March 21, 2022 • 35 mins
On today's show... former Bachelorette and journalist, Georgia Love, and her partner Lee Elliot are facing backlash after promoting an all-expenses paid trip to Saudi Arabia - a country well known for its human rights atrocities.
Tammy Hembrow has sparked debate about payment in the modelling industry, after posting a casting call on her Instagram story.
And Fox Sports Reporter, Tom Morris, has been sacked after audio surfaced online of him making sexist and homophobic comments about a female sport's presenter in a What's App group.
Follow us on Instagram at @outspoken_the_podcast.If you want to join in on the conversation, join us in our Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/546449075892582 Podcast hosted by @amytaeuber @katetaeuber & @sophie_taeuber.
More about this episode
Tammy Hembrow has sparked debate about payment in the modelling industry, after posting a casting call on her Instagram story.
And Fox Sports Reporter, Tom Morris, has been sacked after audio surfaced online of him making sexist and homophobic comments about a female sport's presenter in a What's App group.
Follow us on Instagram at @outspoken_the_podcast.If you want to join in on the conversation, join us in our Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/546449075892582 Podcast hosted by @amytaeuber @katetaeuber & @sophie_taeuber.
More about this episode
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 (00:02):
Hello, and welcome to Outspoken. You're dose of the hottest
influencer and pop culture news twice a week. I'm Kate
Torba and I'm joined by my sisters and journalists Amy
and Sophie. On today's show, Tammy Hembro's casting call, controversy
Fox Sports SAX reporter over sexist and homophobic message and
why are we so judgmental about weddings? But First, former
(00:25):
bachelorette and journalist Georgia Love and her partner Lee Elliott
are facing backlash after promoting an all expenses paid trip
to Saudia Arabia, a country well known for its human
rights atrocities. Sophie, what happened? Well, it has been a
turbulent six months for Georgia Love. In September of last year,
she was taken off the air by seven News following
(00:46):
a casual racism scandal, which also saw her losing a
string of lucrative brand deals. Now, at the end of February,
Georgia announced she was leaving seven News for a job
in pr and soon after that announcement, she started teasing
that she and Lee were off on an overseas adventure.
Now that international borders were open, She urged her followers
to guess where they were off to, and it seems
(01:08):
that none of her followers guest correctly. So Georgia shared
a photo of her and husband Lee arriving at King
Khalid International Airport with the caption, well, I can categorically say,
not one person guest We're in Saudia, Arabia after only
opening to tourists in twenty nineteen. We can't state how
excited we are to be among the first Aussies to
(01:28):
tour Saudi to us. It's important to see, experience and
learn about all cultures around US, and to see how
much and how fast our world is changing. We can't
wait to bring you along on this incredible experience with us.
So as part of the post, Georgia included the hashtag
visit Saudi and also tag the Instagram page by the
same name. Now Georgia and Lee were part of a
(01:49):
group of ten influencers from around the globe flown over
to promote the Middle Eastern country. Among them was a
Lithuanian travel blogger called sky Nate, whose Instagram posts include
Georgia and Lee in background. Now, Georgia and Lee have
both faced backlash following their Instagram posts, and this is
because Saudi Arabia's government has copped heavy criticism for its
(02:09):
human rights abuses, including its treatment of women and its
LGBTQI plus community, as well as for repressing political opposition.
Both followers and critics were quick to show their outrage
about the trip. Entertainment journalist Peter Ford tweeted a link
to a news article revealing Saudi Arabia recently executed eighty
one convicts in a single day. Peter wrote, this is
(02:31):
the country Georgia love accepted a free trip to visit
Of the eighty one, you can be sure there is
a disproportionate number of women, gays, and possibly journalists. Did
you really need a freebee trip that badly, Georgia. One
follower also wrote, they executed eighty two people a few
days ago, not to mention the lack of women's rights
and the LGBTQI plus community. Being a journalist, it might
(02:54):
have been a good idea to research a country before
promoting it. Their human rights are appalling, disappointing. It seems
a free holiday is more important than morals. Another said,
why not use your influence slush platform to promote somewhere
that doesn't have an atrocious record of human rights violations. Now.
In the comments section, Georgia denied it was a paid partnership.
(03:14):
She said, we do not in any way endorse behaviors
of the past or any human rights violations that have
occurred in this country. We are also not being paid
to be here. We are here for ourselves and to
experience and see a different country and culture, as that
is for us what travel is about. We want to
see and experience as much of the world as we can.
This includes all cultures and religions, whether we follow them,
(03:38):
agree with them or not. Lee also weighed in and
responded to the criticism on his posts.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
He said, I truly hear.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
And understand what you're saying and where you're coming from.
We thought long and hard about coming, and we decided
to come as the world is changing for the better
and Saudi along with it. We strongly believe by Saudi
opening up to the rest of the world and by
tourists being here, it has to be more accountable and
hope this is a change for the better. Trust me,
we looked into it before coming and believe many things
have changed for the better. In more recent times and
(04:07):
hope they continued to do so now. After the criticism,
Lee also praised the country, saying the trip was organized
and run solely by women who were here on the ground.
Leading the tour now news dot com weighed in and
reported that despite Lee saying that the tours were led
heavily by females, the other influences on the trip seemed
to be posting about male tour guide, so it didn't
(04:28):
really add up. Well, it gets even murkier because, despite
claiming that the trip was not a paid partnership, Georgia
tagged Instagram page visit Saudi in all of her posts
and used the hashtag visit Saudi, which is of course
a telltale sign of a paid partnership.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Or a gifted partnership.
Speaker 1 (04:45):
Yeah, there's obviously goods exchanging hands at some point here.
And The Herald's son reported that the couple weren't paid
directly for the trip, but Saudi Arabian Tourism approached the
couple and was fitting the bill for the airfares, accommodation
and expenses, and so you when you were reading out
George's response, they were quite clever with their words. We
were not paid to go on the trip. It's like,
(05:06):
but you've got a free trip. Well, currently, Georgia and
Lee they are actually still on the trip. I believe
it may be their last day there today, and they
continue to be in the behind the scenes vision in
the other influencers Instagram posts. However, on Friday, Georgia and
Lee removed all of their posts about the trip on
their Instagram pages. And I'm really interested because, considering this
(05:27):
trip is pretty much a contra deal. I wonder how
the organizers feel that their posts have been removed because presumably, well,
really realistically, they received the trip in exchange for exposure,
but now that exposure has been removed. Yeah, but the
exposure has been so negative, so I'm sure that the
Saudi tourism organizers would want them to remove all of
(05:49):
the images because there are so many bad comments under
each of the posts. Yeah, but that being said, there
would be some people who would have seen the Instagram
stories and thought, wow, this is a part of the
world I've never thought of about visiting.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
So the backlash you think has been good for tourism.
Speaker 1 (06:03):
Now, I'm not saying it's great, but out of there
would have been a percentage of her followers who probably
would have thought, hey, that's a new holiday destination. Yeah,
but there might have been a lot of people that
didn't know how bad Saudi Arabia's human rights violations are.
So if I do understand the decision to remove the post,
it's beneficial to both parties. I think in this instance now,
in regards to this backlash, I feel like Georgia Love
(06:24):
is being held to a higher standard because she is
a journalist. She is expected to know what's going on
in the world, and now that she's working in PR,
I think people would also assume that she would think
really strategically about what brands or partnerships she's choosing to
align herself with. I think that's why there has been
such strong reaction to this. And despite the fact that
(06:45):
Lee said that they both had thought long and hard
about the trip, I believe they really made the wrong decision.
I think it's a cumbination of bad press for Georgia
Love as well. She was very well loved in Australia
after being on The Bachelorette, and I just think it's
this downward negative spiral of bad bad press after bad press. Yeah,
I think that by accepting an all expenses paid trip
to Saudi Arabia, a country that is so well known
(07:07):
for beheading women and members of the LGBTQI community as well,
in particular journalist. It just was such a bad move,
and I don't think that there would have been so
much outrage if they just went or chose to go
to Saudi Arabia themselves. The fact that they're receiving some
sort of kickback or payment in the form of a
trip to promote the country is what people really seem
(07:29):
to have a problem with. So if I agree with
your point about people expecting more from Georgia because she
has been a journalist, and I think it is because
her recommendations offer more weight, She has more credibility, so
people are sad to see her putting her name behind
a country which may not be a safe place for
people to travel to. Well, that's the thing. Particularly when
(07:49):
you're in a situation where you're being provided protection by
the country's tourism department and they want to ensure that
you have the most fantastic time in their country. It
is a little bit differ for maybe some a young
woman who's choosing to go over there because she's seen
it on Georgia Love's Instagram account, but she doesn't have
the sort of safety measures in place that someone who
(08:10):
is being brought over by the tourism company does have.
