May 13, 2024 • 30 mins
Roxy Jacenko has announced she's stepping down from her $10 million house giveaway.
Piers Morgan is under fire for interviewing Baby Reindeer’s real life Martha…
And journalist Antoinette Lattouf breaks her silence over Inspired Unemployed’s prank.
Follow Outspoken on Instagram and TikTok, plus join in on the conversation in our Facebook Community. Podcast hosted by Amy Taeuber, Kate Taeuber and Sophie Taeuber.
Subscribe to Outspoken Plus
Outspoken Plus is our subscription offering that provides subscribers with exclusive access to BONUS weekly episodes. Every week, we’ll be dropping content so juicy, we’ve had to put it behind a paywall. A monthly Outspoken Plus subscription costs $5.99 a month, or save with our annual package, for just $49.99 a year*.
There are three ways you can become an Outspoken Plus subscriber. Apple users can subscribe via Apple Podcasts here: apple.co/outspoken, while Android users can subscribe via Spotify here: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/outspoken-plus/subscribe or Patreon here: https://www.patreon.com/outspoken_plus. * An annual subscription is only available on Apple Podcasts.
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. It's your dose of the
hottest influencer and pop culture news twice a week. Coming
up on today's show, Roxy Jusenko steps down from her
ten million dollar house giveaway. Here's Morgan is under fire
for interviewing Baby Reindeer's real life Martha, and journalist Antoinette
Latoufe breaks her silence over the inspired Unemployed break. But first,
(00:26):
what do you guys think about eating in the shower,
because jar Dae Tunci has sparked debate after she uploaded
a video of her chowing down on a burger in
the shower. Well, I have been known to eat in
the shower quite a bit, but I've never gone as
far as having a burger. I've only had snacks. Yeah,
I have been known to also eat in the shower,
which probably won't surprise OG listeners because we have been
(00:48):
slammed for using our phone in the shower. That's gross.
I don't think I've ever really eaten a meal, let
alone a chocolate in the shower. Oh, you've got to
try it. It's the best when you have a little
snack and you take it in there and you're just
so comfortable and warm. I do want to point out
that Jade Twincy also is eight months pregnant, so I
respect it even more as a fellow pregnant woman. I'm
actually thankful that she reminded me of this because I
(01:10):
haven't done it for so long. I can see how
it would be nice in winter. And maybe this is
something that a lot of mums do because it's probably
the only time they get on their own. The worst
thing is when you get caught out and you've left
a wrapper in the shower and you just look like
it absolutely pig to your part. I think I like
when I have a shower at night time. Usually it's
an everything shower where I'm scrubbing off tan or I'm
(01:30):
shaving my legs so and I'm usually on my phone
as well, so I don't have an extra hand to
hold food. I can't let this get too out of hand.
I feel like your partner, Amy is someone who could
progress to eating in the shower because I don't mean
to call you out. Often when I go in your
bathroom there are empty soda water bottles and also beer bottles.
I think Dale does love a shower beer now and
then it is getting a little bit embarrassing, especially when
(01:52):
I've left my chocolate wrapper and there's also beer cans
in there.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
I had CAFC for dinner last night, and I feel good.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
I feel good that I've.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Held my head.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Hi, I was backed into a corner. My name is
all over.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
This money can be made again by me.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Roxy Jasenko has announced she's stepping away from the controversial
ten million dollar house giveaway she was the face of.
Now before we get into the recent drama, Kay, can
you tell us more about this competition? Well, Roxy launched
the promotion called Roxy's boot Camps, in a wave of
publicity on March eighth. She was absolutely everywhere promoting this competition,
(02:26):
which I'm sure she heavily regrets. Now so, she appeared
on the Kyle and Jackie Oh Show and told the
host that she was giving away a ten million dollar home.
She also did an interview with Sunrise where she said,
you need to incentivize people to study, and what better
way than a ten million dollar house, a rolex or
a burken bag. Now amongst the media attention, Domain ran
(02:48):
with the headline Roxy Jasenko is giving away a ten
million dollar Mediterranean style waterfront pad. This competition was much
more complicated than your average home lottery, so to you
had to sign up to the course. Prices ranged from
twenty nine dollars for one month's access to the course
and one entry into the competition to a four hundred
(03:09):
and ninety nine dollar subscription which provided you then with
five hundred entries. The main prize promoted was a ten
million dollar home located in Cronulla, and the other prizes
included a Rolex watch and a Burken bag, both valued
at twenty thousand dollars. This is such a huge incentive
to enter. It's not every day you see a ten
million dollar house up for grabs, and that is why
(03:30):
over seven thousand people signed up for Roxy's course. A
big part of the issue is, though, that media reports
didn't clearly state entrance only had a chance of winning
the major prize. So the first red flag appeared during
a Sunrise interview when Roxy deflected from answering the exact
chances of winning the ten million dollar house. So this
(03:51):
led publication Criche to dig into the terms and conditions,
and it turned out the winning prize wasn't actually the house,
but instead entry into another game of chance for the home.
So In the secondary competition, in order to win the home,
the entrant had to select two winning envelopes out of
two hundred and fifty available to win the house. So
(04:13):
the odds of going on to pick the right envelope
alone was one in sixty two thousand, two hundred and fifty. Now,
Kraiki ended up contacting Roxy about the low odds, and
she responded saying, there is a chance, and that is
how we are communicating the offer and always have been.
We are offering someone the chance to play to win
the property and guaranteed consolation prizes if it is not
(04:33):
one via the method. Now, the prizes that Roxy is
referring to is the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars
cash and also the Rolex and Burken Bag. So essentially
this competition was committed to giving away those three prizes,
and then it seems like it was very unlikely to
actually go on to win the ten million dollar house.
