You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Why does that make any difference to the way she’s treated by Greg Wallace?
Utterly nothing. Which is why it was odd that GW was pointed out as being talentless. As well as bald. And old.
I couldn't understand why these attributes were brought into the discussion.
Is his behaviour not enough?
Is his skill level and shiny head needed as a character tie-breaker?
It’s a spent conviction she wouldn’t have to disclose in normal circumstances anyway. I couldn’t care if it was a Labour or Tory minister.
Louise Haigh disagrees and claims that she should have disclosed it:
Ms Haigh admitted that not disclosing this to her employer at the time, the insurance giant Aviva, was a "mistake"
https://news.sky.com/story/louise-haighs-resignation-prompts-internal-labour-blame-game-13263058
It would appear that the real reason she has been forced to resign is that she isn't right-wing enough for the acting prime minister Morgan McSweeney. And she was too close to a rival of his.
Louise Haigh disagrees and claims that she should have disclosed it:
In the article you linked Louise Haigh says not disclosing to Aviva that she'd found the missing phone was a mistake. She's not referring to disclosing the conviction.
Ironically they got a policy for almost everything.
In the light of the allegations those are probably more honoured in the breach than to the letter!
This morning someone has handed Mr Wallace a shovel and told him to keep digging his way out of the hole he's in!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k8kryvdjno
"I've been doing MasterChef for 20 years - amateur, professional and Celebrity MasterChef - and I think in that time I have worked with over 4,000 contestants of all different ages, all different backgrounds, all walks of life," Wallace told his more than 200,000 followers.
"And apparently now, I'm reading in the paper, there's been 13 complaints in that time.
I’ve been working in various jobs for 30 years and in that time have worked with thousands of people of all different ages, all different backgrounds, all walks of life. There’s been zero complaints in that time. If there had been 13 I would think the problem was with me.
The old saying... 'stop digging'. What a plonker.
Another example of these complaints being made 10 years too late. As for that shy retiring Rod getting upset because his wife cooked food that was inedible and potentially poisonous not get upset. The phrase horse and stable door springs to mind.
The fact that the middle aged, middle class women - mostly with secure careers that will not be impacted by having made a complaint on their 'CV' are the only ones making public complaints is obviously a cognitive leap too far for Mr Wallace.
As for Mr Rhodes, who there have been a number of references to both here and in the press as being the cheese to Mr Wallace's chalk - take that cheese with a good pinch of salt. A family member (oddly employed whilst an incredibly good looking young lady - see a pattern? Draw your own conclusions - yes, you are thinking on the right lines.) has a very different take on the man.
It’s a spent conviction she wouldn’t have to disclose in normal circumstances anyway. I couldn’t care if it was a Labour or Tory minister.
Presumably no one can be rehabilitated and learn from stupid things they’ve done in the past?
Under normal circumstances, no. But this isn't normal circumstances. The fact she failed to disclose it just says she can't be trusted. If she'd declared it then there would be no story other than a spent conviction that she owned.
If she was convicted of one offence then she wasn’t “done over multiple allegations”
There were several allegations, one of which she was prosecuted over.
She was under no obligation, morally or otherwise, to declare a spent conviction
Er, yes, she was. Ministerial Code. Likewise for kinks and other things that can be used to extort or blackmail.
The fact she failed to disclose it
She says she disclosed it when she was appointed to the shadow cabinet. The PM has neither confirmed nor denied her account. So you cannot say that it's a fact that she failed to disclose it.
There were several allegations, one of which she was prosecuted over.
And? Let's stick with her actual conviction rather than unsubstantiated allegations. I note that the judge felt that her crime was worthy of the lowest possible punishment.
Er, yes, she was. Ministerial Code. Likewise for kinks and other things that can be used to extort or blackmail.
She says she was only asked to disclose unspent convictions. In any case it's not relevant if she had already disclosed it to her manager.
Regardless of the above, she has resigned so then hang 'em high brigade have their wish.
Gregg and his PA heading for the Harvester this morning.
There were several allegations, one of which she was prosecuted over.
Good, so not "done over multiple allegations" then. "Done over one", to use your terminology.
Er, yes, she was. Ministerial Code. Likewise for kinks and other things that can be used to extort or blackmail.
If you are familiar with the Ministerial Code it'd be great if you would point me to the clause where it covers the obligation to declare spent criminal convictions. I'm not aware of one.
This threads got really confusing. It's supposed to be about the fat bald talentless misogynistic greengrocer Gregg Wallace, why are people posting about the labour MP that resigned??
I might have missed the crossover, but why are people blithering on about Haigh on thread about Wallace when she's got her own thread?