Well playing devil's advocate here, does something visiting a country
mean that you agree with how that country is running
and what's happened in the past, Because for many traveling
it's all about experiencing different cultures and lifestyles. So it
doesn't necessarily mean that when you visit a country that
you advocate for everything that that country represents while you're
(08:32):
visiting it. Will you make a really good point, Kate,
because think about Bali. I mean, we had members of
the Bali Nine, fellow Australians who were executed for drug
offenses over there, and it hasn't stopped people from traveling.
I really do think that the backlash has a lot
to do with this changing perception of Georgia Love following
that casual racism scandal. And I do think that she
is being put under a very big microscope at the
(08:53):
moment and every single move she's making is being analyzed.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
We have had and it's not a phrase I would
often use from.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
How Tammy Henbury has sparked debate about payment in the
modeling industry after posting a casting call on her Instagram story.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Sophie, what happened?
Speaker 1 (09:09):
Yeah, Well as you say, Amy Tammy put out a
casting call on her Instagram for women to model her
activewear brand, Saski Now.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
The advert asked applicants to.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
Email a headshot, their size, and a link to their
social media accounts to their official casting email, which was
supplied in the post. The post then went on to
say that the four Saski girls chosen will receive an
unreleased active were set plus a two hundred dollars voucher.
It then wished the entrance good luck.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
Now.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
This post has sparked debate about whether it is fair
to compensate models for their time with free products or vouchers,
or whether we should expect those entering the industry to
work for exposure and to build connections.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
What do you guys think?
Speaker 1 (09:51):
I think it's important to point out that modeling is
a very real job. We found that out the hard
way by trying to take photos for our album cover work,
and I have a huge amount of respect for models.
It is a tough gig and most models do work
with agencies, and those agencies then take a percentage of
their fee, so it's a big business and I think
it's really disrespectful to just offer someone a two hundred
(10:13):
dollar voucher and a couple of active wear sets. Yeah,
and models have spent many years mastering their craft, and
I feel like when brands decide to do callouts like these,
real models lose these opportunities because unfortunately, a two hundred
dollar clothing voucher isn't going to pay their tax, rent, petrol,
or household bills. And having the right model to represent
(10:34):
you in twenty twenty two.
Speaker 2 (10:35):
Is huge these days.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
I feel like as a society, we expect so much
more and for brand selection of a model to represent
what that brand believes in all how they want to
be seen. Have you noticed, though, that it seems like
influencers are putting out these brand calls now that we
dictate that we want to see different sorts of models,
we want to see different sizes, as different shapes, different ethnicities,
and it's like, oh, well, I have to then put
(10:59):
a call out for those time type of people because
those people aren't going to be represented by modeling agencies
and I can just pay them the pittance because they're
not real models.
Speaker 2 (11:08):
Like that's how I feel.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
It's like very disrespectful, and it's also they think, oh,
I'm covering my ass by getting a mix of people in,
but actually it's very offensive because they're saying, oh, well,
you're not really worth the real fee of a typical model.
Well that's the thing in some states, like in Adelaide,
for example, we have worked with brands and we have
gone to modeling agencies and sometimes it is difficult to
(11:30):
find the exact look that you're after. So I understand
that they may have wanted to do a broader call
out online to try and discover new talent, but I
think that the offer of clothing vouchers is a bit
unfair considering how profitable SASKI is. I mean, I could
definitely understand more startup businesses or smaller brands offering exposure
(11:51):
and vouchers as an incentive, but I don't understand why
they wouldn't fairly compensate the models when they clearly have
the money to do so, because these models are adding
a lot to their brand. These brand campaigns are huge.
They make huge bank of selling out activewear brands, and
I don't understand why as a business move, you wouldn't
just properly compensate people for their time.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
The thing is, a lot.
Speaker 1 (12:13):
Of people would pay money to be in a Saski
campaign for the experience, to put that on their resume
or in their portfolio, to say that they've worked for
a big brand. I do like the fact that they
are trying to open it up to real people, but
I do agree with your point k that is a
bit offensive to say, oh, we do want real people
in it, but we're not actually going to pay you
any money.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
We're going to give you a voucher. I agree with you, Amy.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
There is the other argument that this sort of exposure
for an up and coming model could be huge if
they get tagged in the photo, because Saski does have
over half a million followers, and it also could be
a good networking move for the model, who could befriend
one of the country's biggest influences.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
However, at the end of the day, whether the.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
Person is a real model or a real person, they're
still working and using their time basically for free for
the promise of clothes. And this is while the brand
earns so much money from the campaigns and photos that
they feature in. Well, if we do delve into this
topic further, modeling is a female dominated industry, and I
feel like we would never expect men in a male
dominated profession to work for vouchers. Yeah, that's the thing.
(13:15):
It just seems to worsen the gender pay gap. If
we're expecting female dominated areas to just work for free
clothes or gifted things. It just doesn't seem fair. It
is kind of interesting as well if you do compare
it to how fellow influencer an entrepreneur Britney Saunders handles
her marketing because when BRIT's brand Fate advertised for models,
(13:35):
they didn't specify size. Their only requests was that the
models must be confident in front of a camera, and
they also paid them for their work.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
Can I just say something, Yes, you can never have
enough hats, gloves and shoes.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
Fox reporter Tom Morris has been sacked after audio surfaced
online of him making sexist and homophobic comments about a
female colleague in a WhatsApp group, Amy, can you tell
us how all unfolded?
Speaker 2 (14:01):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (14:01):
So? Journalist Tom Morris was in the spotlight for a
very different reason. On Wednesday last week, during a postgame
press conference, he was unfairly berated by Western Bulldogs coach
Luke Beveridge, who labeled him a gutter journalist. Now we
won't go into all the boring details, but basically, Morris
reported correct information about the club and was unfairly attacked
(14:23):
by the coach. The Bulldogs coach was slammed for his
outburst and later released an official apology to Morris. Yeah,
the general consensus was that Luke Beveridge had been particularly
harsh towards Tom Morris, particularly when you think about sports journalism,
and a lot of the time all of the sports
journals are in the club's pockets. They won't report on
anything because they don't want to get the club offsite.
(14:45):
So for a journal to actually be reporting on facts
that are happening at the clubs is really important and
it does hold clubs to account. So there was a
lot of positive publicity around Morris. So the next day
a video recording surfaced online and quickly went viral. The
video was a screen recording of a WhatsApp group chat
between Morris and some friends. So some of his friends
(15:06):
had taken a photo off their TV screens of a
Fox sports presenter called Megan Barnard and asked Morris, I quote,
who's this little baddie. He responded with a voice message
saying what a top chick Barnard is and that she's
super hot and great to talk to, but is a lesbian.
He then made a slur saying that Barnard has her
liquor license and she's good at it. Now, you guys
(15:28):
have heard this audio, it hasn't actually been shared on
news websites. I believe this is due to legalities. What
was your first thoughts when hearing this audio. Oh, he
just came across as a tosser.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
I'm sorry, I have to put it out.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
He just came across as a jerk and as someone
who has worked in newsroom. He just seemed like that
typical lad in the years room that we've all come across.
And I mean, sorry, I might say a naive, but I.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
Didn't really know what a liquor license.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
Man. I've never actually heard it used in this way.