And as for this ten million dollar home, it has
(04:55):
been revealed that it didn't even belong to Roxy, but
instead it belonged to her business partner Yo of Tills
and his associate Kasman Aloui. And according to the Sunday Telegraph.
It was actually purchased in twenty twenty for three point
four million dollars after it failed to sell at auction,
but it was enlisted again late last year for ten million,
but also didn't sell. Now The Daily Telegraph is also
(05:17):
reporting that local Cronulla real estate agents have expressed doubts
that the house would even reach the ten million dollar
asking price. Now. On Friday night, Roxy did share an
eight minute video announcing she was stepping down as director
from Roxy's boot camps. The backstory is very interesting because
she revealed that she had agreed to run the competition
after being approached by a stranger who direct messaged her
(05:40):
with the idea. She said, she went on to form
a partnership with two people she said she didn't know.
Did this shock anyone else? Well, particularly because Roxy does
position herself as being a very savvy business woman and
well connected. Yeah, Well, it didn't take long for her
to regret her decision, because she claims three days after
the emotion commenced that she felt really uncomfortable and she
(06:03):
actually suggested to her new business partners that they refund
all of the purchases. And she alleged that her request
was rejected and that the promotion continued.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
Now.
Speaker 1 (06:13):
The pr message was very clear in this video. I
actually laughed watching it because she said the same thing
over and over again. So she wanted her audience to
know that she has done everything within her power to
ensure that the three prizes are given to the winners. Now,
she claims, after discovering the company bank accounts didn't have
funds to cover the two hundred and fifty thousand dollar prize,
(06:35):
that she tried to chip in the remaining twenty k
that was missing. Now. She said she would do so
if the money was put into a trust to protect it. Now,
she said that that request was rejected and then she
was told that she had to stand down as a
director and she is now just a shareholder in the company.
She also confirmed that she no longer has access to
(06:56):
that bank account, so she can't guarantee that the two
hundred and fifty thousand dollar parries will be paid. She did, however,
say that she is holding the burken bag and the
role AT's hostage. She also claimed that she's out of
pocket three hundred and fifty thousand dollars now. On Saturday,
Roxy did a follow up video confirming that she would
be personally refunding all seven thousand plus customers who purchased
(07:18):
a package from Roxy's boot camp. She said the course
would also remain available to everyone who received a refund. Again,
in this video, it was so clear that she was
really sticking to the PR messaging. So she said so
many times that she will be personally fitting the bill
that the money is coming from her. I mean, obviously,
if you are going to be paying that amount of money,
(07:39):
your people to know that's from you. Well, there is
a rule when you are communicating with people that you
actually do have to reiterate those points over and over
again for people to actually buy in and understand it.
But it's not surprising that she has because how dirty
would you bet your name is attached to this? This
isn't a good look for her, oh, and a terrible look,
and the fact that, I mean she has come out
(08:01):
and said, look, this doesn't look good for me. My
face is all over it. I did find her PR
strategy around it very interesting because she is known as
being a very glamorous PR queen, but she chose to
film the video with no makeup on, in her pajamas,
with her hair slipped back. That was a very intentional move.
She was clearly trying to create sympathy for herself. She said,
(08:23):
my hands are tired, I am exhausted, I feel bullied,
I feel distressed, and I'm embarrassed. It is a clever
move because it is in stark contrast to how she
was portrayed in the advertisements for this ten million dollar giveaway.
She was obviously very glamed up. It really humanized her
as well. I fell and if I'm someone who has
purchased one of these tickets and I'm sort of sitting
at home thinking what the fuck is going on? I
(08:45):
think one, Okay, she's clearly jumped on her social media
as soon as she could to let me know the messaging.
And also if she's sitting on there with a hair
all done, in glamorous clothes, expensive jewelry, I'm thinking, oh,
you've clearly run away with the peat. And it also
looks like it's been pre planned, whereas this looks like
she's just jumped on and she's been very emotive and
wanting to just as you said, instantly get on there
(09:06):
to update people. Yeah, there was definitely a sense of
urgency to this. I also found it interesting that a
month's providing the business details, she repeatedly spoke about her
weight and how it had been impacted by the stress
of the promotion. Let's writ to some of what she
said regarding this.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
The course of the last two months, which to be
really honest with you, feels like two and a half
years for me, Um, it's been nothing short of distressing, stressful.
I am forty nine kilos today alone. I have fainted twice,
things that have never happened to me. And I have
(09:43):
had many businesses. I've had many ups and downs, and
I've powered through each and every one of them.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
In the second video, she followed up by telling her
audience not to worry because she had eaten KFC tonight.
Before I get what she was trying to do, she
was trying to show that obviously, this competition is taken
an emotional toll on her and it's causing her a
lot of stress. But I just feel so uncomfortable with
her constantly putting out there how much she weighs. I
think it's quite irrelevant. You can just say I'm very
stressed and I've lost weight. You don't have to say
(10:11):
how much weight, but also using it as a method
to gunner sympathy. When she has explicitly spoken on an
Instagram story about how she works out five times a week,
she was caught up in controversy because she said she
only ate two boiled eggs and a Greek salad for dinner.
