Normal Island

[AuroraSaab]

I read a thing the other day that said working with him was like endlessly dealing with a Sid James character. He's too unaware to grasp that younger, less confident women weren't in the position to call him out or report his behaviour. Even the older ones were ignored for a long time. He's a foolish man who if the BBC had reined him at the first hint 15 years ago, he might have had a word with himself and thought better of his behaviour. They didn't, he didn't, and now his career's down the pan.

 

[All uphill]

I read a thing the other day that said working with him was like endlessly dealing with a Sid James character. He's too unaware to grasp that younger, less confident women weren't in the position to call him out or report his behaviour. Even the older ones were ignored for a long time. He's a foolish man who if the BBC had reined him at the first hint 15 years ago, he might have had a word with himself and thought better of his behaviour. They didn't, he didn't, and now his career's down the pan.

Seems to be a very common path; men who believe the adulation they get and lose all self awareness and responsibility.

Similar over the water with Conor MacGregor.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I think money and fame go to a lot of people's heads, male or female. It just comes out in different ways. It only takes an entourage, or an organisation, to indulge them and their worse characteristics are given free rein rather than tempered. Wallace was older when he became a celebrity so he can't even blame it on being a stupid young man. His PR folk must be holding their heads in their hands. Standard route is: grovelling apology, it was a long time ago, I've grown as person, I promise to do better, trip to rehab if appropriate,

 

[winjim]

I saw Walace described as someone who never got over his surprise and delight at having lost his virginity.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Apart from that Telegraph 'My Weekend' thing, there were other hints Wallace was a bit of a prat. I'd forgotten about this one.

 

["slow horse" aka "another sam"]

View: https://x.com/MsMelChen/status/1858222549877792778

 

[matticus]

I read a thing the other day that said working with him was like endlessly dealing with a Sid James character. He's too unaware to grasp that younger, less confident women weren't in the position to call him out or report his behaviour. Even the older ones were ignored for a long time. He's a foolish man who if the BBC had reined him at the first hint 15 years ago, he might have had a word with himself and thought better of his behaviour. They didn't, he didn't, and now his career's down the pan.

I'd agree with all that - especially the bold text.
In relation to that, I just read this (stolen from another forum) about the views of Helen Lederer:
Helen Lederer appeared on the bbc r4 news digest this morning, she having been a competitor in the celebrity branch of the show twice. She remarked that if the production company deliberately set out to choose a ‘cheeky chappy’ type as one of two presenters, with in the case of Wallace, a cv that includes time spent as a market greengrocer, who I recall back in the ‘70s, were virtually a by-word for sources of banter & innuendo, then it’s perhaps not surprising that said geezer be reported as having acted the part.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I hadn't thought of it like that but she's right. You employ someone because he's a bit of a geezer and then act surprised when it turns out he really is.

What I find a bit surprising is that was he really so indispensable that he couldn't be reined in? I liked the shows he presented (that Factory thing and Eat Well for Less, didn't watch Masterchef) but any competent presenter could have done it. He didn't carry the shows. In the grand scheme of things others have done a lot worse but was he such a big asset to the BBC that nobody could have a quiet word and tell him to take it down a notch?

 

[Ian H]

I hadn't thought of it like that but she's right. You employ someone because he's a bit of a geezer and then act surprised when it turns out he really is.

What I find a bit surprising is that was he really so indispensable that he couldn't be reined in? I liked the shows he presented (that Factory thing and Eat Well for Less, didn't watch Masterchef) but any competent presenter could have done it. He didn't carry the shows. In the grand scheme of things others have done a lot worse but was he such a big asset to the BBC that nobody could have a quiet word and tell him to take it down a notch?

My impression is that, until recently, this kind of behaviour was normalised - 'bit of a lad' type of culture.

 

[matticus]

I hadn't thought of it like that but she's right. You employ someone because he's a bit of a geezer and then act surprised when it turns out he really is.

What I find a bit surprising is that was he really so indispensable that he couldn't be reined in? I liked the shows he presented (that Factory thing and Eat Well for Less, didn't watch Masterchef) but any competent presenter could have done it. He didn't carry the shows. In the grand scheme of things others have done a lot worse but was he such a big asset to the BBC that nobody could have a quiet word and tell him to take it down a notch?

Two answers:
- the TV companies LOVE sticking with a known face. That's how you get ex-soap stars and footballers pretending to be experts on all sorts of crap. (no doubt paid way more than professors etc brought in from time-to-time to actually state some facts.)
- I don't think it's any one person's job to "rein in" the super celebs. Commisioning/producing shows is just dog-eat-dog now. Better to take the risk of eking out one more series with the dodgy geezer - after all, it if blows up it's all free publicity anyway!

 

[All uphill]

Imo the whole celebrity, famous for being famous thing is revolting, but much of the world seems to buy into it.

There's only a few of us Levellers left.

 

[AuroraSaab]

- I don't think it's any one person's job to "rein in" the super celebs. Commisioning/producing shows is just dog-eat-dog now. Better to take the risk of eking out one more series with the dodgy geezer - after all, it if blows up it's all free publicity anyway!

I'd say it's the producer's job, especially after a complaint. I take your point though that many shows are commissioned now, not run by the BBC, and sometimes the talent owns the production company or would require a big payoff to be replaced.

 

[C R]

I'd say it's the producer's job, especially after a complaint. I take your point though that many shows are commissioned now, not run by the BBC, and sometimes the talent owns the production company or would require a big payoff to be replaced.

The joys of privatisation.

 

[BoldonLad]

The joys of privatisation.

Doesn’t it just mean that the BBC should polish up their contract terms and conditions?, and, having done so, enforce them.

 

[C R]

Doesn’t it just mean that the BBC should polish up their contract terms and conditions?, and, having done so, enforce them.

Like every other public body should do, you mean?