And it was really interesting to see the way this
story progressed and how he so quickly became the badding. Yes. Well,
Fox Sport acted swiftly and they suspended Morris whilst they
investigated what they described as an inappropriate audio recording, and
there have been reports that a second recording exists which
(16:17):
is unrelated to Barnard, which allegedly contains racist comments.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
Now it was a very.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Quick investigation by Fox Sport because they announced the same
day that they had sacked Morris, citing a zero tolerance policy. Now,
Fox Sports executive director Steve Crawley released a statement saying,
our culture at Fox Sport is based on a respectful,
inclusive environment and a fair go for all. While Tom's
journalism has made a valuable contribution to Fox Sport over
(16:43):
the past seven years, the message we became aware of
yesterday crossed the line. It was unacceptable. We have the
best in the business working at Fox Sports. We love
what we do. We have a reputation as a great
place to work. The bottom line is we are committed
to a work environment where everyone can come to work
in the knowledge they are safe, respected and valued. We
(17:03):
have zero tolerance for anything less than that. What do
you guys make of Fox sports response? Well, firstly, I
do want to point out for those who haven't seen
the exchange between the Western Bulldogs coach and Tom, but
it was super awkward because Tom kept saying, oh, Fox
Sports backs me. I'm backed by them, So for them
to swiftly turn around and get rid of him really
(17:24):
says a lot. And I think it is so great
that Fox acted so swiftly because from a pr perspective,
they did the right thing in shutting this down immediately
and saying they have zero tolerance for this sort of behavior,
particularly considering he has worked there for seven years. It
is quite a big call for them to make. Yeah,
and I have seen a lot of men online commenting
on articles about this incident, and they've either left revolting
(17:47):
comments about what a waste it is that Barnard is gay,
or they've said, oh, I don't get what the big
deal is, and just to put it to them, the
big deal is it is completely inappropriate to talk about
a colleague's second uality, full stop. But also it's beyond
disgusting to talk about it in such a derogatory way,
and it's something that needs to stop. This boys club
(18:09):
culture starts from these vile group chats, which are filled
with apparent jokes and slurs, and if we want to
make workplaces a safe space for everyone, this sort of
crap needs to be stamped out, and I'm so happy
to see that Fox Sports has stamped it out. And
it's refreshing to see an organization which, let's be honest,
would have a lot of male executives.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
Say no, this isn't okay.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Yeah, And I don't know, I feel like it hits
home a little bit for us because obviously, Amy, you
cannot talk about it. But almost six years ago now
we had comments throat well, you had comments throwing it
you're regarding your sexuality with someone questioning and saying, oh, well,
one in three women is a lesbian, Amy, so you
must be a lesbian. And the man in question was
not punished in any way.
Speaker 2 (18:52):
If anything, he was.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
Rewarded and those who would deem the issue I et
us were gotten rid of.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
So it is so fantastic to see that this sort
of commentary, even though it didn't actually happen in the workplace,
but this sort of commentary around a colleague is being
taken so seriously. And I do really feel for Barnard
because it would be incredibly awkward to be brought into
this narrative and the stories that are going on, because
I'm sure it's taking away.
Speaker 2 (19:16):
From the great work that she's doing.
Speaker 1 (19:17):
Yeah, well, there has been a lot of high profile
support force Fox Sports decision. So AFL chief executive Gil
McLaughlin labeled the comments clearly unacceptable. Gary Lyon also condemned
the comments, and Fox Footy and ABC commentator Kelly Underwood,
who was the first female footy commentator, made a really
good point. She said that the owners is now on
(19:37):
men to stand up to this type of behavior and
lead the charge for change. She said, we as women
and as leaders in the industry, we can scream from
the rooftops and get accused of sticking up for your
mates or winging.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Where are the men?
Speaker 1 (19:50):
That's what's going to change the culture here. And I
completely agree with Kelly, and to be honest, having previously worked,
as Sophie said, in the media, I've seen this time
and time again where people or organizations will publicly condemn
something but then do it themselves. And I think that
men need to start calling each other out when these
types of group chats go on and say listen, that's
(20:11):
not actually cool to say that. And we also need
to stamp out this rhetoric that boys will be boys
and these are the types of conversations that are normal.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
For them to have.
Speaker 1 (20:19):
I also think it's really fascinating that this conversation took
part in a friend WhatsApp group. Now I'm led to
believe that the friends exposed this audio, which really says
a lot about how they feel about Tom. Well, it's
either one of the friends who has leaked it, or
it is a friend who has sent it on to
another friend and they have leaked. So why would you
(20:40):
ever send that audio onto another friend that unless you're
trying to stitch your friend up or say what a jerk?
Though exactly so, Kate, how has Megan Barnard responded, because
I really felt for her being at the center of
this media story. Well, she has handled herself incredibly well.
She's currently in New Zealand anchoring the ICC Women's World Cup,
and she put out a statement on Instagram on Sunday
(21:01):
saying she'd been overwhelmed by the public support, but said
coming out should never be taken out of someone's hands.
Meghan wrote to everyone who has reached out, thank you. Fortunately,
I'm at a place in my life where I am
comfortable with who I am and I can handle something
deeply personal becoming public, But had this happened as recently
as a few years ago, it would not have been
(21:23):
the case. Coming out is a process and should never
be taken out of someone's hands, nor should anyone be
spoken about in such a degrading manner. I hope my
experience can be a catalyst for change in not just
the sports industry, but in every industry.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
Well.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Megan made a great point because this leaked recording has
literally outed her and has plasted her sexuality all over
the newspapers. So Megan hadn't discussed her sexuality publicly, and why.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Should she have to.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
She's a reporter and her sexuality has nothing to do
with her job. It is a really interesting one because
I don't know who to point the blame out for
outing Megan, because obviously this video went viral online and
it was within the public interest for the media.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
To report on it.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
But is it actually Morris's fault for making the disgusting
claims or is there any onus on the friends to
have not publicly shared this. Are they at fault whoever
shared this video? Are they just as much to blame
as Morris? Or are they actually the good guys for
exposing this journalist's behavior.
Speaker 2 (22:23):
Well, I think Megan is the clear victim amongst this.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
All the audio recording had nothing to do with him
facing off against the Western Bulldogs. Yes, it has raised
his profile and it has put him in the spotlight. However,
I think that this could have been handled internally. That
being said, obviously someone chose to put it out there
on social media. I think the media itself ethically, they
probably shouldn't have included Meghan's name. Yes, of course if
(22:49):
they said a colleague, it does whittle it down to
some people, but not everyone knows who works behind the
scenes of Fox. But the thing is people are going
to go and seek out this recording and they're going
to find out who it was. Could the friends not
have bleeped out her name? Yeah, completely Amy. I think
that Megan's identity should have been withheld from this whole conversation,
and it is incredibly hard and.
Speaker 2 (23:09):
Unfair on her.
Speaker 1 (23:10):
I do really wonder how the Western Borders coach reacted
to this, because I don't know.
Speaker 2 (23:17):
It just seems to all be too neat.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
How this journo who he came up against has been
completely destroyed in the media. Very interesting timing. If he
isn't it it is. I just personally hope that the
way Fox Sports has reacted to this by getting rid
of Morris makes men think twice about discussing women in
such a disgusting way, and it has given a real
(23:39):
insight into conversations men have in these boys group chats,
and I suppose it just makes you realize that really
anything that you put out there through whether it's on
social media or whether it's in a group chat, can
get out there, so people need to think wisely about
what they post. It really blows my mind that people
record voice, memos or vision of themselves like that in
(24:01):
this day and age. By sharing this with more Game Mum,
I pecifically ask for more Orgasma and Rowano Steine. The
Internet went into a frenzy on Friday night when an
influencer shared a photo of her wearing a white dress
to her friend's wedding. The judgment that followed was swift
and harsh, so much so that the bride was forced
to defend her friend's decision on the night of her wedding.
(24:24):
Out of respect for the bride, we are not naming
the influencer as we don't want to add any more
distress or distraction from her special day. However, we did
want to discuss the immense judgment around weddings and just
how ridiculous some of the traditions are. I've now been
engaged for ten months and am deep in the wedding
planning process. Well, so for Amy, you both have been
(24:44):
engaged for three months, and I think the judgment actually
starts the day you get engaged and people ask you
about the way your partner proposed and they judged the ring.
Did you guys feel that judgment from the start? I
feel like it was different for you and I because
I don't feel like the judgment w so much around
how they proposed, but around the fact that they did
it on the same day and whether we were upset
(25:06):
about that, And then there was judgment that the rings
were the same. Well, I personally feel a little bit
of judgment around the fact that I haven't locked in
a date. Well, I mean, talking about all of this judgment,
I feel like we are all guilty of judgment as well.
I mean, there's been so many times on this podcast
that we've discussed influencers, rings or the way they were proposed.
I feel like it's kind of human nature to comment
on weddings, because always when I go to a wedding,
(25:28):
I can't help but view things as, oh, would I
want to have this? Or do I not like that?
Like you kind of use it as a judgment on
things that you want to do for your wedding. It's
funny you say that so, because I had dinner with
some friends a couple months ago and we were talking
about wedding planning, and they were asking us what Dale
and I wanted to do, and then they started talking
about friends' weddings they'd been to, which weren't so impressive,
(25:49):
and it made me really nervous to actually say what
I wanted to have on the day because I felt
like there might be some judgment around it. The thing is,
in most aspects of life, people seem to unders stand
the rule that you need to keep your thoughts to
yourself about people's personal decisions that don't affect you. However,
when it comes to weddings, it's a whole different story.