She's spoken a lot about how she exercises five times
a week. Her weight loss seems quite intentional, particularly because
(10:34):
she also spoke about how she nearly died from taking
a zepic, So it was strange to me that she
was then blaming this weight loss on the stress of
this competition. I wonder how many people they actually expected
to sign up for this course, because it's come out
that they've had seven thousand entries. If they all of
those seven thousand people actually signed up to the four
(10:54):
hundred ninety nine dollars subscription, that adds up to around
three point four million dollars, it's obviously not an enough
to even pay for the house. Yeah, and it's very
unlikely that everyone is going to sign up to the
top package.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
Now.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
Roxy's former business partner, Joseph Tills, spoke to The Sunday
Telegraph and he confirmed that the competition will still go
ahead without Roxy, so Yosef refuted Roxy's claims and said
that the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars were safely
sitting in the company's bank account, and he said that
he only removed Roxy from the account after she shared
(11:26):
the Instagram video on Friday night. Joseph claims that Roxy
was also set to take fifty percent of the shareholding,
while he and his other business partner would take twenty
five percent each. He then went on to claim that
Roxy resigned from the company in mid April, which resulted
in him being locked out of the company accounts and
the bank account being frozen. He also said he explored
(11:47):
legal proceedings, but they were averted when he was granted
access to the accounts on condition that Roxy was permitted
to exit the business. Now it just seems like an
absolute shit show. So there were attempts made to repair
this relationship, and Joseph said that it became irreparable on
May first. I think the most interesting part of his
claim is that he said he and his business partner
(12:09):
were actually the ones that wanted to originally resign from
this business, and he claims that Roxy got wind of
vis so that is why she then pulled the plug
and announced publicly that she was stepping down as director.
So it sounds like they're all trying to jump from
this sinking ship. If I had purchased one of these tickets,
that would not fill me with much confidence that I'm
(12:29):
getting money. I question what these guys are saying because
they have come to Roxy with this concept they are
the brains behind this competition and she is merely the
face of it. Well, I wouldn't say merely the face,
because she also agreed to go ahead with it. These
guys actually claim that they approached Roxy and said that
they wanted a celebrity from the Ministry of Talent, which
(12:50):
is a talent agency. She managed the position, and she said, no,
I've actually got the reach, that is what they allege.
I am so interested to see what happens when this
competition is actually drawn, because Roxy said that she's refunding everyone.
So doesn't that defunct the whole competition? Like, how can
it still go ahead?
Speaker 3 (13:08):
I've got a photographic memory. I was top of the
skill apart from the science. What grade did you get
all right? Grads? I mean, not top of the or anything.
When you do a degree, you get it. You're asking
me what mace I got for thirteen subjects.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
I can't remember. Controversial UK broadcaster Piers Morgan is under
fire for his face to face interview with the so
called real life Marfa, who allegedly inspired the hit Netflix
show Baby Reindeer.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Now.
Speaker 1 (13:35):
Critics are questioning the ethics of paying and interviewing an
alleged stalker, who the show's creator, Richard Gadd, claims is
mentally ill. Sophie, You, like the rest of the world,
has been captivated by this show. Yeah, this show has
gripped me in a way that other shows haven't for
quite some time. And I think it's down to the
fact that it has been promoted as a true story.
(13:56):
This isn't just based off a true story or inspired
by real life events. Netflix has boldly said that this
is a true story and the show is absolutely fascinating.
It is written by Richard Gadd, who also plays himself
on the show. See when I was watching her, I
didn't realize and that adds a whole extra dimension to
it because the show is just so confronting and raw. Yeah,
(14:20):
it does explore how he became the point of obsession
for a serial stalker called Martha whilst he was trying
to make it as a comedian, and I think the
fact that he plays himself in the show makes it
even more powerful. What is pretty remarkable about this show
is that it has turned its audience into armchair detectives.
So after watching this show, fans have been trying to
(14:41):
hunt down the real life Martha and it was actually
relatively easy for them to find her because on the
show they used real messages and emails that Richard says
that the stalker sent him. And the interesting thing about
the messages is they were written in such a specific
way there were a lot of consistent ramatical and spelling errors. Yeah,
and fans were able to cross reference the messages on
(15:05):
social media to the ones on the show, and it
wasn't long before TikTok users revealed who Martha was and
they created all of these videos online which generated a
lot of engagement and a lot of attention. Now, the
real life Martha was revealed to be a fifty eight
year old Scottish woman called Fiona Harvey, and not long
after her identity was revealed, online journalist Piers Morgan was
(15:27):
promoting that he had a world exclusive TV interview with her,
so he wrote on ex world exclusive, the real life
Martha from Baby Reindeer breaks cover and gives me the
first TV interview about the smash hit Netflix show Fiona
Harvey wants to have her say and set the record straight.
Is she a psychostalker? I love that he finished with
(15:49):
that line, because clearly the interview was already in the can.
They would have had to do so much persuading to
get her on the show. It's pretty incredible when you
think a YouTube show actually beat out these huge networks
to get this interview. Well, I think that that speaks
more broadly about the entertainment industry though, because TV is dead.
I mean Piers Morgan, he has two million followers or
(16:11):
two million subscribers on his YouTube channel. In the space
of three days, this YouTube has had nine million views. Now,
this interview was very lengthy. It went for fifty four minutes,
and I was glued to every single second of it,
even though at times I felt uncomfortable that I was
watching it. I think that's how a lot of people
(16:31):
felt online. You almost felt guilty for watching it and
buying into the sensationalism of it. All. It was like
watching a car crash. You just could not look away.
