Presenters Redundant following Live Channel Closure

[argeybargey]

Well Argey at least I'm predictable if nothing else!

OK I'll make a promise now just for you Argey - I promise I will not post anything negative for a period of one week from now! Just wait until then though, I'll have loads to say

6 days 23 hours and 59 minutes to go ..............

Perhaps I should open a book on that my little ray of sunshine? :wink2:

 

[vegasplayer]

Meeshoo - sorry to jump in feet first, but have you really thought through your argument?

All that Graham and others are saying is that it is respectful to loyal customers who have a real sense of friendship with presenters for THE CHANNEL to let them know if they disappear.

It happens so much, and people really do care and worry for their favourite presenters. Not sure that that is remotely personal at all is it?

Those presenters that choose can make public their future plans, but don't dismiss the majority unless you have good reason. 99 out of 100 people here will want to know the news, so surely that is no harm to anyone.

Good luck to both of them, I agree with others that they would not be my first choice to go either.

 

[Graham]

Graham - some people prefer to keep what is happening in their private lives, private. Shouldn't we respect that? I've met Drew and found him to be lovely but I wouldn't expect him to tell me what was happening in his life. I have absolutely no right to ask or demand that. I don't even expect my friends to do that! If people want to tell us things, they will. If they don't, we should respect their privacy.

I understand your point but I believe we are overstepping the mark by demanding to be told. It would be nice BUT if the people involved don't want to tell us, so be it! I won't lose respect for either of them. It's none of my business. I'm sad to see them go and wish others had gone before them, but they have their reasons and I respect that.

IMO it's intrusive and impertinent to demand explanations about somebody's private life. Their roles were in the public domain but anything to do with them personally is absolutely none of our business - so for example, should we be told how much they earn? How many days annual leave they get? No. It's private between them and the Company and I feel the same way about their redundancy. I'm sorry to disagree but I feel very strongly that there is a boundary between what should be public and private.

I'm not going to stop watching GemsTV because of this. Sorry to buck the trend and voice a different opinion but I feel very very strongly about this - perhaps you've guessed? :grin:

Thats the forum we all have different opinioons.

With presenters leaving I will always dig for any information, personally I believe this is the News that readers want to know. If I just had news of whats coming up this weekend etc I would just give up.

In no way am I overstepping the mark just finding out information for the readers. I stick by what I said it would not have hurt Drew and Rod to come on here, but that is just my opinion.

If they don't like it then they should get out of television.

 

[argeybargey]

Meesh - I ain't asking to see their bank accounts or even why they left, though I would have been interested, my gripe is that these presenters are encouraged to make themselves known to us as "friends" and even "family" in some cases which personally I loathe. Some small interest in their welfare must then be expected and I think that as they enter our homes it is merely good manners to say goodbye (either personally or announcement if you don't want a fuss). xxxx

 

[Greenie]

i personally think that it is strange they are supposed to be doing so well but their clearance goes on and on to MAKE ROOM FOR NEW STOCK their sales must have been really crap to have so much old stock that the clearance has gone on so long

It does make you wonder though about the future of GemsTV. Firstly it was the loss of the channel on Freeview, then the closure of Gems TV2, presenters being made redundant, and the seemingly endless clearance sale. I do so hope that they're not going under and wish them every success for the future.

 

[suzyglam]

Meesh - I ain't asking to see their bank accounts or even why they left, though I would have been interested, my gripe is that these presenters are encouraged to make themselves known to us as "friends" and even "family" in some cases which personally I loathe. Some small interest in their welfare must then be expected and I think that as they enter our homes it is merely good manners to say goodbye (either personally or announcement if you don't want a fuss). xxxx

yes, its odd how they seem to think u wouldnt notice them gone, even if they had said that some were leaving they didnt have to say who... least ud have had an idea. Having said that alot of channels seem to do it, the sit up channels seem to have revolving doors for thier presenters lol.

 

[suzyglam]

It does make you wonder though about the future of GemsTV. Firstly it was the loss of the channel on Freeview, then the closure of Gems TV2, presenters being made redundant, and the seemingly endless clearance sale. I do so hope that they're not going under and wish them every success for the future.

yes, and is it possible to be 'fed up' of this meltdown.. what I have noticed is that alot of times they drooped the word clearance and are just meltdown, technically that could mean anything.. similar to promoting something as a special offer or bargain, doesnt mean u have nessarily altered price.. im wondering if they are using such terms to entice customers to think they are getting knock down prices, cos lately i dont think they have been.

 

[argeybargey]

What about your TPs Suzy?