(26:09):
And as you were saying, so, I am no saint
when it comes to judging weddings. I often feel like
I'm on that old TV show for weddings where you
judge everything at the wedding, from the food to the dress,
to the first dance to the song choices. And this
was even before I started planning my own wedding, But
now that I'm in the process of actually planning it,
I have felt so overwhelmed with a sense of what
(26:30):
will people think? And I actually went and got my
wedding dress this week, and while the process was heaps
of fun, I did find it stressful thinking like, what
are people going to think about the dress I chose,
rather than actually focusing on what I liked. When it
comes to wedding dresses, I think they're the biggest aspect
of what is judged on the day because the dress
can't be too expensive or too cheap, and you have
(26:52):
to look the best you have ever looked in your
whole life. And it's like every single guest is they're
judging you, and you've got to understand you can't please everyone.
It's such a personal decision that ultimately you're not going
to keep everyone happy.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
Do you know what?
Speaker 1 (27:05):
I've just thought of another judgment that women now face,
and this is a really modern one. It's if you
choose to take your husband's name, because I feel like
previously it was a done thing that every woman just
took the husband's name, and now we are seeing more
and more women choose to keep their name or hyphenate it.
And for me, I'm in a really interesting situation where
(27:26):
my partner has a double barreled last name, so there
is no way I can double barrel it or triple
barrel trible barrel. Thank you so well, you could, but
it would be extremely long. Yeah, all the last names
are really long and very hard. I'm really confused what
to do because I could remove one of his names,
but then he has strong ties to both names, and it's.
Speaker 2 (27:44):
A really difficult situation.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
And I also feel as a feminist, I feel like
whatever decision I make, people are going to judge me
as well. Well, you could simply keep your own last time,
I could exactly exactly, but that's the thing. I think
that people now expect you to do that, and then
if you decide against that and go down the traditional route,
people have judgments about that as well. So it's really
hard to know what to do. I think you've really
(28:09):
touched on amy because I think the other main reason
why there is so much judgment around weddings comes down
to families, because traditionally weddings were about bringing two families
together and it was all about the parents of the
bride passing this ownership of their daughter over to the groom. However,
these days parents still do play a significant role in
the wedding. Often they contribute significantly to the wedding budget,
(28:33):
so it really makes sense that the people who are
chipping in the money would have an opinion on how
their money is spent. These days, though weddings are becoming
more about the two people rather than the families, however,
the opinions of the people in the audience are still
very important and an interview in Bustle, owner and creative
director of Colour Pop Events Leah Winberg said, this weird
(28:54):
sense of entitlement comes over people when it comes to weddings.
Things people would never do or say under any other
circumstances suddenly become par for the course in the context
of a wedding. If you hosted a dinner party at
your home, would anyone dare tell you to your face
they thought the food was subpar? Of course not. But
when it comes to a wedding, people are going to
let the criticism fly freely. Well, in light of the
(29:17):
influencer getting slammed for breaking wedding etiquette, I thought it
would be quite fun to actually put her said crime
into perspective by discussing the real meaning behind wedding traditions. So,
of course, her crime was wearing a white dress to
a wedding, and I think everyone knows the tradition behind
the dress. White represents purity and virginity, and if you
(29:39):
wear a white dress to a wedding, it's thought to
detract from the bride and be quite rude. I've got
to put my hand up. I have worn a white
dress to my cousin's wedding. It was not as elaborate
as the influencer in question. So I think it's sort
of about whether or not the person is seen to
be stealing the spotlight, I think these days, and we
saw it with the whole Kendle Jenna controversy when she
(30:01):
wore that black, revealing, very eye catching dress. I think
at the end of the day, if the bride in
question is happy with what the guests wore, that's.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
All that should matter.
Speaker 1 (30:11):
I can totally see why people were a little bit
surprised when they saw this influencer in the gown because
it was quite an elaborate gown. But in saying that,
it appears that the theme of the wedding was glamour,
so it really did go with the theme. Yeah. I
just think it's the bride's prerogative. And if she has
come out and said she was very happy with what
her guest was wearing, then let's just stop the conversation there.
(30:33):
In terms of wedding dresses, did you guys know that
before the mid eighteen hundreds, brides actually wore red dresses
And it was actually Queen Victoria who started the trend
of white dresses because she chose to wear a white
lacy dress when she married Prince Albert, and at the
time white actually represented wealth as opposed to purity. So
(30:53):
are you saying that if Queen Victoria hadn't changed it,
we would be discussing influencers who dared to wear red
at their friend's wedding. Yes, exactly right. Red is so
weird to me. I think it must be something to
do with love. I suppose red represents hearts and Valentine's Day,
but it just blows my mind. Can you think of
the color palettes we would have had if people wore
(31:14):
red to their wedding. I know, well, I was kind
of thinking more it might be around like virginity and
purity seems to be a big topic. I was thinking,
does it represent the hymen? Because? Oh, because did you
guys know the cutting of the cake is meant to
represent the breaking of the hymen?
Speaker 2 (31:30):
That is absolutely vile.
Speaker 1 (31:31):
I actually when I was at a wedding recently where
they were cutting the cake, and I did say to
the person sitting next to me, do you know what
that's symbolic for?
Speaker 2 (31:38):
And they had no idea.
Speaker 1 (31:39):
So I don't think that this is actually as well
known as we think it is. But it just makes
me not want to have a cake at all. Yeah. Well,
back to dresses, and I found this quite surprising because
apparently back in the day, the bride and bridesmaids used
to wear literally the same dress, and this was used
to try and confuse the bride's ex partner if he
(32:00):
was trying to steal her away. It was also used
as a method to outsmart evil spirits that were trying
to ruin the bride's happiness, because the theory was if
it's not obvious who the bride is and these people
can't ruin her day. Wait, so they could obviously wear
white then so you know, the whole non white thing
hasn't been that long of a tradition. Then well, the
(32:20):
thing is, I don't think it came down to the
color of the dress. I think it was more the
style because it was made by kuture designer and I'm
going to butcher this but Auguru or something I think
that name, yeah, when it might sound familiar to you
because it was actually the designer that created Olivia Rodgers's
second wedding dress. So it's fairly obvious that it was
(32:41):
a very fancy dress, and maybe it was a little
bit too fancy because it did seem to take the
attention away a little bit from the bride, particularly online.
It's funny because the only reason I'd really be annoyed
at someone for wearing a white dress is just because
I've forgone wearing really night white, nice white dresses before
in the past to engagement parts and weddings myself. I
(33:01):
have two funny traditions to end on. The first is,
do you guys know what the meaning of the garter is?
Because it's pretty disgusting. I feel like, whatever the meaning is,
it's going to make me not want to wear a garter. Yeah. So,
apparently back in the day, newly weds were expected to
consummate their marriage immediately after the wedding while their friends
(33:22):
and family waited and listened outside, so the groom would
then come out and present the garter to the crowd
once the deed was done. As a bit of a
light yep, it's happened. That is disgusting. Gues. My mum
keeps saying that she doesn't want to stay with you
and us after the at the Airbnb.
Speaker 2 (33:39):
After the wedding, it's going to have a garter flung
at her.
Speaker 1 (33:43):
Yuck. I don't know, maybe that's got something to do
with it. Well, lastly, I think you guys will find
this funny. Originally, the purpose of the best man was
to make sure the bride didn't escape during the ceremony,
so if the parents didn't agree with the marriage, the
best man was actually asked kidnap the bride.
Speaker 2 (34:01):
Oh my god.
Speaker 1 (34:02):
And in terms of the title the best man, it
wasn't just you know, your best friend or your brother.
Back then, it was the person who was the strongest
and most capable of using a sword or weapons to
fight off enemies and rival attackers during the ceremony.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
This is fuck.
Speaker 1 (34:17):
This makes me not want to have any sort of
wording traditions because it's so clear that they have been
created by these misogynistic men back hundreds of years ago.
So you're not going to have a best man because
well might have a best woman? No, No, yeah, Well
I just think it kind of puts into perspective this
whole white dress debate and if your friend is happy
(34:37):
for you to wear a white dress, why not wear it. Well,
I think that's all we have time for today. Thank
you so much for joining us for today's episode. If
you have enjoyed it, could you please make sure you
subscribe on Apple Podcasts and also Spotify and make sure
you mention the podcast to a friend.