And it is clear that Peers used this lengthy interview
style as a way to trip her up. I could
just sense how much the producers had tried to say
to Fiona how she and Peers were the same, because
(16:54):
when he asked her, oh, so, what made you choose
my show to appear on, she said that she knew
he had all been persecuted like her. There was this
connection there. However, I think once the interview went on,
it became quite apparent what side Peers was on. Yeah,
the amount of smoke they would have blown up her
ass to actually get her to agree to do the interview,
(17:14):
and then the tables would turned sue quickly. Now, during
this interview, Fiona did claim to have only met Richard
a few times, and she did deny sending him forty
one thousand emails and one hundred letters. Instead, she claimed
that she sent him only a handful of emails and
that he must have made up the rest himself. It's
(17:34):
funny because rather than denying the fact that she contacted
him via email, she just kept saying, oh, how would
someone possibly send forty one thousand emails in the space.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
Of a year.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
It's like, yeah, I don't know if that's a good
enough defense, And then she also said, oh, I don't
think I did, and he's like, well, how do you
not know if you've sent that many emails. She also
denied that she's been convicted of stalking Richard or being
sent to prison, and also claimed to be a lawyer,
and she revealed her plans to sue both Richard and
Netflix for defamation. She did reiterate that she personally wouldn't
(18:04):
be suing them. She also said that her boyfriend was
a lawyer and he wouldn't be suing that she would
get a other lawyer to do so. Apparently she has
been dating this lawyer for five years now. While she
said the show was defamatory, she also claimed to have
never watched any scene of the show, and in one
notable moment during this interview, she also boasted about having
(18:26):
a photographic memory, but was then unable to tell peers
her law school grades. So there were just so many
moments where peers managed to trip her up and make
her look silly. This interview did her no favors whatsoever.
There were so many inconsistencies, and at some points I
felt like Peers was actually trying to help her out,
but she just didn't take the bait at all, and
(18:48):
some of her remarks about Richard have quickly become viral
memes on TikTok. Let's throw to one of them.
Speaker 3 (18:54):
Leave me alone, please get a life, get a proper job.
I am horrified what you've done.
Speaker 1 (19:01):
When I first saw these memes circulating, my first reaction
was to send them on and have a bit of
a laugh. But when you think about it, it's actually
really sad that this mentally ill woman is being taken
advantage of by a huge broadcaster and being mocked for
all of our entertainment. This is also not going to
be good for her legal case, because this will be
used as evidence against her. What I found most surprising
(19:25):
was following this interview, Fiona came out and admitted that
she was paid only two hundred and fifty pounds for
this exclusive, and it turned out that she had turned
down a number of other morning shows. She said that
she felt used by Peers and that the questions were
rapid fire to try and trip her up. She also
said it was fast paced to catch me off. God,
(19:46):
has she not seen any other interviews by Piers Morgan
because that is just his interview style. I do wonder
if these morning shows didn't offer her any money, because
ethically it looks really wrong to pay an accuse stalk
her to get their side of events. Like I mean,
if this was a male stalker, a male older stalker,
(20:06):
I don't think that we would give them any airtime
at all, let alone pay them for their time and
their side of the story. The UK aren't really known
for their media ethics and Piers has faced a lot
of backlash from mental health campaigners and survivors of stalking
over his decision to interview Fiona. Many people have called
it irresponsible and bizarre, and I would agree with them. Yeah,
(20:27):
because after Baby Reindeer, Ed Richard did tell the media
that the real person who inspired Martha was very mentally unwell,
and he also did urge fans not to try and
find her. So it was an interesting decision for a
broadcaster to then go and spotlight this woman.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
Well.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
While he did give her a platform to share her
side of the story, Piers Morgan was always going to
interrogate her. He fired questions at her and he did
pull apart her story. Yeah, I think plenty of journalism
students could learn a lot from watching Peters's interview techniques.
While many people people are questioning the ethics over this interview,
it is clear that he pulled this interview off pretty flawlessly.
(21:06):
He demonstrated that he definitely has talent in interviewing people.
He gave her enough room at the start of the
interview so that she felt comfortable to share her side
of things, but then he was very clever on jumping
on all of her inconsistencies in an attempt to trip
her up and to get her to admit what she
had been accused of. While this may have been a
masterclass in interviewing, it was not in ethics, because while
(21:29):
Fiona may have agreed to do the interview, it's quite
clear that she probably wasn't mentally fit to actually make
that decision or fully understood the repercussions of that decision.
If the show is anything to go by, she was
portrayed as a very lonely person who didn't have a
big support group around her, and if that is the
case in real life, it means that she wouldn't have
(21:50):
had the support of friends of family to actually step
in and say this is a bad idea. I mean,
she did mention that she hadn't told her mum about
the interview. It's clear watching this interview that there's two
possibilities at play. The first possibility is that Fiona is
telling the truth and that Richard and Netflix have overly
exaggerated this story and her character and passed it off
(22:12):
as a true story. If this is the case, a
woman has been defamed and both parties have left themselves
open to legal action. I don't think that that is
the case, but that is one scenario. The other scenario
that is more feasible, in my opinion, is that Fiona
did do all of these things that she's been accused of,
and the media are parading around a mentally ill woman
(22:32):
for clicks and entertainment. And the worst thing is that
we're all lapping it up. Like I personally, as soon
as this interview dropped, I couldn't get enough of it.
I just could not stop watching it. It was such
compelling viewing. So I think we do have to have
a look at ourselves as well. I couldn't help but
also think that Piers Morgan has opened her up for
a counter defamation case because she kept making comments about
(22:56):
how Richard gadd is psychotic and mentally ill himself, and
also making derogatory comments about Netflix. Yeah, and I think
even just mental health. Aside from this, the ethics of
giving an alleged stalker the opportunity to give their side
of the story and rebut a victim's claims, I think
is just very unjustifiable. I think that gender, as I
(23:18):
touched on, has really come into play with this decision.
