Phillip Schofield #11

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
Chita said:
I think an injunction is wrong if it covers up grooming.
Someone's reputation or value to their employer should take second place to a child being groomed - even if the child was a "precocious" one who wanted a TV career.

The secrecy makes our imaginations run riot and its quite possible what is being covered up isn't what we imagine it to be - and it makes you wonder if, sometimes it would be better in the long run to just let the Truth come out, see what the public reaction is and then try your damage limitation.


They do say "the truth will out" - so here we are waiting.
Click to expand...
couldn't agree more lol
 
Sindra Montelle said:
I have always said,never think that Holly is some doe eyed lamb who will flee if and when he does...I know shes not as wholesome as her "act" but working with someone like that has to be draining,since he came out she has really seemed like someone with an added spring in her step,I bet shes dying for him to be gone secretly....
Click to expand...
As in Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer!
 
da1sycha1n said:
Yip I totally agree with you or could it possibly be the advertising sponsorship pulled out? Who usually sponsors the how to spend it well series? (it’s not a programme I watch so I wouldnt know)
Click to expand...
I've worked in commercial TV sales, campaign planning and scheduling. Never heard of a programme ever being pulled because a sponsor pulled out. Sponsorship is bonus cash for broadcasters. If you pulled your sponsorship you would incur a financial penalty, which would be very large, possibly 100%, that close to transmission. Reason being is the closer it is to transmission, the less time you've left the broadcaster to sell the sponsorship to anyone else because of the time required to do a deal, brief creative, get creative made and delivered ready for transmission.
From the broadcaster point of view, they would just absorb the sponsorship time back into normal airtime and fill with paid spots or internal promos. There would be no need to pull a series.
 
Oh Really? said:
I've worked in commercial TV sales, campaign planning and scheduling. Never heard of a programme ever being pulled because a sponsor pulled out. Sponsorship is bonus cash for broadcasters. If you pulled your sponsorship you would incur a financial penalty, which would be very large, possibly 100%, that close to transmission. Reason being is the closer it is to transmission, the less time you've left the broadcaster to sell the sponsorship to anyone else because of the time required to do a deal, brief creative, get creative made and delivered ready for transmission.
From the broadcaster point of view, they would just absorb the sponsorship time back into normal airtime and fill with paid spots or internal promos. There would be no need to pull a series.
Click to expand...
Thank you for explaining,
 
Just seen these on mattylopezmusic twitter...
 

Attachments

  • 4539487E-66AB-43C5-A1E3-7027CA3254AE.png
    4539487E-66AB-43C5-A1E3-7027CA3254AE.png
    27.9 KB · Views: 531
  • 2F34A100-4163-4247-97C7-B8689FFAC812.png
    2F34A100-4163-4247-97C7-B8689FFAC812.png
    53.9 KB · Views: 527
Harrigan said:
www.express.co.uk

Phillip Schofield fury: Host demands answers over coronavirus

THIS MORNING continued with hosts Phillip Schofield and Holly Willoughby who were joined live in the studio by Prime Minister Boris Johnson to talk about coronavirus. However, viewers saw Phillip lose his temper with the Prime Minister as he demanded answers about how the government is planning...
www.express.co.uk www.express.co.uk

i didn’t see this story yesterday but how can Phil ask those questions in his situation?
Click to expand...
I like to look at it in another way and read between the lines!
as in...PS fury = the general public are furious with regards to what’s possibly going on re grooming etc
We’re not stupid = the public not stupid we can suss that there is a cover up etc
 
Sassylass68 said:
www.rsvplive.ie

Phillip Schofield has a 'secret Twitter account' to spy on people he blocks

The star said like 'everyone else', he has a temper
www.rsvplive.ie www.rsvplive.ie
Just found this. Proof that PS is sly, very sly.
Click to expand...
Nadia that was originally on Celebs Go Dating was sacked for using secret Twitter accounts to insult her colleague Eden wasn’t she? I appreciate she was trolling, and Smug McSmugface used them for spying, but yet again he’s not pulled up on this weird behaviour and she’s sacked (she was on E4 rather than ITV though)
 
Sindra Montelle said:
I have always said,never think that Holly is some doe eyed lamb who will flee if and when he does...I know shes not as wholesome as her "act" but working with someone like that has to be draining,since he came out she has really seemed like someone with an added spring in her step,I bet shes dying for him to be gone secretly....
Click to expand...
I think a lot of the staff and crew on TM are a bit scared of him, I remember him interviewing a religious couple who believe homosexuality was a sin etc. It was on in the background and I only homed in on the interview because of his tone, it was very angry and scathing. This was before his coming out. I actually sat open mouth listening to the venom pouring out of him at this couple. Regardless of the subject he really should have been more impartial, he wasn’t at all professional. I’m pretty certain some of the crew must be reading Tattle and cheering, they’ve probably been under the cosh by smug on many occasions. He tells anyone who will listen how great he gets on with HW, the sister he never had etc as he knows full well she is vastly more popular than he is. He wants to be seen as this impossible to replace double act and that she will leave if he is pushed. I doubt that very much.
 
Regarding the people at This Morning covering up.........

I think they have to be very careful about what they say.
It's easy for us to say they are covering up - but suspecting something is very different from having proof of something, so they can't accuse someone of something serious like grooming without any proof.

The smart move would be to be patient and gather evidence.
 
Bobs888 said:
Just seen these on mattylopezmusic twitter...
Click to expand...


These are very interesting indeed. Good luck Matty Lopez Music.
Twitter is quite the place, isn't it????


And that 'Steeple Times' is also interesting.
Wonder who is behind that and if they are outside the UK?

I need to look at Twitter.

Jucyberry said:
Omg, is anyone watching Gogglebox. Pip's getting a right battering..
Click to expand...
bugger - havent got the telly on.
Need to watch on plus 1
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top