Speaker 2 (34:53):
I always love when people join our Facebook community.
Speaker 1 (34:56):
And they say that they have been recommended the podcast
by a friend. And if you'd like to join in
on all the conversation, please head to our Facebook community,
which is outspoken the podcast community.
Speaker 2 (35:06):
Please tell us what topics you did.
Speaker 1 (35:07):
And did not enjoy, because we had a little debate
today about which ones were our faiths. We'd love to
hear your soaking the fire there and if you would
like to follow us on Instagram and on TikTok, you
can find us at Outspoken Underscore the Underscore Podcast
Hello, and welcome to Outspoken. You're dose of the hottest
influencer and pop culture news twice a week. I'm Kate
Torba and I'm joined by my sisters and journalists Amy
and Sophie. On today's show, Tammy Hembro's casting call, controversy
Fox Sports SAX reporter over sexist and homophobic message and
why are we so judgmental about weddings? But First, former
(00:25):
bachelorette and journalist Georgia Love and her partner Lee Elliott
are facing backlash after promoting an all expenses paid trip
to Saudia Arabia, a country well known for its human
rights atrocities. Sophie, what happened? Well, it has been a
turbulent six months for Georgia Love. In September of last year,
she was taken off the air by seven News following
(00:46):
a casual racism scandal, which also saw her losing a
string of lucrative brand deals. Now, at the end of February,
Georgia announced she was leaving seven News for a job
in pr and soon after that announcement, she started teasing
that she and Lee were off on an overseas adventure.
Now that international borders were open, She urged her followers
to guess where they were off to, and it seems
(01:08):
that none of her followers guest correctly. So Georgia shared
a photo of her and husband Lee arriving at King
Khalid International Airport with the caption, well, I can categorically say,
not one person guest We're in Saudia, Arabia after only
opening to tourists in twenty nineteen. We can't state how
excited we are to be among the first Aussies to
(01:28):
tour Saudi to us. It's important to see, experience and
learn about all cultures around US, and to see how
much and how fast our world is changing. We can't
wait to bring you along on this incredible experience with us.
So as part of the post, Georgia included the hashtag
visit Saudi and also tag the Instagram page by the
same name. Now Georgia and Lee were part of a
(01:49):
group of ten influencers from around the globe flown over
to promote the Middle Eastern country. Among them was a
Lithuanian travel blogger called sky Nate, whose Instagram posts include
Georgia and Lee in background. Now, Georgia and Lee have
both faced backlash following their Instagram posts, and this is
because Saudi Arabia's government has copped heavy criticism for its
(02:09):
human rights abuses, including its treatment of women and its
LGBTQI plus community, as well as for repressing political opposition.
Both followers and critics were quick to show their outrage
about the trip. Entertainment journalist Peter Ford tweeted a link
to a news article revealing Saudi Arabia recently executed eighty
one convicts in a single day. Peter wrote, this is
(02:31):
the country Georgia love accepted a free trip to visit
Of the eighty one, you can be sure there is
a disproportionate number of women, gays, and possibly journalists. Did
you really need a freebee trip that badly, Georgia. One
follower also wrote, they executed eighty two people a few
days ago, not to mention the lack of women's rights
and the LGBTQI plus community. Being a journalist, it might
(02:54):
have been a good idea to research a country before
promoting it. Their human rights are appalling, disappointing. It seems
a free holiday is more important than morals. Another said,
why not use your influence slush platform to promote somewhere
that doesn't have an atrocious record of human rights violations. Now.
In the comments section, Georgia denied it was a paid partnership.
(03:14):
She said, we do not in any way endorse behaviors
of the past or any human rights violations that have
occurred in this country. We are also not being paid
to be here. We are here for ourselves and to
experience and see a different country and culture, as that
is for us what travel is about. We want to
see and experience as much of the world as we can.
This includes all cultures and religions, whether we follow them,
(03:38):
agree with them or not. Lee also weighed in and
responded to the criticism on his posts.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
He said, I truly hear.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
And understand what you're saying and where you're coming from.
We thought long and hard about coming, and we decided
to come as the world is changing for the better
and Saudi along with it. We strongly believe by Saudi
opening up to the rest of the world and by
tourists being here, it has to be more accountable and
hope this is a change for the better. Trust me,
we looked into it before coming and believe many things
have changed for the better. In more recent times and
(04:07):
hope they continued to do so now. After the criticism,
Lee also praised the country, saying the trip was organized
and run solely by women who were here on the ground.
Leading the tour now news dot com weighed in and
reported that despite Lee saying that the tours were led
heavily by females, the other influences on the trip seemed
to be posting about male tour guide, so it didn't
(04:28):
really add up. Well, it gets even murkier because, despite
claiming that the trip was not a paid partnership, Georgia
tagged Instagram page visit Saudi in all of her posts
and used the hashtag visit Saudi, which is of course
a telltale sign of a paid partnership.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Or a gifted partnership.
Speaker 1 (04:45):
Yeah, there's obviously goods exchanging hands at some point here.
And The Herald's son reported that the couple weren't paid
directly for the trip, but Saudi Arabian Tourism approached the
couple and was fitting the bill for the airfares, accommodation
and expenses, and so you when you were reading out
George's response, they were quite clever with their words. We
were not paid to go on the trip. It's like,
(05:06):
but you've got a free trip. Well, currently, Georgia and
Lee they are actually still on the trip. I believe
it may be their last day there today, and they
continue to be in the behind the scenes vision in
the other influencers Instagram posts. However, on Friday, Georgia and
Lee removed all of their posts about the trip on
their Instagram pages. And I'm really interested because, considering this
(05:27):
trip is pretty much a contra deal. I wonder how
the organizers feel that their posts have been removed because presumably, well,
really realistically, they received the trip in exchange for exposure,
but now that exposure has been removed. Yeah, but the
exposure has been so negative, so I'm sure that the
Saudi tourism organizers would want them to remove all of
(05:49):
the images because there are so many bad comments under
each of the posts. Yeah, but that being said, there
would be some people who would have seen the Instagram
stories and thought, wow, this is a part of the
world I've never thought of about visiting.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
So the backlash you think has been good for tourism.
Speaker 1 (06:03):
Now, I'm not saying it's great, but out of there
would have been a percentage of her followers who probably
would have thought, hey, that's a new holiday destination. Yeah,
but there might have been a lot of people that
didn't know how bad Saudi Arabia's human rights violations are.
So if I do understand the decision to remove the post,
it's beneficial to both parties. I think in this instance now,
in regards to this backlash, I feel like Georgia Love
(06:24):
is being held to a higher standard because she is
a journalist. She is expected to know what's going on
in the world, and now that she's working in PR,
I think people would also assume that she would think
really strategically about what brands or partnerships she's choosing to
align herself with. I think that's why there has been
such strong reaction to this. And despite the fact that
(06:45):
Lee said that they both had thought long and hard
about the trip, I believe they really made the wrong decision.
I think it's a cumbination of bad press for Georgia
Love as well. She was very well loved in Australia
after being on The Bachelorette, and I just think it's
this downward negative spiral of bad bad press after bad press. Yeah,
I think that by accepting an all expenses paid trip
to Saudi Arabia, a country that is so well known
(07:07):
for beheading women and members of the LGBTQI community as well,
in particular journalist. It just was such a bad move,
and I don't think that there would have been so
much outrage if they just went or chose to go
to Saudi Arabia themselves. The fact that they're receiving some
sort of kickback or payment in the form of a
trip to promote the country is what people really seem
(07:29):
to have a problem with. So if I agree with
your point about people expecting more from Georgia because she
has been a journalist, and I think it is because
her recommendations offer more weight, She has more credibility, so
people are sad to see her putting her name behind
a country which may not be a safe place for
people to travel to. Well, that's the thing. Particularly when
(07:49):
you're in a situation where you're being provided protection by
the country's tourism department and they want to ensure that
you have the most fantastic time in their country. It
is a little bit differ for maybe some a young
woman who's choosing to go over there because she's seen
it on Georgia Love's Instagram account, but she doesn't have
the sort of safety measures in place that someone who
(08:10):
is being brought over by the tourism company does have.
Well playing devil's advocate here, does something visiting a country
mean that you agree with how that country is running
and what's happened in the past, Because for many traveling
it's all about experiencing different cultures and lifestyles. So it
doesn't necessarily mean that when you visit a country that
you advocate for everything that that country represents while you're
(08:32):
visiting it. Will you make a really good point, Kate,
because think about Bali. I mean, we had members of
the Bali Nine, fellow Australians who were executed for drug
offenses over there, and it hasn't stopped people from traveling.