I think the routine hours have had some excellent bargains, it's just the specials like rainbow sapphire and rubellite that have been a bit pricey. The word "clearance" implies nothing legally, but "sale" is the dangerous one which is why they never use it. xxx

 

[Marble]

Thats the forum we all have different opinioons.

With presenters leaving I will always dig for any information, personally I believe this is the News that readers want to know. If I just had news of whats coming up this weekend etc I would just give up.

In no way am I overstepping the mark just finding out information for the readers. I stick by what I said it would not have hurt Drew and Rod to come on here, but that is just my opinion.

If they don't like it then they should get out of television.

What an interesting topic. I don't see it as any more intrusive than the speculation going on about Lee Clarke & Polyanna Woodward and poking around on Facebook really!

What is going on with a channel's staff is probably more relevant, in a way, because it could be an indication of troubled times at the channel. It's not as though Graham is rummaging through their bins!!

 

[Sammi]

I rather suspect that the presenters will have had to sign a non-disclosure clause as part of their redundancy package. What they say in their private lives is one thing, but to actively put out a statement in a public forum is probably professional suicide.

 

[Marble]

Undoubtedly, Sammi. I got the impression that Graham was trying to find out what was going on at Gems TV and their staff, and felt that maybe Rod & Drew could have just popped by to say cheerio ...

I'm not that bothered either way if presenters (or the channels themselves) do pop by to say hello, but appreciate Graham doing his ST.com roving reporter bit. It's interesting.

 

[Graham]

I rather suspect that the presenters will have had to sign a non-disclosure clause as part of their redundancy package. What they say in their private lives is one thing, but to actively put out a statement in a public forum is probably professional suicide.

Expect your right paid "Gardening Leave" maybe I am just old school, but personally I would not sign something that stops me saying thank you and if this is then Gems are silly to promote the presenters Twitter accounts as they is more personal interaction with the viewer.

 

[Klosblue]

What an interesting topic. I don't see it as any more intrusive than the speculation going on about Lee Clarke & Polyanna Woodward and poking around on Facebook really!

What is going on with a channel's staff is probably more relevant, in a way, because it could be an indication of troubled times at the channel. It's not as though Graham is rummaging through their bins!!

Well excuse me but I hardly think you could call me looking people up on Facebook "poking about"! Nor could you call it "rummaging through their bins". These two are in the public eye and Pollyanna even came on here to post so I am prefectly entitled to look them up just as anyone could look up someone in the public eye. Would it have been different if I'd looked up Cheryl Cole or Simon Cowell? No it wouldn't because they are public figures due to their choice of occupation so if they don't like their dirty linen washed in public then they shouldn't be in the public eye.

I take umbrage at your remark particularly when you were quite happy to post on my thread:-
QUOTE - Wishing Polyanna & Lee much happiness. x

We just need to clarify the Derek situation now ... (tee hee hee)


Well it just so happens that I know the "Derek situation" but have no intentions of posting it on here to be accused of "poking about"!

 

[Marble]

KB ... I think you have taken what I said completely the wrong way. Sorry if I didn't make myself very clear. I enjoyed the speculating thread ... it was a bit of fun, and I do wish Polyanna & Lee well - I liked them both very much on TJC - they seem like lovely people. I just didn't see the talk of redundancies as any worse than the other discussion.

Again, sorry that you have taken umbrage

 

[Klosblue]

Thanks Marble. I obviously did take it the wrong way. I'm a wee bit touchy today for various reasons so apologies for my reply too.

 

[Meeshoo]

Whoa!

Exactly WHEN did this topic become an issue that I was having with Graham? Amazing! Actually I believe that Graham has a vested interest and is entitled to ask questions as this site promotes shopping telly - that doesn't mean that GemsTV are obliged to answer but I can understand Graham wanting to at least approach them. Also, if he gets whiff of a channel having difficulties and maybe closure then of course he should dig around. I would never suggest otherwise.

What I will add is that look how many ridiculous posts there have now been speculating that GemsTV is going to close - whenever redundancies are announced this happens. No wonder GemsTV are reluctant to tell us what's happening!

HOWEVER ..............

I took exception to a forum poster emailing GemsTV demanding to know what was going on! To me that is not only bad manners but incredibly naive.

In terms of UK Law, GemsTV can confirm they are making/have made redundancies but cannot, without the express permission of the individuals, name the people involved. If those people don't want it to be public knowledge then GemsTV would get sued if they did name them. For some people, redundancy is a huge shock, leads to financial pressures and can be an incredibly stressful time so why the hell you think they should think about us during that time is beyond me. I know some of these people personally and certainly WOULD NEVER expect them to say anything at all unless they chose to do so.

