settlement Imposed

A Settlement Imposed No criminal route offered The women’s lawyers advised that the case would be difficult without physical evidence or a police report. They were directed toward a financial settlement rather than the public action they had expected. Demands and restrictions Perkins sought workplace safeguards, but the final agreement paid each woman and imposed extensive confidentiality. Their attempt to act together became a legal arrangement that separated them from their own story.

Different Ways to Endure

Different Ways to Endure Chiu returns Unable to explain her abrupt departure to prospective employers, Chiu returned to Miramax in a different role. She later described depression and suicide attempts before leaving the company for good. Perkins leaves the industry Perkins could not make the settlement’s treatment plan work and eventually left film work. Both women carried the effects privately, unable to speak freely even to people close to them.

The Reporter’s Approach

The Reporter’s Approach Separate disclosures Jodi Kantor interviewed Perkins in London while another attempt to reach Chiu led to an awkward conversation with Chiu’s husband. Neither woman knew the full extent of the other’s account. Protection through distance The reporting could not simply bring the women together. Their confidentiality agreements and personal fears meant that the journalists had to keep sources separate while seeking corroboration.

A Room for Conversation

A Room for Conversation Meeting again Perkins and Chiu attended a gathering of women who had figured in the reporting. They were finally able to see one another in a setting where their shared history could be discussed. Chiu chooses disclosure After listening to the others, Chiu decided to go on the record. Perkins’s earlier solidarity had helped her survive the original crisis; years later, the group’s support helped her reclaim the story.

September 1998

October 1998

1999 to the early 2000s

Summer 2017

January to February 2019