If this was a fifty eight year old man who
stalked a much younger woman, we wouldn't have opened up
the possibility to hear his side of events, and I
don't think that he would have been spotlighted in this
way in this show. Richard also made the point the
police didn't take his matter seriously due to it being
(23:38):
a woman who stalks him. And this is despite the
fact that in Baby Reindeer, Martha actually sexually assaulted Richard's
character on the show, So if any of that is true,
and then also an alleged sexual predator has also been platformed,
the whole thing is just uncomfortable. I don't understand how
it's even gotten to this point, and I think Netflix
(24:00):
are really to blame for it because they didn't have
to come out and promote this as a true story.
They could have easily said based on a true story.
They clearly have all of the receipts. I think that
it's quite clear that there's a lot of evidence to
prove that this did happen to Richard. And I just
feel so bad for Richard. You know, he's put it
very bravely, put all of his darkest moments into this
(24:23):
show out for the world to see it. But ethically, Sophie,
if they had said based on a true story and
people found this real Martha, then it wouldn't have such
massive repercussions for this person. I just have found this
interview to be so disrespectful to Richard, and I think
what is so scary about this is this is far
from the end of the story. People are saying that
(24:45):
we are seeing Baby Reindeer two play out in real life,
and through taking part of this interview, Fiona has become
somewhat of a celebrity. In the interview, she even spoke
about getting a potential book deal where she was going
to expose her side of the story and as we speak,
she probably has a ton of reality show producers or
documentary makers who were knocking on her door offering her
(25:06):
money to be involved, and I don't think that she
should be able to profit on allegedly any of this
behavior that has taken place. In saying that, though, do
you think Richard could have avoided this by changing a
few things up, particularly sharing the exact messages that she
shared that were available on Twitter. I think it's a
tough one because when the show exploded in popularity, he
(25:28):
made a point of saying, I have tried to conceal
the real people's identities by making the character slightly different. However,
when we did meet the real life Martha, she looked
bang on to her the actor on the shows absolutely uncanny. Yeah, resemblance.
It was spot on. And also I've seen a lot
of memes floating around saying that all of the other
characters look very much like the actors as well. It's
(25:51):
not just in appearance though, it's the fact that they
would easily know that those tweets were available and could
be searched. But I also think why does he he
necessarily have to protect someone who made his life a
living misery and how it protects him from a defamation case.
But it's not defamat truf. It's true. There's the truth
defense there as well. Yes, I know, but he probably
(26:11):
doesn't want his show overshadowed by having to now go
to court and relive all of overshadowed. This is probably
the best thing for him if he's going to want
to bring out a second series, while mentally it might
be bad for him. I mean, the thing that is
a bit awkward is in the show. In one of
the last episodes, he admitted that he sort of became
obsessed with her and he couldn't let her go. So
(26:33):
a lot of people are saying, is this a way
for her to still be in his life. Journalist Antoinette
Latoufe has broken her silence, saying she was mortified by
the response to her involvement in the inspired unemployeds prank
(26:55):
last month.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
Now.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Alongside Antoinette, high profile feminist you Miss Steins and Clementine
Ford featured at the Love Unboxed event in Sydney last month,
which was marketed as a thought provoking discussion on love
and marriage. Now, the crowd at the time didn't know
that the free Q and a style panel was part
of The Inspired Unemployed's prank show called Impractical Jokers. So
(27:19):
Jack Steele, who is one half of The Inspired Unemployed,
appeared on the panel to give the perspective of a
young male and some of his contributions to the panel
were that he thinks chicks did consent and he really
likes girl writers. Now, he was being fed these lines
because the show was a prank show, so this was
part of a punishment. The backlash was swift, and it
(27:40):
seemed like people were more pissed off at the feminists
that were on the panel rather than at the Inspired Unemployed. Yeah,
they definitely copped it a lot. Now, Antoinette has opened
up on her podcast, explaining that she previously had been
unable to comment about the incident as she and the
other women had signed a non disclosure agreement. That's what
a lot of people did guess at the time. She
(28:02):
admitted that she and the other panelists had completely misread
the situation and was mortified that the audience felt jeeps.
So she explained that producers approached her to host the event,
and she and the other hosts said that they answered
the questions posted them on the panel very seriously, so
they felt as though their audience was still getting something
(28:23):
from the experiment. She said that they really thought that
the joke would be on Jack and that the audience
would enjoy being annoyed at him. However, when the joke
was revealed, the producers were supposed to come up on
stage and back the women and explain what happened, but
they didn't come up on stage, and they were then
left to deal with the upset and the situation as
(28:44):
it unfolded. Well, Antoinette said, the great irony of it
was the three women mopping up. We apologized profusely, and
apologized repeatedly, and we listened and we heard. Then we realized, damn.
We all thought this would land differently. We honestly did
think it would land differently. It's clear they misread the
situation completely. There is a lot of backtracking going on.
(29:05):
Do you think it's fair to blame the producers because
I personally don't think it would have made a difference
if they came out and back them up. I think
it was a bit naive to assume that Jack was
simply going to be the butt of the joke, and
that there wouldn't be men having a laugh about feminism,
because even the fact that this was Jack's punishment to
be put on a stage with feminists who were going
(29:26):
to pick him to pieces, it's clear that the feminists
were the butt of the jokes, not Jack. Maybe it
was this allure of working with the inspired unemployed because
they are extremely popular. Everything they touch seems to turn
to gold, and while they do put out edgy jokes,
people don't normally get too offended by them. They vereem lovable,
they seem untouchable. The inspired unemployed are like teflon. They
(29:48):
have slipped themselves out of this situation and left the
women to explain themselves, which seems to be a reflection
of what happens a lot of the time in society.
