September 27, 2024 • 40 mins
The guy behind the guy. Juliette, Rachel's publicist, is letting you in on all of the secrets behind this week's VPR headlines.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
This is Rachel Goes Rogue. Well, hello, welcome to Rachel
Goes Rogue. And I am not Rachel Savannah Levis. This
is Juliette, publicist and producer. And because Rachel is on
an amazing vacation, I'm taking over today to just go
over the headlines from a PR perspective. I'm going to
(00:27):
add my perspective of twenty four years doing public relations
in the entertainment industry and just give people some different
things to think about. Okay, so we're going to go
through some headlines today, and the first one is all
about how Britney Cartwright translated reality show fame into real
life money to change. Okay, we know her from the shows,
(00:49):
and now she is definitely taking off, and she's got
ownership in the businesses and the buyers and the restaurants,
and then she also has got some collaborations with brands
like Jenny Craig. Now she's got a divorce happening with
Jack's and her businesses are starting to thrive. So look,
(01:10):
I think kudos to Brittany first of all. Right, so
she's on the up, and this is the thing that's
key when you say, what should she do next? To
leverage the eyes she has on her right now. In
the entertainment industry, on the way up is key. And
what I mean by on the way up is it's
when the most eyes are on you and you are
(01:30):
feeling the most popularity and the most trajectory forward. And
if you use those that momentum, and you can harness
that and put it towards everything, you are going to succeed.
You're going to take those fifty minutes and really make
them last. I think in her case, she's gotten away
from some dead weight and she is a free woman,
(01:52):
and you know, what could be next for her is
really the limit if she's got a great team around
her and she tells her story properly. She's a mom,
she's a single mom, she's a woman. She can be dating.
The thing of it is is you and I look
at them as our titles in life. I'm a mom,
I'm a mother, I'm a wife. When you are in
(02:14):
this part of the industry, you look at them as categories.
So which category can I talk about? Where can I
project my brand to? And each one of those equates
to money, So she could really there's no this guy's
the limit for her. Right now, I do think she
is maneuvering her fame very very well. And again, if
(02:36):
she continues on the trajectory she's at, if she has
a good team, if she stays on the straight and narrow,
she can do insane things. And you know, we saw
it with Ariana. Arianna leaned into her scorned woman and
cheated on woman, and the fans rallied behind her. Same
thing with Brittany. She's gone through a toxic relationship and
(02:56):
she's a single mom and she had to move out
of her house with her kid. She's got the fans
sympathy and support, and if she can be good to
her fans and pick smart brands, she's gonna continue to
go well. And I think right now she's already separated
her name from Jack, so I don't even think she
has to concentrate on that. He's the father of her kid,
so they're gonna have to interact and hopefully they can
cope in a healthy way. But I think from a
(03:19):
pr perspective, if she really uses this fifteen minutes of
fame smartly, this guy is her limit and she should
continue to make those brand deals and endorsements and bring
in as much cash as she can. I'm sure she
could do a book. I'm sure she could do other
television shows, whether it's a Dancing with the Stars appearance,
whether it's a game show appearance. So if she keeps
(03:40):
riding this train, Brittany's going to be okay, and kudos
to her. Let us look at the next headline. I
love this one because Emily in Paris, Emily in Paris
star Lily Collins couldn't get into the Vanderpump Rules sandwich Shop. Okay,
first of all, that's my favorite show and it's my
guilty pleasure. So when it comes on with the new season,
(04:00):
don't call me for two days because I binge it.
So love her love the show Modern Day Carrie Bradshaw
updated version. So basically in this article that was by
Marie Claire, she says that the line was down the block,
but she couldn't get a sandwich. She needed a sandwich
and she couldn't get her sandwich, and in despite her
disappointment in missing out onto something about her sandwich, Lily
(04:21):
Collins only had nice things to say about Maddox, then
something about her. Instagram replied at Lily Collins, if you're
reading this and still need that sandwich. We got you, girl.
So let's talk about that for a minute, because the
possibilities is a she was walking down the street and
wanted a sandwich and saw the line and said no way.
(04:41):
Because in La there's a restaurant in every corner. So
me personally and my family, we won't wait in the
line for anything. There's too many restaurants. But it is
also possible that she has assistants and team members that
could have or would have gone and caught that sandwich
for her. It's possible she would have called ahead and
pre ordered it and had somebody to go pick up
(05:03):
that sandwich for her. Why do I bring that up
because I'm going to give you a little insight on
how the entertainment industry works a little bit. In the background.
Each talent that you see, each actor, singer, whatever, a
person that you're a fan of, they have multiple teammates,
whether it is their publicists, their manager, their agents, and
(05:23):
each one of those entities has many many clients, and entertainment,
believe it or not, is kind of a small world,
So you could have relationships with these different publicists, managers, etc.
And sometimes you do favors for each other. So sometimes
you might say, hey, can you give you my neighbor
(05:43):
or my best friend who's also publicist to Lily Collins
or manager, could you give us a shout out or
do something kind for us. That's saying that happen. I
don't have firsthand knowledge. I'm saying it's a different kind
of a perspective depending on the relationships that happen in
the entertainment business. It is possible that somebody asked for
a little bit of a book for it, right, and
(06:05):
or it was created. And I'll give you an example.
I had a very very high profile boy bander who
was in one of the top boy bands in the world,
who was going through a very public breakup, and I
called a publicist friend of mine who had a high
profile client, and we arranged for them to go out
on a date so that, you know, he wouldn't look
(06:27):
like he was crying at home over this breakup. Right.
So my point in saying all these things is sometimes
they're manipulated. Also, Lily Collins went on Watch What Happens
Live and said the statement, my guess is that she
needed to find a tie in to the show to go.
You know why was she there as a guest, and
she wanted to incorporate herself with the fans and the
(06:49):
storyline and something that was positive. I don't think Lily
Collins would dive into scandaval or Jackson Brittany and have
to pick a side. This was something that is lighthearted
and were already you know, talking about and complaining. So
she could be relatable and have a connection to the
show and to Andy and give the show a plug
without picking something that was you know, controversial or you know,
(07:12):
could get her backlash. So she said it in a
great way. So I am sure that it was really
about a connection with the fans and being connected to
the Bravo sphere in a lighthearted way. I am not
surmising in this situation. I am just saying there are
multiple possibilities from a pr perspective. At the end of
the day, if she wanted a sandwich and she didn't
get her sandwich, that's kind of a bummer. And I
(07:34):
think they need to hire more people if the lines
are that long, because you want to serve your people
and they missed out on a really great photo op.
I think what's interesting, you know, one of the questions
we have here is what factors contribute to the phenomenon
of food spots becoming so popular that not even celebrities
can avoid the lines. Again, if you're you know, you'd
get to the front of line, if you were the talent,
(07:55):
and if somebody there was looking out for her, they
would have brought her to the front too. But look,
I think when you use celebrity endorsements, I don't know
if people go there because of the sandwiches or because
they want the chance of running into Ariana and Katie.
And that is the beauty of partnering with a celebrity
for a brand for business. Is it brings the buzz.
There's the hope that they're going to get a glimpse
of those people. That's why people go to the restaurants
(08:17):
such as Sir etc. I don't know if it's for
the food. It's more about Wow, what if we get
to see the cast? How fun is that? It's a
different kind of an experience. So yes, there are so
many restaurants that you see that have a celebrities name
out front that they have just licensed to use. There
are some celebrities that do actually partner and get into
the business. It's a lot tougher that way. They actually
(08:38):
have to work at it, so a lot of times
they just license their name. But it definitely drives the
consumer there, and obviously it's successful or all these people
wouldn't do it. And dare we say that since there
was such a long line that the sandwiches are actually good.
I don't know. I've never had one of their sandwiches,
and there are very few sandwich shops. There's one in
particular in Santa Monica that I always say is memorable
(08:58):
to me. But you know, if you're a sandwich junkie,
then you know, and their sandwiches are good by all
means power to them. I'm all for women owned and
women backed businesses, So let's go. Okay. So that's my
thoughts on my favorite Emily in Paris. The next headline,
(09:28):
shemus Say accuses Rachel Loves of weaponizing the justice system
against Ariana Maddis. She basically accused her of weaponizing the
justice system again, this time against Ariano Maddox About the
videos and the scan of all, what do I think
about this article? Well, in my opinion, this is the
(09:50):
second time that Sheena is making defaming claims towards Rachel
that she is weaponizing the legal system. The first one
was about the restraining order and why I have to
bring this up before I go it into the next
one is that she knew we weren't coming. Sheena knew
we weren't coming. The restraining order was being dropped, we
(10:11):
were not pursuing it, and she chose to go stand
on the courtroom steps with her attorney and weaponize the
legal system, because when you don't show up for a
restraining order, it goes away. And I have all the
receipts and the emails to her attorneys saying we weren't going.