I really do think that the backlash has a lot
to do with this changing perception of Georgia Love following
that casual racism scandal. And I do think that she
is being put under a very big microscope at the
(08:53):
moment and every single move she's making is being analyzed.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
We have had and it's not a phrase I would
often use from.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
How Tammy Henbury has sparked debate about payment in the
modeling industry after posting a casting call on her Instagram story.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Sophie, what happened?
Speaker 1 (09:09):
Yeah, Well as you say, Amy Tammy put out a
casting call on her Instagram for women to model her
activewear brand, Saski Now.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
The advert asked applicants to.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
Email a headshot, their size, and a link to their
social media accounts to their official casting email, which was
supplied in the post. The post then went on to
say that the four Saski girls chosen will receive an
unreleased active were set plus a two hundred dollars voucher.
It then wished the entrance good luck.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
Now.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
This post has sparked debate about whether it is fair
to compensate models for their time with free products or vouchers,
or whether we should expect those entering the industry to
work for exposure and to build connections.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
What do you guys think?
Speaker 1 (09:51):
I think it's important to point out that modeling is
a very real job. We found that out the hard
way by trying to take photos for our album cover work,
and I have a huge amount of respect for models.
It is a tough gig and most models do work
with agencies, and those agencies then take a percentage of
their fee, so it's a big business and I think
it's really disrespectful to just offer someone a two hundred
(10:13):
dollar voucher and a couple of active wear sets. Yeah,
and models have spent many years mastering their craft, and
I feel like when brands decide to do callouts like these,
real models lose these opportunities because unfortunately, a two hundred
dollar clothing voucher isn't going to pay their tax, rent, petrol,
or household bills. And having the right model to represent
(10:34):
you in twenty twenty two.
Speaker 2 (10:35):
Is huge these days.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
I feel like as a society, we expect so much
more and for brand selection of a model to represent
what that brand believes in all how they want to
be seen. Have you noticed, though, that it seems like
influencers are putting out these brand calls now that we
dictate that we want to see different sorts of models,
we want to see different sizes, as different shapes, different ethnicities,
and it's like, oh, well, I have to then put
(10:59):
a call out for those time type of people because
those people aren't going to be represented by modeling agencies
and I can just pay them the pittance because they're
not real models.
Speaker 2 (11:08):
Like that's how I feel.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
It's like very disrespectful, and it's also they think, oh,
I'm covering my ass by getting a mix of people in,
but actually it's very offensive because they're saying, oh, well,
you're not really worth the real fee of a typical model.
Well that's the thing in some states, like in Adelaide,
for example, we have worked with brands and we have
gone to modeling agencies and sometimes it is difficult to
(11:30):
find the exact look that you're after. So I understand
that they may have wanted to do a broader call
out online to try and discover new talent, but I
think that the offer of clothing vouchers is a bit
unfair considering how profitable SASKI is. I mean, I could
definitely understand more startup businesses or smaller brands offering exposure
(11:51):
and vouchers as an incentive, but I don't understand why
they wouldn't fairly compensate the models when they clearly have
the money to do so, because these models are adding
a lot to their brand. These brand campaigns are huge.
They make huge bank of selling out activewear brands, and
I don't understand why as a business move, you wouldn't
just properly compensate people for their time.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
The thing is, a lot.
Speaker 1 (12:13):
Of people would pay money to be in a Saski
campaign for the experience, to put that on their resume
or in their portfolio, to say that they've worked for
a big brand. I do like the fact that they
are trying to open it up to real people, but
I do agree with your point k that is a
bit offensive to say, oh, we do want real people
in it, but we're not actually going to pay you
any money.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
We're going to give you a voucher. I agree with you, Amy.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
There is the other argument that this sort of exposure
for an up and coming model could be huge if
they get tagged in the photo, because Saski does have
over half a million followers, and it also could be
a good networking move for the model, who could befriend
one of the country's biggest influences.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
However, at the end of the day, whether the.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
Person is a real model or a real person, they're
still working and using their time basically for free for
the promise of clothes. And this is while the brand
earns so much money from the campaigns and photos that
they feature in. Well, if we do delve into this
topic further, modeling is a female dominated industry, and I
feel like we would never expect men in a male
dominated profession to work for vouchers. Yeah, that's the thing.
(13:15):
It just seems to worsen the gender pay gap. If
we're expecting female dominated areas to just work for free
clothes or gifted things. It just doesn't seem fair. It
is kind of interesting as well if you do compare
it to how fellow influencer an entrepreneur Britney Saunders handles
her marketing because when BRIT's brand Fate advertised for models,
(13:35):
they didn't specify size. Their only requests was that the
models must be confident in front of a camera, and
they also paid them for their work.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
Can I just say something, Yes, you can never have
enough hats, gloves and shoes.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
Fox reporter Tom Morris has been sacked after audio surfaced
online of him making sexist and homophobic comments about a
female colleague in a WhatsApp group, Amy, can you tell
us how all unfolded?
Speaker 2 (14:01):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (14:01):
So? Journalist Tom Morris was in the spotlight for a
very different reason. On Wednesday last week, during a postgame
press conference, he was unfairly berated by Western Bulldogs coach
Luke Beveridge, who labeled him a gutter journalist. Now we
won't go into all the boring details, but basically, Morris
reported correct information about the club and was unfairly attacked
(14:23):
by the coach. The Bulldogs coach was slammed for his
outburst and later released an official apology to Morris. Yeah,
the general consensus was that Luke Beveridge had been particularly
harsh towards Tom Morris, particularly when you think about sports journalism,
and a lot of the time all of the sports
journals are in the club's pockets. They won't report on
anything because they don't want to get the club offsite.
(14:45):
So for a journal to actually be reporting on facts
that are happening at the clubs is really important and
it does hold clubs to account. So there was a
lot of positive publicity around Morris. So the next day
a video recording surfaced online and quickly went viral. The
video was a screen recording of a WhatsApp group chat
between Morris and some friends. So some of his friends
(15:06):
had taken a photo off their TV screens of a
Fox sports presenter called Megan Barnard and asked Morris, I quote,
who's this little baddie. He responded with a voice message
saying what a top chick Barnard is and that she's
super hot and great to talk to, but is a lesbian.
He then made a slur saying that Barnard has her
liquor license and she's good at it. Now, you guys
(15:28):
have heard this audio, it hasn't actually been shared on
news websites. I believe this is due to legalities. What
was your first thoughts when hearing this audio. Oh, he
just came across as a tosser.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
I'm sorry, I have to put it out.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
He just came across as a jerk and as someone
who has worked in newsroom. He just seemed like that
typical lad in the years room that we've all come across.
And I mean, sorry, I might say a naive, but I.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
Didn't really know what a liquor license.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
Man. I've never actually heard it used in this way.
And it was really interesting to see the way this
story progressed and how he so quickly became the badding. Yes. Well,
Fox Sport acted swiftly and they suspended Morris whilst they
investigated what they described as an inappropriate audio recording, and
there have been reports that a second recording exists which
(16:17):
is unrelated to Barnard, which allegedly contains racist comments.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
Now it was a very.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Quick investigation by Fox Sport because they announced the same
day that they had sacked Morris, citing a zero tolerance policy. Now,
Fox Sports executive director Steve Crawley released a statement saying,
our culture at Fox Sport is based on a respectful,
inclusive environment and a fair go for all. While Tom's
journalism has made a valuable contribution to Fox Sport over
(16:43):
the past seven years, the message we became aware of
yesterday crossed the line. It was unacceptable. We have the
best in the business working at Fox Sports. We love
what we do. We have a reputation as a great
place to work. The bottom line is we are committed
to a work environment where everyone can come to work
in the knowledge they are safe, respected and valued. We
(17:03):
have zero tolerance for anything less than that. What do
you guys make of Fox sports response? Well, firstly, I
do want to point out for those who haven't seen
the exchange between the Western Bulldogs coach and Tom, but
it was super awkward because Tom kept saying, oh, Fox
Sports backs me. I'm backed by them, So for them
to swiftly turn around and get rid of him really
(17:24):
says a lot. And I think it is so great
that Fox acted so swiftly because from a pr perspective,
they did the right thing in shutting this down immediately
and saying they have zero tolerance for this sort of behavior,
particularly considering he has worked there for seven years. It
is quite a big call for them to make. Yeah,
and I have seen a lot of men online commenting
on articles about this incident, and they've either left revolting
(17:47):
comments about what a waste it is that Barnard is gay,
or they've said, oh, I don't get what the big
deal is, and just to put it to them, the
big deal is it is completely inappropriate to talk about
a colleague's second uality, full stop. But also it's beyond
disgusting to talk about it in such a derogatory way,
and it's something that needs to stop. This boys club
(18:09):
culture starts from these vile group chats, which are filled
with apparent jokes and slurs, and if we want to
make workplaces a safe space for everyone, this sort of
crap needs to be stamped out, and I'm so happy
to see that Fox Sports has stamped it out. And
it's refreshing to see an organization which, let's be honest,
would have a lot of male executives.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
Say no, this isn't okay.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Yeah, And I don't know, I feel like it hits
home a little bit for us because obviously, Amy, you
cannot talk about it. But almost six years ago now
we had comments throat well, you had comments throwing it
you're regarding your sexuality with someone questioning and saying, oh, well,
one in three women is a lesbian, Amy, so you
must be a lesbian. And the man in question was
not punished in any way.