I'm looking forward to hearing when Clementine Ford comes out
and what she has to say about Well, if the
NDA has already passed, surely she would have said something
by now. I'm surprised that the NDA finishes before the
episode is aired. That's what's confused me. I'm really interested
(30:09):
to see this episode I think it air or yeah, well,
if it does air, we'll get more of an idea
of what's gone down. I think that is all we
have time for today. Thank you so much for joining
us for this episode. If you have enjoyed it, could
you please make sure you are subscribed on Apple Podcasts
and also Spotify. And if you are a longtime listener
of the show and really enjoy what we put out,
we would really appreciate it if you could leave us
(30:31):
a five start review. If you do want to hear
more content from us, we release a subscriber episode every
Thursday with bonus content. If you're not already an Outspoken
Plus subscriber. All the details to sign up are in
our show notes. This podcast was recorded on the traditional
land of the Ghana people of the Adelaid Planes. We
pay respect to elders past and present.
Hello, and welcome to Outspoken. It's your dose of the
hottest influencer and pop culture news twice a week. Coming
up on today's show, Roxy Jusenko steps down from her
ten million dollar house giveaway. Here's Morgan is under fire
for interviewing Baby Reindeer's real life Martha, and journalist Antoinette
Latoufe breaks her silence over the inspired Unemployed break. But first,
(00:26):
what do you guys think about eating in the shower,
because jar Dae Tunci has sparked debate after she uploaded
a video of her chowing down on a burger in
the shower. Well, I have been known to eat in
the shower quite a bit, but I've never gone as
far as having a burger. I've only had snacks. Yeah,
I have been known to also eat in the shower,
which probably won't surprise OG listeners because we have been
(00:48):
slammed for using our phone in the shower. That's gross.
I don't think I've ever really eaten a meal, let
alone a chocolate in the shower. Oh, you've got to
try it. It's the best when you have a little
snack and you take it in there and you're just
so comfortable and warm. I do want to point out
that Jade Twincy also is eight months pregnant, so I
respect it even more as a fellow pregnant woman. I'm
actually thankful that she reminded me of this because I
(01:10):
haven't done it for so long. I can see how
it would be nice in winter. And maybe this is
something that a lot of mums do because it's probably
the only time they get on their own. The worst
thing is when you get caught out and you've left
a wrapper in the shower and you just look like
it absolutely pig to your part. I think I like
when I have a shower at night time. Usually it's
an everything shower where I'm scrubbing off tan or I'm
(01:30):
shaving my legs so and I'm usually on my phone
as well, so I don't have an extra hand to
hold food. I can't let this get too out of hand.
I feel like your partner, Amy is someone who could
progress to eating in the shower because I don't mean
to call you out. Often when I go in your
bathroom there are empty soda water bottles and also beer bottles.
I think Dale does love a shower beer now and
then it is getting a little bit embarrassing, especially when
(01:52):
I've left my chocolate wrapper and there's also beer cans
in there.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
I had CAFC for dinner last night, and I feel good.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
I feel good that I've.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Held my head.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Hi, I was backed into a corner. My name is
all over.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
This money can be made again by me.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Roxy Jasenko has announced she's stepping away from the controversial
ten million dollar house giveaway she was the face of.
Now before we get into the recent drama, Kay, can
you tell us more about this competition? Well, Roxy launched
the promotion called Roxy's boot Camps, in a wave of
publicity on March eighth. She was absolutely everywhere promoting this competition,
(02:26):
which I'm sure she heavily regrets. Now so, she appeared
on the Kyle and Jackie Oh Show and told the
host that she was giving away a ten million dollar home.
She also did an interview with Sunrise where she said,
you need to incentivize people to study, and what better
way than a ten million dollar house, a rolex or
a burken bag. Now amongst the media attention, Domain ran
(02:48):
with the headline Roxy Jasenko is giving away a ten
million dollar Mediterranean style waterfront pad. This competition was much
more complicated than your average home lottery, so to you
had to sign up to the course. Prices ranged from
twenty nine dollars for one month's access to the course
and one entry into the competition to a four hundred
(03:09):
and ninety nine dollar subscription which provided you then with
five hundred entries. The main prize promoted was a ten
million dollar home located in Cronulla, and the other prizes
included a Rolex watch and a Burken bag, both valued
at twenty thousand dollars. This is such a huge incentive
to enter. It's not every day you see a ten
million dollar house up for grabs, and that is why
(03:30):
over seven thousand people signed up for Roxy's course. A
big part of the issue is, though, that media reports
didn't clearly state entrance only had a chance of winning
the major prize. So the first red flag appeared during
a Sunrise interview when Roxy deflected from answering the exact
chances of winning the ten million dollar house. So this
(03:51):
led publication Criche to dig into the terms and conditions,
and it turned out the winning prize wasn't actually the house,
but instead entry into another game of chance for the home.
So In the secondary competition, in order to win the home,
the entrant had to select two winning envelopes out of
two hundred and fifty available to win the house. So
(04:13):
the odds of going on to pick the right envelope
alone was one in sixty two thousand, two hundred and fifty. Now,
Kraiki ended up contacting Roxy about the low odds, and
she responded saying, there is a chance, and that is
how we are communicating the offer and always have been.
We are offering someone the chance to play to win
the property and guaranteed consolation prizes if it is not
(04:33):
one via the method. Now, the prizes that Roxy is
referring to is the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars
cash and also the Rolex and Burken Bag. So essentially
this competition was committed to giving away those three prizes,
and then it seems like it was very unlikely to
actually go on to win the ten million dollar house.