I called the judge's clerk and let them know, and
they were very grateful because they knew it was going
(10:33):
to be a circus if the two ladies showed up,
so they were happy to hear we weren't coming. Obviously,
then they must have called and said they were, or
they I think they brought TMS. You forgot who it
was that came and covered it. But that is weaponizing
the legal system, because, plain and simple, we'd already said
we weren't coming, and I tried personally to negotiate a
peaceful resolution for both of them, and their attorney said
(10:55):
not unless Rachel denied that the assault ever happened, which
we were not willing to do. Now here's the bigger
thing of this in the sense of scandaval, and Rachel's
suing the people that she's suing, just like Sheena should
never have put her hands on Rachel, which she admitted to,
pushing her against the wall on television with her hardest might,
(11:18):
and whether it was a slap or a punch, et cetera,
it's still an assault. It's illegal. And Arianna shouldn't have
sent videos anywhere it's illegal. And Tom should not have
filmed Rachel without her consent. It's illegal. There are two
things can be true. At one time, the scandal was
an unfortunate decision making, and we don't need to go
(11:43):
into that bad mistake. That's one thing. Two things can
be true. So on the other side, these behaviors are
still illegal, and it's one hundred percent rational to sue
or take legal action for such illegal activity, which is
also true. And at the end of the day, illegal
activities get legal consequences. And I think people are failing
(12:07):
because they love the show or they love Ariana and
they feel bad for Ariana. They're failing to see that
illegal behaviors still have legal consequences, So that is not
weaponizing the justice system, and talking about it in this
way is not only defamation, in my opinion, but it's
also it's also purposefully trying to drive a narrative that's
(12:29):
not true. Because people don't search deep into the Internet
to find all of the facts. They read headlines. So
what does Sheina do. She's giving them a headline so
everybody can repeat, Oh, Rachel's weaponizing the justice system. She's not.
She's standing up for what's right because what was done
to her is wrong, which is completely separate from the scandal,
which was also wrong. Why do I think Sheena feels
(12:53):
that Rachel's legal actions are an additional attempt to hurt
Ariana when they could just be to actually fix Rachel.
It's because it's much Look, Sena knows where her bread
is buttered, right, it's much more profitable to be on
the Ariana train and to hit your wagon to that.
And you know, remember, let's not forget this show. Vander
(13:14):
Punt Rules was founded on Sheena's cheating, and that's how
the show came to be right and she's a longtime player,
and she gets a paycheck as that show keeps going.
So it's in her best interest from a business perspective
to to follow the money and to make the show
come back and be successful because she gets paychecks. Right
(13:37):
in this entire situation, you know the words that come
to mind for me, your deflection and reframing, right, because
at the end of the day, Sena assaulted Rachel, and
Arianna and Tom did illegal things towards Rachel. Those are
the facts, and those have actually been confirmed by a
(13:57):
judge that though there was enough illegal activity or things
that happened for the case to move forward. So if
that if there wasn't, they would have thrown it out
and we wouldn't still be having this conversation. So trying
to reframe it once again and keep putting messaging out
that's negative towards Rachel is in their best interest. Plus,
negativity in the PR world and in the world of
(14:19):
social media is much more popular than something positive. When
somebody says something positive, they leave a positive comment, they
say something nicest about somebody, what's left to say? You
kind of go, yeah, okay. But when somebody brings in
something negative, everybody can go, oh yeah, you know, oh
I feel that way too, or could you believe they
did this? It's more of a conversation starter. And so
(14:41):
for the show, for Sheena, for any of these people
that jump on them, I'm going to bash Rachel today
train it creates more conversation, it creates more relativity for them.
So from a pr perspective, in my opinion, that's why
they continuously attack her and say to say she's weaponizing
the system is just ill informed because she's using the
(15:04):
legal system in the way it was meant to to
go after the people that hurt her and that purposefully
did illicit and illegal activities towards her. Again, two things
can be true at once, and in this case, the
scandal happened, and so did all the illegal activity. At
the end of the day, Guys, just even thinking about
if this reality show, if it wasn't even a show,
take the show out of it. Somebody filmed her without
(15:25):
her consent, somebody sent that video around, and somebody attacked
her and pushed her against the wall, getting a restraining order,
taking a lawsuit to the next It's perfectly reasonable behavior
when those kinds of things are done to you. So
I just hope that people look at it from a
little bit more fair para goggles, And that's what I
have to say about that. Okay, more Sheena Pump rules.
(15:48):
Sheena say on what she'd say to Rachel Levis, and
she basically goes into I mean, it's interesting to me
that she says that she's back on Zola and she
spoke about her former friendship and they're trying to figure
out if there's a reboot. I've also seen her ask
for a producing credit, which I thought was interesting too,
(16:10):
And she says Rachel and I were good friends and
I had such a soft spot for her, but maybe
it was actually more like a blind spot. But if
I could tell her one thing today, I'd probably tell
her to drop the lawsuit against Ariana again, as I
just said, hitch your wagon to the most profitable train
and you stick with it, and it makes more sense
for her. Although it would make fascinating TV for Sheen
(16:32):
and Rachel to have a conversation, right, I do find
that interesting. Nobody has approached Rachel about even considering to
do that. It's much easier safer to bash her, and
it's more guaranteed you're going to get some pickup on that,
but it would make fascinating television to actually have them
sit down and have a conversation and talk about it.
(16:54):
But nobody's interested in that. You'll notice from their end,
you know, her saying she did enough damage there. I
don't think Arianna needs to be involved in the lawsuit
at all. Well, if you were a lawyer and you
knew the laws and you knew what was done to you,
I don't know, she know, maybe you would sit down
and let people run over you and do illegal things
to you. But Rachel's not going to do that, and
(17:14):
she isn't doing that. And nobody gets a free pass
when you do something illegal to hurt somebody else. It
was done with intention. Those videos being talked about was
done with intention. Those videos being sent with horrible texts
was done with intention. And I'm sorry. Maybe if it
was done to you, you'd roll over and take it.
But good for Rachel that she's not. And I'll stand
behind her on that. And you know what, Arianna could
(17:37):
have approached it with grace. She could have said I
was cheated on. Let's not forget there was already huge
problems within the relationship and it wasn't going to last,
and everybody already knew that, and that's been confirmed and
reconfirmed since the since this has all happened. So knowing
that you were probably exiting a relationship, you could have
just walked away from it. You could have just said
(17:58):
I got cheated on, and you know, I'm not happy
about it. But talking about those intimate videos and bringing
attention to it, that was done with intention from a
pr perspective the show, and I know the publicist for
the show, she's very good at her job. You know,
they rode those headlines. They drove those headlines, and they
made vander pumpt Rule season the best that's ever had
to beat numbers like The Bachelor's. That was also done
(18:21):
with intention and weaponizing the justice system against a woman
she wronged. It's not weaponizing the justice system. The just
system is there to protect those that have been violated
or hurt or illegally, you know, hurt against and Rachel's
doing exactly what she should do. She's holding people accountable
(18:41):
for their actions. Because nobody on the cast has any
problems holding Rachel accountable for what she did, right, They
do seem to have problems, however, holding Tom accountable as
to the same level of Rachel or you know, Jax,
he gets a little bit of a or James Kennedy's
seemingly the males get a little bit more of a
pass than the females here. But at the end of
(19:04):
the day, Rachel has taken accountability for her actions, and
she's holding the other people accountable. Why do they get
a free pass? Why should they? That is not weaponizing
the justice system. And I would love any attorney other
than Sheena's to weigh in on that fact and say,
if there is a legal activity against your client, do
you not take the appropriate legal actions to protect them
(19:25):
and right the wrong. They all want Rachel to right
the wrong that she did having an affair or relationship
with somebody else that was in a relationship. Then Sina
goes on to talk about Rachel again and this podcast
to say, I hear that she's now basically dedicated her
podcast to just talking about her former friend group. She
(19:45):
did an episode on Jackson's mental health when she has
no idea what's really going on in the situation. So
I assume that's more of a money ratings ploy versus
what she really wants to be doing I can't imagine
it's good for her mental health. Well, I guess my
question would she know? Why do you do a podcast?