This is what happens when you cross the streams......
Anyway, Hugh Fearnley-Whatshisname has suggested that Wallace should be concentrating on listening rather than talking at the moment, which sounded like a pretty epic telling off by his standards.
This threads got really confusing. It’s supposed to be about the fat bald talentless misogynistic greengrocer Gregg Wallace, why are people posting about the labour MP that resigned??
Guilty as charged, sorry. I was just about to post something similar bemoaning how this thread had shot off on more tangents than usual even for STW and then I got suckered into joining in.
If you are familiar with the Ministerial Code it’d be great if you would point me to the clause where it covers the obligation to declare spent criminal convictions. I’m not aware of one.
I'd imagine 1.4 b
Integrity: Holders of public office
must avoid placing themselves
under any obligation to people
or organisations that might try
inappropriately to influence
their work. They should not act
or take decisions in order to
gain financial or other material
benefits for themselves, their
family, or their friends. They must
declare and resolve any interests
and relationships.
Like I said before, that covers stuff that could be used to blackmail unduly influence an elected official.
But yeah crossed streams.
.
Averaging a complaint of sexual misconduct once every couple of years is nothing to be shouting about!
Who is advising this plonker?
Why don't celebs who get caught out like this ever apologise??
I mean a genuine apology rather than one of those faux "sorry if you were offended" type ones.
Because it’s an admission of guilt.
Who is advising this plonker?
He's set only to 'transmit' not 'receive'
Si King was on the box this morning being charming and chirpy.
He's probs already had the call.
Get Sean in, he's done enough voiceover for the program and thanks to Miss zeta jones knows about trifle.
Now it’s got MORE worse - a contestant has come out and said such behaviour was so rife by Gregg and others (on Masterchef) that they were made to sign an NDA.
BBC in coverup yet again, and lo! We have a rise in the TV license fee to pay for the lawyers ffs!
Is this a BBC thing though? I mean they broadcast it sure but they don’t make the show as far as I can tell. Are they actually involved in its production or do they just buy the finished product?
What’s it got to do with the bbc. They don’t make the programme or employ the presenters.
Averaging a complaint of sexual misconduct once every couple of years is nothing to be shouting about!
Ah but they are only women of a certain age so doesnt really count.
Who is advising this plonker?
Me? After being told I was being made redundant and having had a few pints to get over it.
Men like Gregg don't need advisors. Those are for leftist woke cucks. Men like Gregg tell it like it is. What you see is what you get with men like Gregg.
I'm guessing GB News will be starting a cooking segment soon. 😉
I'm only half joking. Seems like a perfect fit.
Men like Gregg don’t need advisors.
Men like Gregg need lawyers.
From the "I See You" podcast / Facebook account:
I see you, Gregg Wallace.
Phwoar! This isn’t what you were expecting, was it? This isn’t your ordinary pud. This is a hot, fresh, sweet, salty, lip-licking gobful of comeuppance. You just can’t stop sticking your spoon in it, digging deeper and deeper, despite the PR team desperately windmilling their arms just out of shot. It’s quite something, isn’t it? We’re going to have to take you straight through to the final two. HR meetings, that is.
You just can’t say anything any more, can you? Not without some uppity middle-aged woman of a certain age running off to the complaints department. Why is it always the more world-weary and financially secure ones that get offended? Why is it only the ones with established careers - who have been dealing with tedious men in the workplace for years - that are always so keen to take you down a peg or two?
It’s never the junior freelancers, or the terrified members of the public stood in front of a TV camera for the first time in their lives, melting down as they mangle a quenelle under the pressure. You distinctly remember nearly all of them laughing. So hard, in fact, that some of them still had tears in their eyes an hour later. Keep going with that pattern recognition, Gregg. You’re so close to actually getting it.
Nope, it’s gone. This isn't the time for quiet self-reflection about your own conduct! There's just one thing this situation calls for, and it’s to film a video blaming the women. That’ll deal with those nasty accusations of misogyny. It should also put to bed this silly idea that you might not know just how offensively you come across. Who needs experts in defensive comms, when you can just manifest and self-actualise your own victory in this Total PR War?
Who’d have thought it could come to this? Well, apart from Popbitch that is, who have been recording examples of your ad-libbed comic genius for posterity dating back years. It’s almost as if everyone around you has been sick of your shit for ages, quietly seething with resentment for how desperately uncomfortable you made them feel. Why not tell Popbitch, when all you want is for someone - anyone - to actually challenge the creeps on their bullshit? It’s not like BBC management were taking any of them seriously.