And as for this ten million dollar home, it has
(04:55):
been revealed that it didn't even belong to Roxy, but
instead it belonged to her business partner Yo of Tills
and his associate Kasman Aloui. And according to the Sunday Telegraph.
It was actually purchased in twenty twenty for three point
four million dollars after it failed to sell at auction,
but it was enlisted again late last year for ten million,
but also didn't sell. Now The Daily Telegraph is also
(05:17):
reporting that local Cronulla real estate agents have expressed doubts
that the house would even reach the ten million dollar
asking price. Now. On Friday night, Roxy did share an
eight minute video announcing she was stepping down as director
from Roxy's boot camps. The backstory is very interesting because
she revealed that she had agreed to run the competition
after being approached by a stranger who direct messaged her
(05:40):
with the idea. She said, she went on to form
a partnership with two people she said she didn't know.
Did this shock anyone else? Well, particularly because Roxy does
position herself as being a very savvy business woman and
well connected. Yeah, Well, it didn't take long for her
to regret her decision, because she claims three days after
the emotion commenced that she felt really uncomfortable and she
(06:03):
actually suggested to her new business partners that they refund
all of the purchases. And she alleged that her request
was rejected and that the promotion continued.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
Now.
Speaker 1 (06:13):
The pr message was very clear in this video. I
actually laughed watching it because she said the same thing
over and over again. So she wanted her audience to
know that she has done everything within her power to
ensure that the three prizes are given to the winners. Now,
she claims, after discovering the company bank accounts didn't have
funds to cover the two hundred and fifty thousand dollar prize,
(06:35):
that she tried to chip in the remaining twenty k
that was missing. Now. She said she would do so
if the money was put into a trust to protect it. Now,
she said that that request was rejected and then she
was told that she had to stand down as a
director and she is now just a shareholder in the company.
She also confirmed that she no longer has access to
(06:56):
that bank account, so she can't guarantee that the two
hundred and fifty thousand dollar parries will be paid. She did, however,
say that she is holding the burken bag and the
role AT's hostage. She also claimed that she's out of
pocket three hundred and fifty thousand dollars now. On Saturday,
Roxy did a follow up video confirming that she would
be personally refunding all seven thousand plus customers who purchased
(07:18):
a package from Roxy's boot camp. She said the course
would also remain available to everyone who received a refund. Again,
in this video, it was so clear that she was
really sticking to the PR messaging. So she said so
many times that she will be personally fitting the bill
that the money is coming from her. I mean, obviously,
if you are going to be paying that amount of money,
(07:39):
your people to know that's from you. Well, there is
a rule when you are communicating with people that you
actually do have to reiterate those points over and over
again for people to actually buy in and understand it.
But it's not surprising that she has because how dirty
would you bet your name is attached to this? This
isn't a good look for her, oh, and a terrible look,
and the fact that, I mean she has come out
(08:01):
and said, look, this doesn't look good for me. My
face is all over it. I did find her PR
strategy around it very interesting because she is known as
being a very glamorous PR queen, but she chose to
film the video with no makeup on, in her pajamas,
with her hair slipped back. That was a very intentional move.
She was clearly trying to create sympathy for herself. She said,
(08:23):
my hands are tired, I am exhausted, I feel bullied,
I feel distressed, and I'm embarrassed. It is a clever
move because it is in stark contrast to how she
was portrayed in the advertisements for this ten million dollar giveaway.
She was obviously very glamed up. It really humanized her
as well. I fell and if I'm someone who has
purchased one of these tickets and I'm sort of sitting
at home thinking what the fuck is going on? I
(08:45):
think one, Okay, she's clearly jumped on her social media
as soon as she could to let me know the messaging.
And also if she's sitting on there with a hair
all done, in glamorous clothes, expensive jewelry, I'm thinking, oh,
you've clearly run away with the peat. And it also
looks like it's been pre planned, whereas this looks like
she's just jumped on and she's been very emotive and
wanting to just as you said, instantly get on there
(09:06):
to update people. Yeah, there was definitely a sense of
urgency to this. I also found it interesting that a
month's providing the business details, she repeatedly spoke about her
weight and how it had been impacted by the stress
of the promotion. Let's writ to some of what she
said regarding this.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
The course of the last two months, which to be
really honest with you, feels like two and a half
years for me, Um, it's been nothing short of distressing, stressful.
I am forty nine kilos today alone. I have fainted twice,
things that have never happened to me. And I have
(09:43):
had many businesses. I've had many ups and downs, and
I've powered through each and every one of them.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
In the second video, she followed up by telling her
audience not to worry because she had eaten KFC tonight.
Before I get what she was trying to do, she
was trying to show that obviously, this competition is taken
an emotional toll on her and it's causing her a
lot of stress. But I just feel so uncomfortable with
her constantly putting out there how much she weighs. I
think it's quite irrelevant. You can just say I'm very
stressed and I've lost weight. You don't have to say
(10:11):
how much weight, but also using it as a method
to gunner sympathy. When she has explicitly spoken on an
Instagram story about how she works out five times a week,
she was caught up in controversy because she said she
only ate two boiled eggs and a Greek salad for dinner.