Why do you talk about ra Why do you talk
about the cast? Why when the scandal broke and you
were all under a gag order, did you continue to
(20:07):
bash Rachel and bring on guests to talk about Rachel?
Was that a money maker for you? I don't know.
I don't think anybody has the right to say what
she does or doesn't do. And I think in this
podcast in particular, she uses it to process her information,
to kind of go through with counselors, with other people,
with fans. She explains her experience, and she works through
(20:29):
a lot of the stuff that she went through in
purpose of shedding light for listeners. So I think her
cause is a little bit more noble and that's personal thing.
And then she was also asked if she would be
okay if the show was canceled, and she said she
would be fine with that. You know, I think you
don't have a choice but to be fine with if
(20:49):
somebody makes that decision for you. You don't have a choice.
But I don't care what any of them say. Maybe
Ariana wants to be done with it, but it depends
what she has in the hopper. But at the end
of the day, television time it breeds. It breeds your celebrity,
it increases your job opportunities besides and beyond the show.
So anybody would want the show to continue because that's
(21:11):
how they keep maximizing their fifteen minutes and extending brand
deals and making their money. So none of them want
it to be canceled. Would they survive They wouldn't have
a choice, so of course they would do. I think
the cast overall is ready to move on from PPR again.
I'm sure. I mean, look, they're all in their forties now, right,
(21:32):
so this is not the show was. Like I said,
it was originated when Shina had her affair and with
a married man with kids, and it's set at a bar,
and it's set about dating. They're all in most of
them are in relationships or in or out of relationships.
I don't know. I would think in your forties you
would be tired of doing the same thing over again.
(21:54):
But like I said, at the end of the day,
it's business, and that business affords them the opportunity to
bring in more business. So none of them want it
to go away. And what do I think next moves
for cast members would be if the show's canceled. I
think they'll all try to get on other reality shows.
They'll try to do game shows, competitive shows. They'll try
(22:14):
to do anything they can to stay on TV. They'll
try to write books, They'll try to ride that fame
for as long as they can, as they should. It's
a good business decision, right Sheena mentions that Rachel talking
about Jackx's situation can't be positive for her mental health,
yet continues to bring up the fact that Rachel should
not be bringing Ariana into a lawsuit. Is this contradictory? Yes,
I do think that is contradictory. First of all, who's
(22:37):
better to talk about Jackson's journey besides Jack's is than
somebody else that shared the show and shared a mental
health breakdown and mental health treatment. She can really shed light,
which is her purpose in life right now, is to
get people talking more about mental health, to debunk the
(22:57):
stigma that goes along with getting treatment, and she's dedicated
herself to highlighting that, which again I feel is a
good move for Rachel and it is healing for her
and the way she talks about things is healing for
her And if any of the people really listen to
her podcast, know the fans and the listeners do They've
heard her break down and cry, They've heard her go
through the emotions, raw and live. And I I take
(23:22):
my hat off to her for being allowing herself to
be vulnerable and share with the fans the intention of
letting them get behind the scenes and learn from her mistakes.
So I think it's pretty positive. I'm not sure what
Sheina did to repent for her cheating. I don't know.
I don't remember a lot of PR around her saying
she was sorry or trying to make amends to the
(23:44):
family that she broke up. But you know, it's just me.
Oh again. The final thing I will say on that
again from the PR perspective, what is she doing. She's
using the headlines that including Rachel because she knows those
headlines are going to get picked up. Her talking about
fun things she did with Brad at home that doesn't
get a headline, talking about driving her kid to school,
(24:04):
and you know, doing something cute that doesn't make a headline.
The negative things and the drawing in the villain, that's
what makes headlines, and that's what she's doing. She's using
Rachel to make headlines, and she's using her animosity towards
Rachel to keep the feud going. I guess I could
say this too. In the rap world. There's a lot
of feuds. In the music world, there's a lot of feuds.
(24:26):
Some of them are real and some of them are
very manufactured. And it's because the negativity drives press. And
I'm sure you all could look back and dissect a
lot of these and figure out how some of them
are done with real behaviors and how some of them
are just made for publicity. Okay, the next one is
(24:57):
Laala Kent is clearing up confusion over Sosa's name for
the final time. She's putting her foot down here. This
was in People. She cleared up confusion about her daughter's name,
saying that I believe it was well. She said that
the having this daughter brought her back to life and
(25:17):
expressed her excitement about this new chapter of their lives.
And I believe that she's not named after me. That
was the key point. She emphasized that Sosa is not
named after anyone in particular, but simply a name she loves.
I think it's a cute name. It's nice. Don't know
what it means, but it's a cute name. I have
to say, if I took my personal involvement out with
(25:38):
this show, Lala is probably the one I like the most.
I like her personality. I like that she sort of
balls to the walls and says what she says, and
she crafts her messages for PR or she makes PR moves.
I don't hate Lalla or her personality or what she does.
I get her. She's street smart and she's savvy, and
that's what this industry thrives off of. Well, they thrive
(25:59):
off people that don't get it, and they use and
spit those people out. But then the people that get
it and play the game that makes everybody money. So
Lalla's a moneymaker. What are my thoughts on how public
she's making this child so early? This is a very
slippery slope. And remember I've been doing this for twenty
four years, and I think it's a challenge. If she's
(26:20):
going to put the kid in the entertainment industry, she's
going to need to be prepared to be with that
kid twenty four to seven. If she's going to make
a business out of that kid, then she's going to
need to parent and be there because this industry is
not kind to young people that don't have parental guidance.
And there's millions, not millions, there's tons and tons of
pop stars out there. I represented Aaron Carter for a
(26:42):
lot of years, other high profile celebrities in their moms.
The parents sold stories to the outlets. You know, there's
a definitely a dark road for kids on the other side.
If she can, just like a Kim Kardashian or Beyonce
and jay Z, trying to create generational wealth for your kid,
(27:03):
I think can be a good thing. You just have
to manage it, and you have to be very careful,
and you can't for a minute think that it's just
going to be okay if you're not around kids. It's
weird with kids, you know. And I'm a mom of three.
I have two eleven year olds and a sixteen year old.
One of them is very theatrical and she loves the spotlight.
The other one hates it, terrified of it. Right, you
(27:27):
can't make kid do something they don't want to do,
No more than my son who's athletic, and the coaches
tried to make him a tennis star and said it
was my job as a parent to get him to
do it. I couldn't make him practice seven hours a
day at a sport he didn't like. I didn't have that.
I know there are parents that do it violin, you know,
the violin tennis. They want their kids to be those stars,
and I just am not that person. I think in
(27:49):
this situation, you'd never know when the kid grows up
how they're going to feel about it. I think if
they're following the laws, and if they're making money off
of the kid, for the kid, that they have the
kup accounts, they have the proper paperwork, they do those things.
Because they didn't do that for Aaron Carter, who ended
up in million dollars of debt with the irs. The
parents profited off of him and it was a very
(28:14):
sad story. I wouldn't want that for my kids. After
being in business for twenty four years, which is my
livelihood and I love it, I would not put my
kids in it. Yet, if my kids really chose to
be in it, I'm not sure I could necessarily stop them.
I think in this situation, what is particularly interesting is
she was very vocal about how the first child with Randall,
(28:34):
she did not have the ability to do what she
wanted to do with that kid. I will say I
do understand the mama Bearah mentality too, So I on
a daily basis say my kids, my kids, my kids,
and my husband says there are kids like, no, don't know,
they're my kids, my kids, my kids. Being a mom
and having that thing grow inside of you and then
you birth it and then you create, you know, help
(28:56):
it grow into who it is. It's very hard to
kind of let that go. So you feel that you
have some sort of an ownership right over the kid,
but it comes pretty quickly to your attention that they
have a mind of their own and you have very
little ownership in them, especially in the teenage years. So
I think that her wanting to have control over this
(29:16):
kid is a bit of a statement, right or this
child's appearances and etc. I know there was speculation did
she do it on purpose so that she could put
this child into the public eye and make money. I
don't know. I think that's pretty far. I wouldn't put
it past anybody. I would choose to look at it
like she is wanting to share this moment, in this
(29:38):
part of their life with this child on television, and
get that child a pay check which could take care
of a car in college and future and set them up.