Every off-colour joke you’ve ever told, each of them leaping straight over that firmly established line of cheeky British daytime TV innuendo. Why go for wit, when you can leap straight into ‘every woman who hears this joke suddenly craving a scalding hot shower’ territory? So many of them, quoted in Typewriter in that double-spaced newsletter. I mean really, where’s the harm? It’s just ‘banter,’ isn’t it? A bit of slap and tickle, cheeky wink, Yakety-Sax themed cheekiness.
What does that dish remind me of? I know, it’s my aunt’s c**t! An apparent quote from you there. One that inexplicably ended up on the cutting room floor. Why, I have no idea - it’s an expertly written bit of harmlessly suggestive wordplay that could have been lifted directly out of any of the Carry On films.
I’m sure everybody on set roared with laughter that day, particularly the women. Like the time you told another contestant in front of Ulrika Johnsson that they were handling a fish ‘like a rapist attempting foreplay.’ I can’t think of a single reason why as many as one in four women wouldn’t have roared with laughter at that one.
Wasn’t that the day Monica completely coincidentally snapped a knife sharpener, the corner of one of her eyes twitching? Oh how we laughed, as that jagged spar of steel bounced and twanged across the studio floor before embedding itself in the door of a microwave. It was all just harmless fun!
But why stop there? What’s the difference between jam and jelly, Gregg? You don’t present Masterchef for twenty years just to get more than a dozen complaints of workplace harassment jellied up your arse! Wait, what do you mean I’m ‘suspended with pay pending an investigation?’ This is political correctness gone mad! Didn’t you read my column? I’m just a normal bloke!
No wonder you’re so ruffled. It’s an injustice, isn’t it? It’s classism, that’s what it is - they can’t stand the working boy for having done good. You’re being persecuted by the middle-class liberal elites, the humourless ones who can’t take a bit of harmless banter. It’s definitely not narcissism that causes you to instantly recast yourself as the wronged hero of this story. I can practically hear the word “woke” bubbling up in your throat from here.
I can feel it rising through your convulsing body, a throttled battle cry of frustrated anger that will soon erupt forth like Caesar first learning to speak. I give it a week, max, before you finally snap and grab that cattle prod, roaring “WOOOOOOKE!” across social media like every other grotesque boor that thinks it’s a magic word for excusing their bullshit.
Actually thinking about it, maybe we should drop the Caesar analogy. You shouldn’t grab the cattle prod. You’ll only end up windmilling it at an intern.
I see you, Gregg Wallace. I ****ing see you.
ITV breakfast were suggesting his next role could be as a Reform candidate given his attitudes.
Went see Paddy McGuinness last night (surprisingly good btw) and he opened with "sweating like Gregg Wallace at a WI meeting...."
I’m guessing GB News will be starting a cooking segment soon.
I'm thinking more he'll go to the US once Trump is President and join the circuit of ex-pat 'celebrity' ****ers over there.
Do we actually know his political leanings? I mean, we could probably guess, but we'd be guessing.
Do we actually know his political leanings?
Russell Brand just spat his cornflakes out at the idea of existing political leanings being more important than monetising the anti woke market.
I give it a week, max, before you finally snap and grab that cattle prod, roaring “WOOOOOOKE!” across social media like every other grotesque boor that thinks it’s a magic word for excusing their bullshit.
So true.
Bit of a less important point, but where does he get the 4000 contestants figure from?
Celebrity, professionals, amateur MasterChef. A dozen contestants a series, 1 series a year for 20 years, adds up to 720? That's a long way from 4000.
‘Battle adapted combine harvesters’ is a genius description of middle aged, middle class women.
Is that sexist or complimentary - I can’t tell.
Here Greg, have a bigger spade. You'll need it dig your hole bigger...
Celebrity, professionals, amateur MasterChef. A dozen contestants a series, 1 series a year for 20 years, adds up to 720? That’s a long way from 4000.
I also wondered this. Unless he and Torode work with the people who apply but never get to the televised stages?
Lying man lies, shock horror.
A dozen contestants a series
its way more than that. 12 is the second or third round I think
28 amateurs in 2019 a brief google reveals. Plus the celebs (12?) plus the pros (20 odd?)
I'm late to the party but I quite like master chef and always wondered why he was even there... It's not like he really adds anything of value to the show other than to potentially make it appear a bit less pretentious and a bit more accessible with his more 'working class banter'.
Coming soon to GBeebies...
Gregg Wallace and Mark Lawrenson do a road trip around good old Blighty in a Range Rover.
"My Aunt's **** and Another Miserable **** Ride Again".
The 'banter' will be epic. Not.
Awaiting leak of production company’s rushes.
I’m late to the party but I quite like master chef and always wondered why he was even there… It’s not like he really adds anything of value to the show other than to potentially make it appear a bit less pretentious and a bit more accessible with his more ‘working class banter’.