Speaker 2 (18:52):
If anything, he was.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
Rewarded and those who would deem the issue I et
us were gotten rid of.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
So it is so fantastic to see that this sort
of commentary, even though it didn't actually happen in the workplace,
but this sort of commentary around a colleague is being
taken so seriously. And I do really feel for Barnard
because it would be incredibly awkward to be brought into
this narrative and the stories that are going on, because
I'm sure it's taking away.
Speaker 2 (19:16):
From the great work that she's doing.
Speaker 1 (19:17):
Yeah, well, there has been a lot of high profile
support force Fox Sports decision. So AFL chief executive Gil
McLaughlin labeled the comments clearly unacceptable. Gary Lyon also condemned
the comments, and Fox Footy and ABC commentator Kelly Underwood,
who was the first female footy commentator, made a really
good point. She said that the owners is now on
(19:37):
men to stand up to this type of behavior and
lead the charge for change. She said, we as women
and as leaders in the industry, we can scream from
the rooftops and get accused of sticking up for your
mates or winging.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Where are the men?
Speaker 1 (19:50):
That's what's going to change the culture here. And I
completely agree with Kelly, and to be honest, having previously worked,
as Sophie said, in the media, I've seen this time
and time again where people or organizations will publicly condemn
something but then do it themselves. And I think that
men need to start calling each other out when these
types of group chats go on and say listen, that's
(20:11):
not actually cool to say that. And we also need
to stamp out this rhetoric that boys will be boys
and these are the types of conversations that are normal.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
For them to have.
Speaker 1 (20:19):
I also think it's really fascinating that this conversation took
part in a friend WhatsApp group. Now I'm led to
believe that the friends exposed this audio, which really says
a lot about how they feel about Tom. Well, it's
either one of the friends who has leaked it, or
it is a friend who has sent it on to
another friend and they have leaked. So why would you
(20:40):
ever send that audio onto another friend that unless you're
trying to stitch your friend up or say what a jerk?
Though exactly so, Kate, how has Megan Barnard responded, because
I really felt for her being at the center of
this media story. Well, she has handled herself incredibly well.
She's currently in New Zealand anchoring the ICC Women's World Cup,
and she put out a statement on Instagram on Sunday
(21:01):
saying she'd been overwhelmed by the public support, but said
coming out should never be taken out of someone's hands.
Meghan wrote to everyone who has reached out, thank you. Fortunately,
I'm at a place in my life where I am
comfortable with who I am and I can handle something
deeply personal becoming public, But had this happened as recently
as a few years ago, it would not have been
(21:23):
the case. Coming out is a process and should never
be taken out of someone's hands, nor should anyone be
spoken about in such a degrading manner. I hope my
experience can be a catalyst for change in not just
the sports industry, but in every industry.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
Well.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Megan made a great point because this leaked recording has
literally outed her and has plasted her sexuality all over
the newspapers. So Megan hadn't discussed her sexuality publicly, and why.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Should she have to.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
She's a reporter and her sexuality has nothing to do
with her job. It is a really interesting one because
I don't know who to point the blame out for
outing Megan, because obviously this video went viral online and
it was within the public interest for the media.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
To report on it.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
But is it actually Morris's fault for making the disgusting
claims or is there any onus on the friends to
have not publicly shared this. Are they at fault whoever
shared this video? Are they just as much to blame
as Morris? Or are they actually the good guys for
exposing this journalist's behavior.
Speaker 2 (22:23):
Well, I think Megan is the clear victim amongst this.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
All the audio recording had nothing to do with him
facing off against the Western Bulldogs. Yes, it has raised
his profile and it has put him in the spotlight. However,
I think that this could have been handled internally. That
being said, obviously someone chose to put it out there
on social media. I think the media itself ethically, they
probably shouldn't have included Meghan's name. Yes, of course if
(22:49):
they said a colleague, it does whittle it down to
some people, but not everyone knows who works behind the
scenes of Fox. But the thing is people are going
to go and seek out this recording and they're going
to find out who it was. Could the friends not
have bleeped out her name? Yeah, completely Amy. I think
that Megan's identity should have been withheld from this whole conversation,
and it is incredibly hard and.
Speaker 2 (23:09):
Unfair on her.
Speaker 1 (23:10):
I do really wonder how the Western Borders coach reacted
to this, because I don't know.
Speaker 2 (23:17):
It just seems to all be too neat.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
How this journo who he came up against has been
completely destroyed in the media. Very interesting timing. If he
isn't it it is. I just personally hope that the
way Fox Sports has reacted to this by getting rid
of Morris makes men think twice about discussing women in
such a disgusting way, and it has given a real
(23:39):
insight into conversations men have in these boys group chats,
and I suppose it just makes you realize that really
anything that you put out there through whether it's on
social media or whether it's in a group chat, can
get out there, so people need to think wisely about
what they post. It really blows my mind that people
record voice, memos or vision of themselves like that in
(24:01):
this day and age. By sharing this with more Game Mum,
I pecifically ask for more Orgasma and Rowano Steine. The
Internet went into a frenzy on Friday night when an
influencer shared a photo of her wearing a white dress
to her friend's wedding. The judgment that followed was swift
and harsh, so much so that the bride was forced
to defend her friend's decision on the night of her wedding.
(24:24):
Out of respect for the bride, we are not naming
the influencer as we don't want to add any more
distress or distraction from her special day. However, we did
want to discuss the immense judgment around weddings and just
how ridiculous some of the traditions are. I've now been
engaged for ten months and am deep in the wedding
planning process. Well, so for Amy, you both have been
(24:44):
engaged for three months, and I think the judgment actually
starts the day you get engaged and people ask you
about the way your partner proposed and they judged the ring.
Did you guys feel that judgment from the start? I
feel like it was different for you and I because
I don't feel like the judgment w so much around
how they proposed, but around the fact that they did
it on the same day and whether we were upset
(25:06):
about that, And then there was judgment that the rings
were the same. Well, I personally feel a little bit
of judgment around the fact that I haven't locked in
a date. Well, I mean, talking about all of this judgment,
I feel like we are all guilty of judgment as well.
I mean, there's been so many times on this podcast
that we've discussed influencers, rings or the way they were proposed.
I feel like it's kind of human nature to comment
on weddings, because always when I go to a wedding,
(25:28):
I can't help but view things as, oh, would I
want to have this? Or do I not like that?
Like you kind of use it as a judgment on
things that you want to do for your wedding. It's
funny you say that so, because I had dinner with
some friends a couple months ago and we were talking
about wedding planning, and they were asking us what Dale
and I wanted to do, and then they started talking
about friends' weddings they'd been to, which weren't so impressive,
(25:49):
and it made me really nervous to actually say what
I wanted to have on the day because I felt
like there might be some judgment around it. The thing is,
in most aspects of life, people seem to unders stand
the rule that you need to keep your thoughts to
yourself about people's personal decisions that don't affect you. However,
when it comes to weddings, it's a whole different story.
(26:09):
And as you were saying, so, I am no saint
when it comes to judging weddings. I often feel like
I'm on that old TV show for weddings where you
judge everything at the wedding, from the food to the dress,
to the first dance to the song choices. And this
was even before I started planning my own wedding, But
now that I'm in the process of actually planning it,
I have felt so overwhelmed with a sense of what
(26:30):
will people think? And I actually went and got my
wedding dress this week, and while the process was heaps
of fun, I did find it stressful thinking like, what
are people going to think about the dress I chose,
rather than actually focusing on what I liked. When it
comes to wedding dresses, I think they're the biggest aspect
of what is judged on the day because the dress
can't be too expensive or too cheap, and you have
(26:52):
to look the best you have ever looked in your
whole life. And it's like every single guest is they're
judging you, and you've got to understand you can't please everyone.