If those individuals want us to be told, then so be it. I find it incredulous that people on here think they have a "right" to be said goodbye to or be told somebody is leaving!

 

[Meeshoo]

Meeshoo - sorry to jump in feet first, but have you really thought through your argument?

All that Graham and others are saying is that it is respectful to loyal customers who have a real sense of friendship with presenters for THE CHANNEL to let them know if they disappear.

It happens so much, and people really do care and worry for their favourite presenters. Not sure that that is remotely personal at all is it?

Those presenters that choose can make public their future plans, but don't dismiss the majority unless you have good reason. 99 out of 100 people here will want to know the news, so surely that is no harm to anyone.

Good luck to both of them, I agree with others that they would not be my first choice to go either.

I suggest you read my post above. I have clearly thought through my argument thank you and happen to believe that just "wanting to know" and being "entitled to know" are two different issues.

 

[argeybargey]

I understand exactly what you say Meesh, and in the main agree, privacy and good manners are two different animals though. I don't think we have the "right" to any personal details but I do think some sort of goodbye is simple good manners. I understand that a presenter may not wish to do this themselves, and that the reasons may be private to both parties, but I still think we have the "right" to expect the courtesy of what could have been a very simple statement advising viewers that a presenter has "left" - no more, no less. Any speculation by us after that is simply that and/or nosiness, but as you say not a "right".

However, we are human beings and there's nothing like a bit of very loud silence to get the old wheels in the head moving in all directions. For myself, if I am told someone is leaving/has left my first thought is that they have moved on to better themselves and am therefore much less likely to dwell on the matter.

"Anyone" who voluntarily uses the celebrity wagon has to expect a two way journey to some small extent. They "make" us interested in them and cannot cry when some become (shall we say) over-enthusiastic. It has always been so, except once upon a time these people were generally respected by the public (although exploited by their studios which of course is another matter entirely), along with health workers, teachers, etc.

Sorry for the ramble. Hopefully you'll get what I'm trying to say. xxxxxxxx

 

[Meeshoo]

Argey I do understand your very well made points. I guess I'm more old school than I thought and believe that privacy should be just that - irrespective of whether one is in the public eye or not UNLESS that person chooses to make something public and then it's fair game!

Now, ask me whether I believe a wrong doing by a company should be exposed and for me there's no issue. It's a yes. If a company was going down the tubes (one perhaps featured on st.com) would I want to find out about it as soon as I could - absolutely yes! For me, these are different issues. They're not specific to an individual!

I certainly do understand that courtesy is something completely different but, and I speak wholly for myself, I don't feel strongly about any of the presenters to really care. I don't feel emotionally attached to them and whilst I am sad to see a good presenter leave, it's normally because the good ones are in short supply! I have to say that it's a testament to how GemsTV gets things soooooo right when people react so incredibly strongly when somebody leaves - their marketing department are definitely doing something right!

 

[argeybargey]

Argey I do understand your very well made points. I guess I'm more old school than I thought and believe that privacy should be just that - irrespective of whether one is in the public eye or not UNLESS that person chooses to make something public and then it's fair game!

Now, ask me whether I believe a wrong doing by a company should be exposed and for me there's no issue. It's a yes. If a company was going down the tubes (one perhaps featured on st.com) would I want to find out about it as soon as I could - absolutely yes! For me, these are different issues. They're not specific to an individual!

I certainly do understand that courtesy is something completely different but, and I speak wholly for myself, I don't feel strongly about any of the presenters to really care. I don't feel emotionally attached to them and whilst I am sad to see a good presenter leave, it's normally because the good ones are in short supply! I have to say that it's a testament to how GemsTV gets things soooooo right when people react so incredibly strongly when somebody leaves - their marketing department are definitely doing something right!

<a href="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fwww.smileycentral.com%252F%253Fpartner%253DZSzeb008%255FZNxpt484YYGB%2526i%253D36%252F36%255F11%255F6%2526feat%253Dprof/page.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_11_6.gif" alt="SmileyCentral.com" border="0"><img border="0" src="http://plugin.smileycentral.com/http%253A%252F%252Fimgfarm%252Ecom%252Fimages%252Fnocache%252Ftr%252Ffw%252Fsmiley%252Fsocial%252Egif%253Fi%253D36%252F36_11_6%2526uiv%253D3.0/image.gif"></a> As they say "only no publicity is bad publicity" xxxxxx