I think you've answered your own question there. He was also the common factor across all the formats (am, pro, celeb) which is an important part of the "brand". I suspect he's more recognisable and nameable by the audience than the chefs. His "cheeky chappy" persona with some vague food knowledge but not being a chef is actually probably important to the format and its commercial success. That in no way excuses him behaving like a ****, but it may go some way to explaining why producers didn't just replace him. He will actually be quite hard to replace; I'm not 100% sure that the show will survive such a big change amidst a bit of a scandal when it is a bit of a tired format now. Some producer will possibly try to bring in fresh ideas and kill the show or try to find a new Wallace, but instead of finding truely fresh meat will bring in some C list celeb - perhaps a comedian, and the show will become about them not the contestants/food.
I'm sure he'll find enough work to keep the wolves from the door, by commentating on things like chlorinated chicken, the importance of farmers to food supply, etc on GB News and even in the tabloid that are currently tearing him to pieces (their enemy is the BBC not Wallace!). The people who won't actually learn a lesson here are the producers and production company - but they are essentially complicit. Contestants and junior production staff are at a huge power disadvantage complaining against one of the judges and still a number of them complained and nothing happened: talent are easily reshuffled before they become part of the scenery.
Just need to get rid of the horrible Monica Galetti and her absurd “skills tests” now.
Just need to get rid of the horrible Monica Galetti and her absurd “skills tests” now
monica only appears on the professional version, I like the skills test and her facial expressions as people who profess to be expert chefs screw them up!
Yeah, the skills tests are my favourite thing about Masterchef the Professionals.
@supernova No mention in the post of age or class of the women. One does not poke the sleeping, hungry, potentially face-eating leopards.
I’m still trying to understand why those complaining have done so to the BBC? The BBC doesn’t make the programme or hire anyone who works on it from the presenters down to the admin assistants. Surely if you want to complain you would do so at the time and to the people responsible for the programme.
I’m still trying to understand why those complaining have done so to the BBC?
who complained to BBC and when?
ultimately the BBC spends license/tax payers money commissioning the show so I think they do have an interest in ensuring standards are upheld.
it sounds like a number of people did raise concerns with the production company and little or no action was taken. Others may not have complained at the time if:
- they were in a competition and complaining about one of the judges
- they were media production crew who are on flimsy employment arrangements
- they thought they were the only person / a one off
Just need to get rid of the horrible Monica Galetti and her absurd “skills tests” now.
Au contraire, Monica is the best thing about Masterchef.
I only (sometimes) watch the Professionals one now, and mainly for her.
Plenty of TV chefs and food-adjacent presenters out there to choose from to replace GW.
I reckon they will go for a woman of a certain age.
Plenty of TV chefs and food-adjacent presenters out there to choose from to replace GW.
Just needs a bit of sally salt and polly pepper!
I'll see your Ainsley and raise you,
I’ll see your Ainsley and raise you,
You know it's going to be Paddy McGuinness, don't you? 😀
I’m still trying to understand why those complaining have done so to the BBC? The BBC doesn’t make the programme or hire anyone who works on it from the presenters down to the admin assistants. Surely if you want to complain you would do so at the time and to the people responsible for the programme.
OK so I never worked on MasterChef, but I've seen how it could happen.
After a series or two they start to put their foot down / throw some weight around either making demands about how things are done, editorial decisions' etc. They stop asking if you'd like a cup of tea and start asking you to make them one. After 20something series they're fing unbearable. I don't know if that's an underlying part of personalities common to people who agree to be on TV, or a version of the Stanford Experiment where the power just gets to them. There's one show in particular I can't believe is still running because the star is known for making junior production staff cry, and the production company staffed it with less and less experienced people both because they weren't paying enough and because no one wanted to do it twice. My job was niche enough that I didn't have to be there very often and didn't rely on it for a paycheck so I may have eyerolled him when he went off on one, which upset him somewhat....
In that particular case there was no show without him.
I guess with longer running shows you end up in a catch 22, do you do the right thing and out them but admit you've been covering it up for 20+ series which makes you look just as bad (the Welby paradox?). Or do you keep quiet, which appealing especially to indie TV producers because there's f all new stuff being commissioned at the moment and long running shows are a cash cow that keeps the lights on.
A chat show on Friday nights and there are glasses of wine?
No, AFAIK Graham still has national treasure status but I've never worked on that sort of show.
TBH the fact I'm not going to tell you who it is shows you the problem. I've zero skin in the game anymore, but he has a mountain of cash and probably better lawyers. If he ever gets his day in the tabloids I'll happily be in the "13 other people have come forward since these allegations were made" but I'm not sticking my neck above the parapet. PopBitch have touched on it before though so maybe that time will come.