So I'm going to choose to think about the good
side of it, but caution all people that put their
kids in the entertainment business that it's not for the
faint of heart and that you really have to be
involved in it. So I think I think the scariest
(30:00):
thing is that if these websites and Instagrams and Facebook's
have the right to own your pictures, you don't know
where your kids picture is going to show up. And
in the case of Bravo and NBC, in the contracts
with production, they own that footage for life. So whatever
is on the television with you and Sosa, they own
for life, and they can use it in any way
(30:23):
they want to use it because that's what the contracts say.
So for the rest of Sosa's life, the footage that
was used of her at the beginning can be used.
And if they choose to say that you're a bad
mom and for doing this, they can use that footage
and make that headline go for as long as they want.
So that's a little bit concerning. That's my perspective there,
all right. The last headline for today Lisa vander Pump's
(30:48):
Dog Foundation settles disgruntled ex staffer's lawsuit. I believe she
offered to pay two hundred thousand dollars in damages and
she took the case to mediation to settle as opposed
to going to court. And in the settlement, I believe
it's the details are supposed to remain confidential. She's got
(31:09):
a lot of legal challenges, and on this one, I
actually I can speak from a personal experience and personal
situation too, where I actually had a friend that sued
Lisa for stealing their dog clothes. Ideas this was a
very wealthy person. And I'm not going to disclose more
(31:30):
than that, but I think Lisa has a lot of lawsuits.
There's a lot of people that get reputation for not
doing good business, and I think that's where she is
at right now. She's definitely on the TV path to
success and she's making her money, but it does seem
like she leaves some lawsuits in her trail. And the
(31:53):
Dog Foundation, you know, good for her, that's her passion project.
She does a lot of good things for Anna animals,
I think, but she you know, businesses first with her,
so clearly she's made some decisions that don't make people happy,
and good for them for standing up to her and
fighting for what's right. And if she settled, it's from
(32:16):
a pr perspective one of two reasons. Either she was
in the wrong and she knew it, or she just
didn't want more negative publicity out there and more lawsuits,
so it was easier to sort of settle. But it's
kind of funny because it's still in the press that
she settled, so you know, and the reason you go
to mediation over going to court is to publicly keep
those facts private, which is going to be fascinating with
(32:39):
all the lawsuits that are happening against the reality moguls
and networks and things, because none of them want to
go to court. Because discovery allows them to look at
all the emails and all of the footage that's on
the floor instead of on TV. They're allowed to dig in,
I am, and they find things they don't want to
(32:59):
that they don't want to be found, and so all
discovery is fascinating, and I am sure that Lisa doesn't
want all of her business dealings and emails, and let's
say she had an angry exchange at one point and
said you fing whatever. She doesn't want that out there, right,
So I think that mediation is protecting her from having
(33:20):
more exposed and more bad publicity. So most people will
choose mediation overcourt in high profile situations because they don't
want their dirty laundry continue to be aired because it
can lead to more headlines and bigger things and illegal dealings,
so they don't want to How does this lawsuit reflect
(33:41):
larger issues with nonprofit organizations. It's interesting because nonprofits are
held to a much stricter ethical code and IRS code.
There's a reporting you have to show. I can't even
tell you how many people I've repped over the years
that use a nonprofit as a text shelter, so you know,
they pay people through it. There's a lot of bad
(34:04):
stuff that happens. But I you know, look, we need
the nonprofits. They do a lot of great work. And
there are a lot of nonprofits that do things above
board and those are the ones you need to support.
So yeah, that is it's a tricky slope there too.
You can't raise a million dollars and give a five
thousand dollars scholarship. That's all I'll say. How does it
affect Lisa's image? Lisa's image is interesting. People either love
(34:25):
her or hate her. People in the real world that
know her don't necessarily think she's the nicest person in
my opinion, and once again these are all my opinions,
only my opinions. But on a business standpoint, she makes
good money. She makes people or helps people make good money.
She's doing show after show, business after business. People love
(34:46):
a brit I happen to be married to one. People
follow their knees when you hear their accent. It's so weird.
People think she's different because she's had a British accent,
and she conducts her way herself in a way that
people are attracted to. And clearly she has a formula
for success because she keeps being successful. So I don't
I think all these lawsuits, it depends how many people
(35:10):
pick up on the lawsuit, the fact that it was settled.
But at the end of the day, again it was
settled either because she was in the wrong or she
didn't want things to go public. People's attention spans are
small they will tend to hold on to the things
that are continuously going. So it really depends on how
much traction this story gets is as to how it
(35:31):
will impact her image. I think from the entertainment industry,
they don't care. People get sued all the time, so
they're just like, yeah, it's just another lawsuit. They'll keep
it moving because she's making the money. What does it
show about celebrities putting their name on foundations and organizations.
There's two ways. Sometimes people join an organization as a spokesperson,
and sometimes they create their own nonprofits because they really
(35:54):
do want to help. I have a client that did
one for learning disabilities and it is amazing. I have
clients that do sports scholarships for kids. I have teamed
up all of my celebrities with various nonprofits to make
appearances and donations. One of my clients supports Make a
Wish and does a tremendous amount for Make a Wish.
So celebrities really help draw attention to a nonprofit's cause
(36:20):
and they do a lot of good for the nonprofits.
I think where they have to be careful is if
they tie their name to an organization that's questionable. It
could hurt the celebrity tremendously. But you know, it all
depends on how it's framed, because they if it's explained
that they were just a part of it, and then
they found out the nonprofit did bad, I don't think
(36:41):
that scars them for life. It's sort of like a
little check against them, and if they get several more
it becomes a problem. But one bad decision or association
shouldn't take them down. Actually, let's talk about that if
we have a minute, because there are some other headlines
out there that are not Man Apartment. So obviously you
(37:01):
know you've got Diddy, You've got Justin Bieber. There's a
lot that is that is out there in the headlines
right now. And I think what's important in Ashton Kutcher
they just went after too. I think it's all about
how the celebrity handles the publicity. So if they lean
in and they explain it, and they can give a
very good statement or explanation, the fans are forgiving. Hollywood
(37:25):
is Hollywood is make believe. It's all about this image
and what we put out there, so it can easily
be torn down and it can be easily forgiven, apologized
for and rebuilt if it's handled correctly with the publicity.
So all of these I'm not talking about Diddy in
the situation. I'm talking about the you know, the damage,
(37:45):
the collateral damage on the outside. If it's Justin, if
it's if it's Ashton, they're going to have to clarify
their their roles in the situation, and they're going to
have to separate themselves from the situation. But the one
thing I would caution fans because I look at Ashton
situation and Justin, who's a new dad, and Justin clearly
(38:05):
has gone through a lot of struggles, and he's a
nice celebrity, and you don't hear bad things about Justin's behavior.
I think the worst thing he did is he had
a monkey or the worst thing he did he sped
through Calabasas. He's a nice person and you know, people
trying to tie him into things. I think that's his
story to tell, whatever happened, and whatever he wants to
tell when he wants to tell it. So I know
(38:27):
that fans they're so curious, and they're curious for the
right reasons. They aren't trying to take justice. They want
to support him, they want to go after somebody else.
But I do think if you don't buy the magazines
or you don't click on the headlines, that's the message
that tells the publication that you're not going to stand
for that or you're not going to take it. And
I think that we need to be selective with our
(38:48):
clicks the same way that if you you know, if
you're against a war, or you know some o their
activation and you hold your pocketbook back, it makes a statement.
It's the same thing with your clicks. Don't click on
it if you think it's just making somebody money at
somebody else's peril. So use your power wisely on those.