It's such a personal decision that ultimately you're not going
to keep everyone happy.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
Do you know what?
Speaker 1 (27:05):
I've just thought of another judgment that women now face,
and this is a really modern one. It's if you
choose to take your husband's name, because I feel like
previously it was a done thing that every woman just
took the husband's name, and now we are seeing more
and more women choose to keep their name or hyphenate it.
And for me, I'm in a really interesting situation where
(27:26):
my partner has a double barreled last name, so there
is no way I can double barrel it or triple
barrel trible barrel. Thank you so well, you could, but
it would be extremely long. Yeah, all the last names
are really long and very hard. I'm really confused what
to do because I could remove one of his names,
but then he has strong ties to both names, and it's.
Speaker 2 (27:44):
A really difficult situation.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
And I also feel as a feminist, I feel like
whatever decision I make, people are going to judge me
as well. Well, you could simply keep your own last time,
I could exactly exactly, but that's the thing. I think
that people now expect you to do that, and then
if you decide against that and go down the traditional route,
people have judgments about that as well. So it's really
hard to know what to do. I think you've really
(28:09):
touched on amy because I think the other main reason
why there is so much judgment around weddings comes down
to families, because traditionally weddings were about bringing two families
together and it was all about the parents of the
bride passing this ownership of their daughter over to the groom. However,
these days parents still do play a significant role in
the wedding. Often they contribute significantly to the wedding budget,
(28:33):
so it really makes sense that the people who are
chipping in the money would have an opinion on how
their money is spent. These days, though weddings are becoming
more about the two people rather than the families, however,
the opinions of the people in the audience are still
very important and an interview in Bustle, owner and creative
director of Colour Pop Events Leah Winberg said, this weird
(28:54):
sense of entitlement comes over people when it comes to weddings.
Things people would never do or say under any other
circumstances suddenly become par for the course in the context
of a wedding. If you hosted a dinner party at
your home, would anyone dare tell you to your face
they thought the food was subpar? Of course not. But
when it comes to a wedding, people are going to
let the criticism fly freely. Well, in light of the
(29:17):
influencer getting slammed for breaking wedding etiquette, I thought it
would be quite fun to actually put her said crime
into perspective by discussing the real meaning behind wedding traditions. So,
of course, her crime was wearing a white dress to
a wedding, and I think everyone knows the tradition behind
the dress. White represents purity and virginity, and if you
(29:39):
wear a white dress to a wedding, it's thought to
detract from the bride and be quite rude. I've got
to put my hand up. I have worn a white
dress to my cousin's wedding. It was not as elaborate
as the influencer in question. So I think it's sort
of about whether or not the person is seen to
be stealing the spotlight, I think these days, and we
saw it with the whole Kendle Jenna controversy when she
(30:01):
wore that black, revealing, very eye catching dress. I think
at the end of the day, if the bride in
question is happy with what the guests wore, that's.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
All that should matter.
Speaker 1 (30:11):
I can totally see why people were a little bit
surprised when they saw this influencer in the gown because
it was quite an elaborate gown. But in saying that,
it appears that the theme of the wedding was glamour,
so it really did go with the theme. Yeah. I
just think it's the bride's prerogative. And if she has
come out and said she was very happy with what
her guest was wearing, then let's just stop the conversation there.
(30:33):
In terms of wedding dresses, did you guys know that
before the mid eighteen hundreds, brides actually wore red dresses
And it was actually Queen Victoria who started the trend
of white dresses because she chose to wear a white
lacy dress when she married Prince Albert, and at the
time white actually represented wealth as opposed to purity. So
(30:53):
are you saying that if Queen Victoria hadn't changed it,
we would be discussing influencers who dared to wear red
at their friend's wedding. Yes, exactly right. Red is so
weird to me. I think it must be something to
do with love. I suppose red represents hearts and Valentine's Day,
but it just blows my mind. Can you think of
the color palettes we would have had if people wore
(31:14):
red to their wedding. I know, well, I was kind
of thinking more it might be around like virginity and
purity seems to be a big topic. I was thinking,
does it represent the hymen? Because? Oh, because did you
guys know the cutting of the cake is meant to
represent the breaking of the hymen?
Speaker 2 (31:30):
That is absolutely vile.
Speaker 1 (31:31):
I actually when I was at a wedding recently where
they were cutting the cake, and I did say to
the person sitting next to me, do you know what
that's symbolic for?
Speaker 2 (31:38):
And they had no idea.
Speaker 1 (31:39):
So I don't think that this is actually as well
known as we think it is. But it just makes
me not want to have a cake at all. Yeah. Well,
back to dresses, and I found this quite surprising because
apparently back in the day, the bride and bridesmaids used
to wear literally the same dress, and this was used
to try and confuse the bride's ex partner if he
(32:00):
was trying to steal her away. It was also used
as a method to outsmart evil spirits that were trying
to ruin the bride's happiness, because the theory was if
it's not obvious who the bride is and these people
can't ruin her day. Wait, so they could obviously wear
white then so you know, the whole non white thing
hasn't been that long of a tradition. Then well, the
(32:20):
thing is, I don't think it came down to the
color of the dress. I think it was more the
style because it was made by kuture designer and I'm
going to butcher this but Auguru or something I think
that name, yeah, when it might sound familiar to you
because it was actually the designer that created Olivia Rodgers's
second wedding dress. So it's fairly obvious that it was
(32:41):
a very fancy dress, and maybe it was a little
bit too fancy because it did seem to take the
attention away a little bit from the bride, particularly online.
It's funny because the only reason I'd really be annoyed
at someone for wearing a white dress is just because
I've forgone wearing really night white, nice white dresses before
in the past to engagement parts and weddings myself. I
(33:01):
have two funny traditions to end on. The first is,
do you guys know what the meaning of the garter is?
Because it's pretty disgusting. I feel like, whatever the meaning is,
it's going to make me not want to wear a garter. Yeah. So,
apparently back in the day, newly weds were expected to
consummate their marriage immediately after the wedding while their friends
(33:22):
and family waited and listened outside, so the groom would
then come out and present the garter to the crowd
once the deed was done. As a bit of a
light yep, it's happened. That is disgusting. Gues. My mum
keeps saying that she doesn't want to stay with you
and us after the at the Airbnb.
Speaker 2 (33:39):
After the wedding, it's going to have a garter flung
at her.
Speaker 1 (33:43):
Yuck. I don't know, maybe that's got something to do
with it. Well, lastly, I think you guys will find
this funny. Originally, the purpose of the best man was
to make sure the bride didn't escape during the ceremony,
so if the parents didn't agree with the marriage, the
best man was actually asked kidnap the bride.
Speaker 2 (34:01):
Oh my god.
Speaker 1 (34:02):
And in terms of the title the best man, it
wasn't just you know, your best friend or your brother.
Back then, it was the person who was the strongest
and most capable of using a sword or weapons to
fight off enemies and rival attackers during the ceremony.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
This is fuck.
Speaker 1 (34:17):
This makes me not want to have any sort of
wording traditions because it's so clear that they have been
created by these misogynistic men back hundreds of years ago.
So you're not going to have a best man because
well might have a best woman? No, No, yeah, Well
I just think it kind of puts into perspective this
whole white dress debate and if your friend is happy
(34:37):
for you to wear a white dress, why not wear it. Well,
I think that's all we have time for today. Thank
you so much for joining us for today's episode. If
you have enjoyed it, could you please make sure you
subscribe on Apple Podcasts and also Spotify and make sure
you mention the podcast to a friend.
Speaker 2 (34:53):
I always love when people join our Facebook community.
Speaker 1 (34:56):
And they say that they have been recommended the podcast
by a friend. And if you'd like to join in
on all the conversation, please head to our Facebook community,
which is outspoken the podcast community.
Speaker 2 (35:06):
Please tell us what topics you did.
Speaker 1 (35:07):
And did not enjoy, because we had a little debate
today about which ones were our faiths. We'd love to
hear your soaking the fire there and if you would
like to follow us on Instagram and on TikTok, you
can find us at Outspoken Underscore the Underscore Podcast
Popular Podcasts
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.
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
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.