Cougar2Free Member
I’m still trying to understandYou’re not, are you.
Yes I am. Presumably you can’t explain it hence your comment.
You complain to the company that you contracted to appear in the programme with. You complain about other employees at that company. You don’t complain to a third party who neither you or the other participant have a contractual arrangement with.
Fingers crossed for Ainsley.
It'll send the "no matter what the cause I'm on the side of the anti-woke bloke" lot into an attack of the vapours that will be magnificent to behold.
It's hard to believe that, in 20 years of straying over the being an out of order prat line fairly regularly, no one ever said "Err, Gregg, that's a bit too close to the knuckle old chap". He will have had multiple opportunities to stop being a berk. There will be other former contestants out there too who were pretty pissed off about stuff he did or said and who haven't made a complaint.
It's hard to feel too much sympathy. Personally I think this probably wouldn't have ended his career if it hadn't been for his doubling-down on Instagram.
It’s hard to believe that, in 20 years of straying over the being an out of order prat line fairly regularly,
Is there any evidence beyond he said she said to support that statement. Or are you just assuming he is guilty. I have no idea if he is guilty or not. Nothing has been shared in public to substantiate either sides case hence investigations are being carried out.
You complain to the company that you contracted to appear in the programme with. You complain about other employees at that company. You don’t complain to a third party who neither you or the other participant have a contractual arrangement with.
so @chrismac do you know for sure that none of the people you claim have complained to the BBC: 1. Complained to the production company? 2. Have no contractual arrangement with the BBC? The story is not really that Wallace was out of order, it’s that the producers knew he was out of order and did nothing.
Do you think that BBC News had no right to investigate this? Because that seems to be what you are implying. Surely any journalist who hears rumours of impropriety and complaints going without action is entitled to investigate that and if there is a story to progress it. Are you confusing “spoke to a BBC journalist” with “complained to the BBC”.
Yes I am. Presumably you can’t explain it hence your comment.
TBF, when you're a poster who everyone thinks "I know exactly what their stance will be" as soon as they see the username on this kind of thread...
Then expect to be called out on stuff.
Is there any evidence beyond he said she said to support that statement. Or are you just assuming he is guilty. I have no idea if he is guilty or not. Nothing has been shared in public to substantiate either sides case hence investigations are being carried out.
QED. Thanks for making my point for me a second time.
Touché. You seem to be signed up to the guilty without any knowledge of the facts. From what I’ve read the bbc have both been spoken to as journalists and complained at as if they are responsible. I have no idea as to who version, if anyone’s, is the truth. If he is found to have done something wrong I expect to see him in court accused. I’m struggling to see why Monica or Marcus would hang around and risk thier reputations if they thought there was something wrong that could tarnish their image.
All I’m suggesting is we wait to see what the outcome of the investigations are rather than sack him and decide who should replace him before we know the facts.
Ooh wait.
Tell Ainsley to hang fire.
What about Jack Monroe?
Now that would be magnifico. The 'proper blokes' on Twunter will go into meltdown. It'd be epic.
If he is found to have done something wrong I expect to see him in court accused.
You are unlikely to end up in court for being a a complete knob, he has not been accused of stuff that would end up in court.
Not trying to derail the conversation, but struck by the number of column inches dedicated to GW, versus the almost total non-mention of Conor Mcgregor's (civil) conviction for a very serious sexual assault.
You complain to the company that you contracted to appear in the programme with. You complain about other employees at that company. You don’t complain to a third party who neither you or the other participant have a contractual arrangement with.
@chrismac honestly, depending on where in the food chain you were then you probably would go to the channel not the production company. If we were talking about everyday production staff then maybe it'd be different. But anything senior or on-screen I'd probably say the channel isn't the wrong answer.
For starters the channels now have whistleblowing numbers for exactly this sort of shit. They're on the call sheets.
Secondly if you're runner/researcher/junior/assistant your complaint will have to pass up through so many pairs of hands who are paid weekly that I can see how it would eventually reach the desk of "well I'm not biting the hand that feeds". That's not a slight against people working in TV production, it's human nature proven time and time again. Even if it reaches the production company executives they're then balancing a precarious job that could be canceled at any minute (not in a cancel culture sense, just not commissioned) that pays hundreds of peoples mortgages Vs someone who has probably already moved onto the next gig.
The channel on the other hand is writing the cheques and it's their name metaphorically above the door. No-one outside the industry knows who Banijay are. The channel is the the one with the power to tell your boss' boss' boss to fire someone.