But I do think that all of these are publicity
(39:11):
stories and they are publicity driven for click, so be
careful with that. Also, Dancing with the Stars, I think
this one's quite funny that Anna Delvy. I do find
that particularly questionable that they cast her. I have to
say ABC Disney Channel that they chose to cast her
when she was known for fraud and found guilty, and
(39:31):
it's not about forgiveness and redemption. I'm all for those
things for people, but it's particularly odd that that corporation
of Disney chose to go after a convicted fraudulent person
and put her on television, and you see her personality
came through. When they asked her what she took away
from Dancing with the Stars, she said nothing, whereas Tory
Spelling said she had a life changing, wonderful experience, and
(39:56):
it is I've had lots of celebs on Dancing with
the Stars. It is a legitimate amount of physical work
and bonding with people that you didn't know, and so
I'm glad for Tori that she got such great experience
out of it. And Anna, I think that's just kind
of who she is. A leopard doesn't change spots, and
I think that's it for headlines. Thank you so much
(40:20):
for listening to Rachel Goes Grogue. Follow us on Instagram
and TikTok for exclusive video content at Rachel gos Rogue
Podcast
This is Rachel Goes Rogue. Well, hello, welcome to Rachel
Goes Rogue. And I am not Rachel Savannah Levis. This
is Juliette, publicist and producer. And because Rachel is on
an amazing vacation, I'm taking over today to just go
over the headlines from a PR perspective. I'm going to
(00:27):
add my perspective of twenty four years doing public relations
in the entertainment industry and just give people some different
things to think about. Okay, so we're going to go
through some headlines today, and the first one is all
about how Britney Cartwright translated reality show fame into real
life money to change. Okay, we know her from the shows,
(00:49):
and now she is definitely taking off, and she's got
ownership in the businesses and the buyers and the restaurants,
and then she also has got some collaborations with brands
like Jenny Craig. Now she's got a divorce happening with
Jack's and her businesses are starting to thrive. So look,
(01:10):
I think kudos to Brittany first of all. Right, so
she's on the up, and this is the thing that's
key when you say, what should she do next? To
leverage the eyes she has on her right now. In
the entertainment industry, on the way up is key. And
what I mean by on the way up is it's
when the most eyes are on you and you are
(01:30):
feeling the most popularity and the most trajectory forward. And
if you use those that momentum, and you can harness
that and put it towards everything, you are going to succeed.
You're going to take those fifty minutes and really make
them last. I think in her case, she's gotten away
from some dead weight and she is a free woman,
(01:52):
and you know, what could be next for her is
really the limit if she's got a great team around
her and she tells her story properly. She's a mom,
she's a single mom, she's a woman. She can be dating.
The thing of it is is you and I look
at them as our titles in life. I'm a mom,
I'm a mother, I'm a wife. When you are in
(02:14):
this part of the industry, you look at them as categories.
So which category can I talk about? Where can I
project my brand to? And each one of those equates
to money, So she could really there's no this guy's
the limit for her. Right now, I do think she
is maneuvering her fame very very well. And again, if
(02:36):
she continues on the trajectory she's at, if she has
a good team, if she stays on the straight and narrow,
she can do insane things. And you know, we saw
it with Ariana. Arianna leaned into her scorned woman and
cheated on woman, and the fans rallied behind her. Same
thing with Brittany. She's gone through a toxic relationship and
(02:56):
she's a single mom and she had to move out
of her house with her kid. She's got the fans
sympathy and support, and if she can be good to
her fans and pick smart brands, she's gonna continue to
go well. And I think right now she's already separated
her name from Jack, so I don't even think she
has to concentrate on that. He's the father of her kid,
so they're gonna have to interact and hopefully they can
cope in a healthy way. But I think from a
(03:19):
pr perspective, if she really uses this fifteen minutes of
fame smartly, this guy is her limit and she should
continue to make those brand deals and endorsements and bring
in as much cash as she can. I'm sure she
could do a book. I'm sure she could do other
television shows, whether it's a Dancing with the Stars appearance,
whether it's a game show appearance. So if she keeps
(03:40):
riding this train, Brittany's going to be okay, and kudos
to her. Let us look at the next headline. I
love this one because Emily in Paris, Emily in Paris
star Lily Collins couldn't get into the Vanderpump Rules sandwich Shop. Okay,
first of all, that's my favorite show and it's my
guilty pleasure. So when it comes on with the new season,
(04:00):
don't call me for two days because I binge it.
So love her love the show Modern Day Carrie Bradshaw
updated version. So basically in this article that was by
Marie Claire, she says that the line was down the block,
but she couldn't get a sandwich. She needed a sandwich
and she couldn't get her sandwich, and in despite her
disappointment in missing out onto something about her sandwich, Lily
(04:21):
Collins only had nice things to say about Maddox, then
something about her. Instagram replied at Lily Collins, if you're
reading this and still need that sandwich. We got you, girl.
So let's talk about that for a minute, because the
possibilities is a she was walking down the street and
wanted a sandwich and saw the line and said no way.
(04:41):
Because in La there's a restaurant in every corner. So
me personally and my family, we won't wait in the
line for anything. There's too many restaurants. But it is
also possible that she has assistants and team members that
could have or would have gone and caught that sandwich
for her. It's possible she would have called ahead and
pre ordered it and had somebody to go pick up
(05:03):
that sandwich for her. Why do I bring that up
because I'm going to give you a little insight on
how the entertainment industry works a little bit. In the background.
Each talent that you see, each actor, singer, whatever, a
person that you're a fan of, they have multiple teammates,
whether it is their publicists, their manager, their agents, and
(05:23):
each one of those entities has many many clients, and entertainment,
believe it or not, is kind of a small world,
So you could have relationships with these different publicists, managers, etc.
And sometimes you do favors for each other. So sometimes
you might say, hey, can you give you my neighbor
(05:43):
or my best friend who's also publicist to Lily Collins
or manager, could you give us a shout out or
do something kind for us. That's saying that happen. I
don't have firsthand knowledge. I'm saying it's a different kind
of a perspective depending on the relationships that happen in
the entertainment business. It is possible that somebody asked for
a little bit of a book for it, right, and
(06:05):
or it was created. And I'll give you an example.
I had a very very high profile boy bander who
was in one of the top boy bands in the world,
who was going through a very public breakup, and I
called a publicist friend of mine who had a high
profile client, and we arranged for them to go out
on a date so that, you know, he wouldn't look
(06:27):
like he was crying at home over this breakup. Right.
So my point in saying all these things is sometimes
they're manipulated. Also, Lily Collins went on Watch What Happens
Live and said the statement, my guess is that she
needed to find a tie in to the show to go.
You know why was she there as a guest, and
she wanted to incorporate herself with the fans and the
(06:49):
storyline and something that was positive. I don't think Lily
Collins would dive into scandaval or Jackson Brittany and have
to pick a side. This was something that is lighthearted
and were already you know, talking about and complaining. So
she could be relatable and have a connection to the
show and to Andy and give the show a plug
without picking something that was you know, controversial or you know,
(07:12):
could get her backlash. So she said it in a
great way. So I am sure that it was really
about a connection with the fans and being connected to
the Bravo sphere in a lighthearted way. I am not
surmising in this situation. I am just saying there are
multiple possibilities from a pr perspective. At the end of
the day, if she wanted a sandwich and she didn't
get her sandwich, that's kind of a bummer. And I
(07:34):
think they need to hire more people if the lines
are that long, because you want to serve your people
and they missed out on a really great photo op.
I think what's interesting, you know, one of the questions
we have here is what factors contribute to the phenomenon
of food spots becoming so popular that not even celebrities
can avoid the lines. Again, if you're you know, you'd
get to the front of line, if you were the talent,
(07:55):
and if somebody there was looking out for her, they
would have brought her to the front too. But look,
I think when you use celebrity endorsements, I don't know
if people go there because of the sandwiches or because
they want the chance of running into Ariana and Katie.
And that is the beauty of partnering with a celebrity
for a brand for business. Is it brings the buzz.
There's the hope that they're going to get a glimpse
of those people. That's why people go to the restaurants
(08:17):
such as Sir etc. I don't know if it's for
the food. It's more about Wow, what if we get
to see the cast? How fun is that? It's a
different kind of an experience. So yes, there are so
many restaurants that you see that have a celebrities name
out front that they have just licensed to use. There
are some celebrities that do actually partner and get into
the business. It's a lot tougher that way. They actually
(08:38):
have to work at it, so a lot of times
they just license their name. But it definitely drives the
consumer there, and obviously it's successful or all these people
wouldn't do it. And dare we say that since there
was such a long line that the sandwiches are actually good.
I don't know. I've never had one of their sandwiches,
and there are very few sandwich shops. There's one in
particular in Santa Monica that I always say is memorable
(08:58):
to me. But you know, if you're a sandwich junkie,
then you know, and their sandwiches are good by all
means power to them. I'm all for women owned and
women backed businesses, So let's go. Okay. So that's my
thoughts on my favorite Emily in Paris. The next headline,
(09:28):
shemus Say accuses Rachel Loves of weaponizing the justice system
against Ariana Maddis. She basically accused her of weaponizing the
justice system again, this time against Ariano Maddox About the
videos and the scan of all, what do I think
about this article? Well, in my opinion, this is the
(09:50):
second time that Sheena is making defaming claims towards Rachel
that she is weaponizing the legal system. The first one
was about the restraining order and why I have to
bring this up before I go it into the next
one is that she knew we weren't coming. Sheena knew
we weren't coming. The restraining order was being dropped, we
(10:11):
were not pursuing it, and she chose to go stand
on the courtroom steps with her attorney and weaponize the
legal system, because when you don't show up for a
restraining order, it goes away. And I have all the
receipts and the emails to her attorneys saying we weren't going.
I called the judge's clerk and let them know, and
they were very grateful because they knew it was going
(10:33):
to be a circus if the two ladies showed up,
so they were happy to hear we weren't coming. Obviously,
then they must have called and said they were, or
they I think they brought TMS. You forgot who it
was that came and covered it. But that is weaponizing
the legal system, because, plain and simple, we'd already said
we weren't coming, and I tried personally to negotiate a
peaceful resolution for both of them, and their attorney said
(10:55):
not unless Rachel denied that the assault ever happened, which
we were not willing to do. Now here's the bigger
thing of this in the sense of scandaval, and Rachel's
suing the people that she's suing, just like Sheena should
never have put her hands on Rachel, which she admitted to,
pushing her against the wall on television with her hardest might,
(11:18):
and whether it was a slap or a punch, et cetera,
it's still an assault. It's illegal. And Arianna shouldn't have
sent videos anywhere it's illegal. And Tom should not have
filmed Rachel without her consent. It's illegal. There are two
things can be true. At one time, the scandal was
an unfortunate decision making, and we don't need to go
(11:43):
into that bad mistake. That's one thing. Two things can
be true. So on the other side, these behaviors are
still illegal, and it's one hundred percent rational to sue
or take legal action for such illegal activity, which is
also true. And at the end of the day, illegal
activities get legal consequences. And I think people are failing
(12:07):
because they love the show or they love Ariana and
they feel bad for Ariana. They're failing to see that
illegal behaviors still have legal consequences, So that is not
weaponizing the justice system, and talking about it in this
way is not only defamation, in my opinion, but it's
also it's also purposefully trying to drive a narrative that's
(12:29):
not true. Because people don't search deep into the Internet
to find all of the facts. They read headlines. So
what does Sheina do. She's giving them a headline so
everybody can repeat, Oh, Rachel's weaponizing the justice system. She's not.
She's standing up for what's right because what was done
to her is wrong, which is completely separate from the scandal,
which was also wrong. Why do I think Sheena feels
(12:53):
that Rachel's legal actions are an additional attempt to hurt
Ariana when they could just be to actually fix Rachel.
It's because it's much Look, Sena knows where her bread
is buttered, right, it's much more profitable to be on
the Ariana train and to hit your wagon to that.
And you know, remember, let's not forget this show. Vander
(13:14):
Punt Rules was founded on Sheena's cheating, and that's how
the show came to be right and she's a longtime player,
and she gets a paycheck as that show keeps going.
So it's in her best interest from a business perspective
to to follow the money and to make the show
come back and be successful because she gets paychecks. Right
(13:37):
in this entire situation, you know the words that come
to mind for me, your deflection and reframing, right, because
at the end of the day, Sena assaulted Rachel, and
Arianna and Tom did illegal things towards Rachel. Those are
the facts, and those have actually been confirmed by a
(13:57):
judge that though there was enough illegal activity or things
that happened for the case to move forward. So if
that if there wasn't, they would have thrown it out
and we wouldn't still be having this conversation. So trying
to reframe it once again and keep putting messaging out
that's negative towards Rachel is in their best interest. Plus,
negativity in the PR world and in the world of
(14:19):
social media is much more popular than something positive. When
somebody says something positive, they leave a positive comment, they
say something nicest about somebody, what's left to say? You
kind of go, yeah, okay. But when somebody brings in
something negative, everybody can go, oh yeah, you know, oh
I feel that way too, or could you believe they
did this? It's more of a conversation starter. And so
(14:41):
for the show, for Sheena, for any of these people
that jump on them, I'm going to bash Rachel today
train it creates more conversation, it creates more relativity for them.
So from a pr perspective, in my opinion, that's why
they continuously attack her and say to say she's weaponizing
the system is just ill informed because she's using the
(15:04):
legal system in the way it was meant to to
go after the people that hurt her and that purposefully
did illicit and illegal activities towards her. Again, two things
can be true at once, and in this case, the
scandal happened, and so did all the illegal activity. At
the end of the day, Guys, just even thinking about
if this reality show, if it wasn't even a show,
take the show out of it. Somebody filmed her without
(15:25):
her consent, somebody sent that video around, and somebody attacked
her and pushed her against the wall, getting a restraining order,
taking a lawsuit to the next It's perfectly reasonable behavior
when those kinds of things are done to you. So
I just hope that people look at it from a
little bit more fair para goggles, And that's what I
have to say about that. Okay, more Sheena Pump rules.
(15:48):
Sheena say on what she'd say to Rachel Levis, and
she basically goes into I mean, it's interesting to me
that she says that she's back on Zola and she
spoke about her former friendship and they're trying to figure
out if there's a reboot. I've also seen her ask
for a producing credit, which I thought was interesting too,
(16:10):
And she says Rachel and I were good friends and
I had such a soft spot for her, but maybe
it was actually more like a blind spot. But if
I could tell her one thing today, I'd probably tell
her to drop the lawsuit against Ariana again, as I
just said, hitch your wagon to the most profitable train
and you stick with it, and it makes more sense
for her. Although it would make fascinating TV for Sheen
(16:32):
and Rachel to have a conversation, right, I do find
that interesting. Nobody has approached Rachel about even considering to
do that. It's much easier safer to bash her, and
it's more guaranteed you're going to get some pickup on that,
but it would make fascinating television to actually have them
sit down and have a conversation and talk about it.
(16:54):
But nobody's interested in that. You'll notice from their end,
you know, her saying she did enough damage there. I
don't think Arianna needs to be involved in the lawsuit
at all. Well, if you were a lawyer and you
knew the laws and you knew what was done to you,
I don't know, she know, maybe you would sit down
and let people run over you and do illegal things
to you. But Rachel's not going to do that, and
(17:14):
she isn't doing that. And nobody gets a free pass
when you do something illegal to hurt somebody else. It
was done with intention. Those videos being talked about was
done with intention. Those videos being sent with horrible texts
was done with intention. And I'm sorry. Maybe if it
was done to you, you'd roll over and take it.
But good for Rachel that she's not. And I'll stand
behind her on that. And you know what, Arianna could
(17:37):
have approached it with grace. She could have said I
was cheated on. Let's not forget there was already huge
problems within the relationship and it wasn't going to last,
and everybody already knew that, and that's been confirmed and
reconfirmed since the since this has all happened. So knowing
that you were probably exiting a relationship, you could have
just walked away from it. You could have just said
(17:58):
I got cheated on, and you know, I'm not happy
about it. But talking about those intimate videos and bringing
attention to it, that was done with intention from a
pr perspective the show, and I know the publicist for
the show, she's very good at her job. You know,
they rode those headlines. They drove those headlines, and they
made vander pumpt Rule season the best that's ever had
to beat numbers like The Bachelor's. That was also done
(18:21):
with intention and weaponizing the justice system against a woman
she wronged. It's not weaponizing the justice system. The just
system is there to protect those that have been violated
or hurt or illegally, you know, hurt against and Rachel's
doing exactly what she should do. She's holding people accountable
(18:41):
for their actions. Because nobody on the cast has any
problems holding Rachel accountable for what she did, right, They
do seem to have problems, however, holding Tom accountable as
to the same level of Rachel or you know, Jax,
he gets a little bit of a or James Kennedy's
seemingly the males get a little bit more of a
pass than the females here. But at the end of
(19:04):
the day, Rachel has taken accountability for her actions, and
she's holding the other people accountable. Why do they get
a free pass? Why should they? That is not weaponizing
the justice system. And I would love any attorney other
than Sheena's to weigh in on that fact and say,
if there is a legal activity against your client, do
you not take the appropriate legal actions to protect them
(19:25):
and right the wrong. They all want Rachel to right
the wrong that she did having an affair or relationship
with somebody else that was in a relationship. Then Sina
goes on to talk about Rachel again and this podcast
to say, I hear that she's now basically dedicated her
podcast to just talking about her former friend group. She
(19:45):
did an episode on Jackson's mental health when she has
no idea what's really going on in the situation. So
I assume that's more of a money ratings ploy versus
what she really wants to be doing I can't imagine
it's good for her mental health. Well, I guess my
question would she know? Why do you do a podcast?
Why do you talk about ra Why do you talk
about the cast? Why when the scandal broke and you
were all under a gag order, did you continue to
(20:07):
bash Rachel and bring on guests to talk about Rachel?
Was that a money maker for you? I don't know.
I don't think anybody has the right to say what
she does or doesn't do. And I think in this
podcast in particular, she uses it to process her information,
to kind of go through with counselors, with other people,
with fans. She explains her experience, and she works through
(20:29):
a lot of the stuff that she went through in
purpose of shedding light for listeners. So I think her
cause is a little bit more noble and that's personal thing.
And then she was also asked if she would be
okay if the show was canceled, and she said she
would be fine with that. You know, I think you
don't have a choice but to be fine with if
(20:49):
somebody makes that decision for you. You don't have a choice.
But I don't care what any of them say. Maybe
Ariana wants to be done with it, but it depends
what she has in the hopper. But at the end
of the day, television time it breeds. It breeds your celebrity,
it increases your job opportunities besides and beyond the show.
So anybody would want the show to continue because that's
(21:11):
how they keep maximizing their fifteen minutes and extending brand
deals and making their money. So none of them want
it to be canceled. Would they survive They wouldn't have
a choice, so of course they would do. I think
the cast overall is ready to move on from PPR again.
I'm sure. I mean, look, they're all in their forties now, right,
(21:32):
so this is not the show was. Like I said,
it was originated when Shina had her affair and with
a married man with kids, and it's set at a bar,
and it's set about dating. They're all in most of
them are in relationships or in or out of relationships.
I don't know. I would think in your forties you
would be tired of doing the same thing over again.
(21:54):
But like I said, at the end of the day,
it's business, and that business affords them the opportunity to
bring in more business. So none of them want it
to go away. And what do I think next moves
for cast members would be if the show's canceled. I
think they'll all try to get on other reality shows.
They'll try to do game shows, competitive shows. They'll try
(22:14):
to do anything they can to stay on TV. They'll
try to write books, They'll try to ride that fame
for as long as they can, as they should. It's
a good business decision, right Sheena mentions that Rachel talking
about Jackx's situation can't be positive for her mental health,
yet continues to bring up the fact that Rachel should
not be bringing Ariana into a lawsuit. Is this contradictory? Yes,
I do think that is contradictory. First of all, who's
(22:37):
better to talk about Jackson's journey besides Jack's is than
somebody else that shared the show and shared a mental
health breakdown and mental health treatment. She can really shed light,
which is her purpose in life right now, is to
get people talking more about mental health, to debunk the
(22:57):
stigma that goes along with getting treatment, and she's dedicated
herself to highlighting that, which again I feel is a
good move for Rachel and it is healing for her
and the way she talks about things is healing for
her And if any of the people really listen to
her podcast, know the fans and the listeners do They've
heard her break down and cry, They've heard her go
through the emotions, raw and live. And I I take
(23:22):
my hat off to her for being allowing herself to
be vulnerable and share with the fans the intention of
letting them get behind the scenes and learn from her mistakes.
So I think it's pretty positive. I'm not sure what
Sheina did to repent for her cheating. I don't know.
I don't remember a lot of PR around her saying
she was sorry or trying to make amends to the
(23:44):
family that she broke up. But you know, it's just me.
Oh again. The final thing I will say on that
again from the PR perspective, what is she doing. She's
using the headlines that including Rachel because she knows those
headlines are going to get picked up. Her talking about
fun things she did with Brad at home that doesn't
get a headline, talking about driving her kid to school,
(24:04):
and you know, doing something cute that doesn't make a headline.
The negative things and the drawing in the villain, that's
what makes headlines, and that's what she's doing. She's using
Rachel to make headlines, and she's using her animosity towards
Rachel to keep the feud going. I guess I could
say this too. In the rap world. There's a lot
of feuds. In the music world, there's a lot of feuds.
(24:26):
Some of them are real and some of them are
very manufactured. And it's because the negativity drives press. And
I'm sure you all could look back and dissect a
lot of these and figure out how some of them
are done with real behaviors and how some of them
are just made for publicity. Okay, the next one is
(24:57):
Laala Kent is clearing up confusion over Sosa's name for
the final time. She's putting her foot down here. This
was in People. She cleared up confusion about her daughter's name,
saying that I believe it was well. She said that
the having this daughter brought her back to life and
(25:17):
expressed her excitement about this new chapter of their lives.
And I believe that she's not named after me. That
was the key point. She emphasized that Sosa is not
named after anyone in particular, but simply a name she loves.
I think it's a cute name. It's nice. Don't know
what it means, but it's a cute name. I have
to say, if I took my personal involvement out with
(25:38):
this show, Lala is probably the one I like the most.
I like her personality. I like that she sort of
balls to the walls and says what she says, and
she crafts her messages for PR or she makes PR moves.
I don't hate Lalla or her personality or what she does.
I get her. She's street smart and she's savvy, and
that's what this industry thrives off of. Well, they thrive
(25:59):
off people that don't get it, and they use and
spit those people out. But then the people that get
it and play the game that makes everybody money. So
Lalla's a moneymaker. What are my thoughts on how public
she's making this child so early? This is a very
slippery slope. And remember I've been doing this for twenty
four years, and I think it's a challenge. If she's
(26:20):
going to put the kid in the entertainment industry, she's
going to need to be prepared to be with that
kid twenty four to seven. If she's going to make
a business out of that kid, then she's going to
need to parent and be there because this industry is
not kind to young people that don't have parental guidance.
And there's millions, not millions, there's tons and tons of
pop stars out there. I represented Aaron Carter for a
(26:42):
lot of years, other high profile celebrities in their moms.
The parents sold stories to the outlets. You know, there's
a definitely a dark road for kids on the other side.
If she can, just like a Kim Kardashian or Beyonce
and jay Z, trying to create generational wealth for your kid,
(27:03):
I think can be a good thing. You just have
to manage it, and you have to be very careful,
and you can't for a minute think that it's just
going to be okay if you're not around kids. It's
weird with kids, you know. And I'm a mom of three.
I have two eleven year olds and a sixteen year old.
One of them is very theatrical and she loves the spotlight.
The other one hates it, terrified of it. Right, you
(27:27):
can't make kid do something they don't want to do,
No more than my son who's athletic, and the coaches
tried to make him a tennis star and said it
was my job as a parent to get him to
do it. I couldn't make him practice seven hours a
day at a sport he didn't like. I didn't have that.
I know there are parents that do it violin, you know,
the violin tennis. They want their kids to be those stars,
and I just am not that person. I think in
(27:49):
this situation, you'd never know when the kid grows up
how they're going to feel about it. I think if
they're following the laws, and if they're making money off
of the kid, for the kid, that they have the
kup accounts, they have the proper paperwork, they do those things.
Because they didn't do that for Aaron Carter, who ended
up in million dollars of debt with the irs. The
parents profited off of him and it was a very
(28:14):
sad story. I wouldn't want that for my kids. After
being in business for twenty four years, which is my
livelihood and I love it, I would not put my
kids in it. Yet, if my kids really chose to
be in it, I'm not sure I could necessarily stop them.
I think in this situation, what is particularly interesting is
she was very vocal about how the first child with Randall,
(28:34):
she did not have the ability to do what she
wanted to do with that kid. I will say I
do understand the mama Bearah mentality too, So I on
a daily basis say my kids, my kids, my kids,
and my husband says there are kids like, no, don't know,
they're my kids, my kids, my kids. Being a mom
and having that thing grow inside of you and then
you birth it and then you create, you know, help
(28:56):
it grow into who it is. It's very hard to
kind of let that go. So you feel that you
have some sort of an ownership right over the kid,
but it comes pretty quickly to your attention that they
have a mind of their own and you have very
little ownership in them, especially in the teenage years. So
I think that her wanting to have control over this
(29:16):
kid is a bit of a statement, right or this
child's appearances and etc. I know there was speculation did
she do it on purpose so that she could put
this child into the public eye and make money. I
don't know. I think that's pretty far. I wouldn't put
it past anybody. I would choose to look at it
like she is wanting to share this moment, in this
(29:38):
part of their life with this child on television, and
get that child a pay check which could take care
of a car in college and future and set them up.
So I'm going to choose to think about the good
side of it, but caution all people that put their
kids in the entertainment business that it's not for the
faint of heart and that you really have to be
involved in it. So I think I think the scariest
(30:00):
thing is that if these websites and Instagrams and Facebook's
have the right to own your pictures, you don't know
where your kids picture is going to show up. And
in the case of Bravo and NBC, in the contracts
with production, they own that footage for life. So whatever
is on the television with you and Sosa, they own
for life, and they can use it in any way
(30:23):
they want to use it because that's what the contracts say.
So for the rest of Sosa's life, the footage that
was used of her at the beginning can be used.
And if they choose to say that you're a bad
mom and for doing this, they can use that footage
and make that headline go for as long as they want.
So that's a little bit concerning. That's my perspective there,
all right. The last headline for today Lisa vander Pump's
(30:48):
Dog Foundation settles disgruntled ex staffer's lawsuit. I believe she
offered to pay two hundred thousand dollars in damages and
she took the case to mediation to settle as opposed
to going to court. And in the settlement, I believe
it's the details are supposed to remain confidential. She's got
(31:09):
a lot of legal challenges, and on this one, I
actually I can speak from a personal experience and personal
situation too, where I actually had a friend that sued
Lisa for stealing their dog clothes. Ideas this was a
very wealthy person. And I'm not going to disclose more
(31:30):
than that, but I think Lisa has a lot of lawsuits.
There's a lot of people that get reputation for not
doing good business, and I think that's where she is
at right now. She's definitely on the TV path to
success and she's making her money, but it does seem
like she leaves some lawsuits in her trail. And the
(31:53):
Dog Foundation, you know, good for her, that's her passion project.
She does a lot of good things for Anna animals,
I think, but she you know, businesses first with her,
so clearly she's made some decisions that don't make people happy,
and good for them for standing up to her and
fighting for what's right. And if she settled, it's from
(32:16):
a pr perspective one of two reasons. Either she was
in the wrong and she knew it, or she just
didn't want more negative publicity out there and more lawsuits,
so it was easier to sort of settle. But it's
kind of funny because it's still in the press that
she settled, so you know, and the reason you go
to mediation over going to court is to publicly keep
those facts private, which is going to be fascinating with
(32:39):
all the lawsuits that are happening against the reality moguls
and networks and things, because none of them want to
go to court. Because discovery allows them to look at
all the emails and all of the footage that's on
the floor instead of on TV. They're allowed to dig in,
I am, and they find things they don't want to
(32:59):
that they don't want to be found, and so all
discovery is fascinating, and I am sure that Lisa doesn't
want all of her business dealings and emails, and let's
say she had an angry exchange at one point and
said you fing whatever. She doesn't want that out there, right,
So I think that mediation is protecting her from having
(33:20):
more exposed and more bad publicity. So most people will
choose mediation overcourt in high profile situations because they don't
want their dirty laundry continue to be aired because it
can lead to more headlines and bigger things and illegal dealings,
so they don't want to How does this lawsuit reflect
(33:41):
larger issues with nonprofit organizations. It's interesting because nonprofits are
held to a much stricter ethical code and IRS code.
There's a reporting you have to show. I can't even
tell you how many people I've repped over the years
that use a nonprofit as a text shelter, so you know,
they pay people through it. There's a lot of bad
(34:04):
stuff that happens. But I you know, look, we need
the nonprofits. They do a lot of great work. And
there are a lot of nonprofits that do things above
board and those are the ones you need to support.
So yeah, that is it's a tricky slope there too.
You can't raise a million dollars and give a five
thousand dollars scholarship. That's all I'll say. How does it
affect Lisa's image? Lisa's image is interesting. People either love
(34:25):
her or hate her. People in the real world that
know her don't necessarily think she's the nicest person in
my opinion, and once again these are all my opinions,
only my opinions. But on a business standpoint, she makes
good money. She makes people or helps people make good money.
She's doing show after show, business after business. People love
(34:46):
a brit I happen to be married to one. People
follow their knees when you hear their accent. It's so weird.
People think she's different because she's had a British accent,
and she conducts her way herself in a way that
people are attracted to. And clearly she has a formula
for success because she keeps being successful. So I don't
I think all these lawsuits, it depends how many people
(35:10):
pick up on the lawsuit, the fact that it was settled.
But at the end of the day, again it was
settled either because she was in the wrong or she
didn't want things to go public. People's attention spans are
small they will tend to hold on to the things
that are continuously going. So it really depends on how
much traction this story gets is as to how it
(35:31):
will impact her image. I think from the entertainment industry,
they don't care. People get sued all the time, so
they're just like, yeah, it's just another lawsuit. They'll keep
it moving because she's making the money. What does it
show about celebrities putting their name on foundations and organizations.
There's two ways. Sometimes people join an organization as a spokesperson,
and sometimes they create their own nonprofits because they really
(35:54):
do want to help. I have a client that did
one for learning disabilities and it is amazing. I have
clients that do sports scholarships for kids. I have teamed
up all of my celebrities with various nonprofits to make
appearances and donations. One of my clients supports Make a
Wish and does a tremendous amount for Make a Wish.
So celebrities really help draw attention to a nonprofit's cause
(36:20):
and they do a lot of good for the nonprofits.
I think where they have to be careful is if
they tie their name to an organization that's questionable. It
could hurt the celebrity tremendously. But you know, it all
depends on how it's framed, because they if it's explained
that they were just a part of it, and then
they found out the nonprofit did bad, I don't think
(36:41):
that scars them for life. It's sort of like a
little check against them, and if they get several more
it becomes a problem. But one bad decision or association
shouldn't take them down. Actually, let's talk about that if
we have a minute, because there are some other headlines
out there that are not Man Apartment. So obviously you
(37:01):
know you've got Diddy, You've got Justin Bieber. There's a
lot that is that is out there in the headlines
right now. And I think what's important in Ashton Kutcher
they just went after too. I think it's all about
how the celebrity handles the publicity. So if they lean
in and they explain it, and they can give a
very good statement or explanation, the fans are forgiving. Hollywood
(37:25):
is Hollywood is make believe. It's all about this image
and what we put out there, so it can easily
be torn down and it can be easily forgiven, apologized
for and rebuilt if it's handled correctly with the publicity.
So all of these I'm not talking about Diddy in
the situation. I'm talking about the you know, the damage,
(37:45):
the collateral damage on the outside. If it's Justin, if
it's if it's Ashton, they're going to have to clarify
their their roles in the situation, and they're going to
have to separate themselves from the situation. But the one
thing I would caution fans because I look at Ashton
situation and Justin, who's a new dad, and Justin clearly
(38:05):
has gone through a lot of struggles, and he's a
nice celebrity, and you don't hear bad things about Justin's behavior.
I think the worst thing he did is he had
a monkey or the worst thing he did he sped
through Calabasas. He's a nice person and you know, people
trying to tie him into things. I think that's his
story to tell, whatever happened, and whatever he wants to
tell when he wants to tell it. So I know
(38:27):
that fans they're so curious, and they're curious for the
right reasons. They aren't trying to take justice. They want
to support him, they want to go after somebody else.
But I do think if you don't buy the magazines
or you don't click on the headlines, that's the message
that tells the publication that you're not going to stand
for that or you're not going to take it. And
I think that we need to be selective with our
(38:48):
clicks the same way that if you you know, if
you're against a war, or you know some o their
activation and you hold your pocketbook back, it makes a statement.
It's the same thing with your clicks. Don't click on
it if you think it's just making somebody money at
somebody else's peril. So use your power wisely on those.
But I do think that all of these are publicity
(39:11):
stories and they are publicity driven for click, so be
careful with that. Also, Dancing with the Stars, I think
this one's quite funny that Anna Delvy. I do find
that particularly questionable that they cast her. I have to
say ABC Disney Channel that they chose to cast her
when she was known for fraud and found guilty, and
(39:31):
it's not about forgiveness and redemption. I'm all for those
things for people, but it's particularly odd that that corporation
of Disney chose to go after a convicted fraudulent person
and put her on television, and you see her personality
came through. When they asked her what she took away
from Dancing with the Stars, she said nothing, whereas Tory
Spelling said she had a life changing, wonderful experience, and
(39:56):
it is I've had lots of celebs on Dancing with
the Stars. It is a legitimate amount of physical work
and bonding with people that you didn't know, and so
I'm glad for Tori that she got such great experience
out of it. And Anna, I think that's just kind
of who she is. A leopard doesn't change spots, and
I think that's it for headlines. Thank you so much
(40:20):
for listening to Rachel Goes Grogue. Follow us on Instagram
and TikTok for exclusive video content at Rachel gos Rogue
Podcast
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.