She's spoken a lot about how she exercises five times
a week. Her weight loss seems quite intentional, particularly because
(10:34):
she also spoke about how she nearly died from taking
a zepic, So it was strange to me that she
was then blaming this weight loss on the stress of
this competition. I wonder how many people they actually expected
to sign up for this course, because it's come out
that they've had seven thousand entries. If they all of
those seven thousand people actually signed up to the four
(10:54):
hundred ninety nine dollars subscription, that adds up to around
three point four million dollars, it's obviously not an enough
to even pay for the house. Yeah, and it's very
unlikely that everyone is going to sign up to the
top package.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
Now.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
Roxy's former business partner, Joseph Tills, spoke to The Sunday
Telegraph and he confirmed that the competition will still go
ahead without Roxy, so Yosef refuted Roxy's claims and said
that the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars were safely
sitting in the company's bank account, and he said that
he only removed Roxy from the account after she shared
(11:26):
the Instagram video on Friday night. Joseph claims that Roxy
was also set to take fifty percent of the shareholding,
while he and his other business partner would take twenty
five percent each. He then went on to claim that
Roxy resigned from the company in mid April, which resulted
in him being locked out of the company accounts and
the bank account being frozen. He also said he explored
(11:47):
legal proceedings, but they were averted when he was granted
access to the accounts on condition that Roxy was permitted
to exit the business. Now it just seems like an
absolute shit show. So there were attempts made to repair
this relationship, and Joseph said that it became irreparable on
May first. I think the most interesting part of his
claim is that he said he and his business partner
(12:09):
were actually the ones that wanted to originally resign from
this business, and he claims that Roxy got wind of
vis so that is why she then pulled the plug
and announced publicly that she was stepping down as director.
So it sounds like they're all trying to jump from
this sinking ship. If I had purchased one of these tickets,
that would not fill me with much confidence that I'm
(12:29):
getting money. I question what these guys are saying because
they have come to Roxy with this concept they are
the brains behind this competition and she is merely the
face of it. Well, I wouldn't say merely the face,
because she also agreed to go ahead with it. These
guys actually claim that they approached Roxy and said that
they wanted a celebrity from the Ministry of Talent, which
(12:50):
is a talent agency. She managed the position, and she said, no,
I've actually got the reach, that is what they allege.
I am so interested to see what happens when this
competition is actually drawn, because Roxy said that she's refunding everyone.
So doesn't that defunct the whole competition? Like, how can
it still go ahead?
Speaker 3 (13:08):
I've got a photographic memory. I was top of the
skill apart from the science. What grade did you get
all right? Grads? I mean, not top of the or anything.
When you do a degree, you get it. You're asking
me what mace I got for thirteen subjects.
Speaker 1 (13:22):
I can't remember. Controversial UK broadcaster Piers Morgan is under
fire for his face to face interview with the so
called real life Marfa, who allegedly inspired the hit Netflix
show Baby Reindeer.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Now.
Speaker 1 (13:35):
Critics are questioning the ethics of paying and interviewing an
alleged stalker, who the show's creator, Richard Gadd, claims is
mentally ill. Sophie, You, like the rest of the world,
has been captivated by this show. Yeah, this show has
gripped me in a way that other shows haven't for
quite some time. And I think it's down to the
fact that it has been promoted as a true story.
(13:56):
This isn't just based off a true story or inspired
by real life events. Netflix has boldly said that this
is a true story and the show is absolutely fascinating.
It is written by Richard Gadd, who also plays himself
on the show. See when I was watching her, I
didn't realize and that adds a whole extra dimension to
it because the show is just so confronting and raw. Yeah,
(14:20):
it does explore how he became the point of obsession
for a serial stalker called Martha whilst he was trying
to make it as a comedian, and I think the
fact that he plays himself in the show makes it
even more powerful. What is pretty remarkable about this show
is that it has turned its audience into armchair detectives.
So after watching this show, fans have been trying to
(14:41):
hunt down the real life Martha and it was actually
relatively easy for them to find her because on the
show they used real messages and emails that Richard says
that the stalker sent him. And the interesting thing about
the messages is they were written in such a specific
way there were a lot of consistent ramatical and spelling errors. Yeah,
and fans were able to cross reference the messages on
(15:05):
social media to the ones on the show, and it
wasn't long before TikTok users revealed who Martha was and
they created all of these videos online which generated a
lot of engagement and a lot of attention. Now, the
real life Martha was revealed to be a fifty eight
year old Scottish woman called Fiona Harvey, and not long
after her identity was revealed, online journalist Piers Morgan was
(15:27):
promoting that he had a world exclusive TV interview with her,
so he wrote on ex world exclusive, the real life
Martha from Baby Reindeer breaks cover and gives me the
first TV interview about the smash hit Netflix show Fiona
Harvey wants to have her say and set the record straight.
Is she a psychostalker? I love that he finished with
(15:49):
that line, because clearly the interview was already in the can.
They would have had to do so much persuading to
get her on the show. It's pretty incredible when you
think a YouTube show actually beat out these huge networks
to get this interview. Well, I think that that speaks
more broadly about the entertainment industry though, because TV is dead.
I mean Piers Morgan, he has two million followers or
(16:11):
two million subscribers on his YouTube channel. In the space
of three days, this YouTube has had nine million views. Now,
this interview was very lengthy. It went for fifty four minutes,
and I was glued to every single second of it,
even though at times I felt uncomfortable that I was
watching it. I think that's how a lot of people
(16:31):
felt online. You almost felt guilty for watching it and
buying into the sensationalism of it. All. It was like
watching a car crash. You just could not look away.
And it is clear that Peers used this lengthy interview
style as a way to trip her up. I could
just sense how much the producers had tried to say
to Fiona how she and Peers were the same, because
(16:54):
when he asked her, oh, so, what made you choose
my show to appear on, she said that she knew
he had all been persecuted like her. There was this
connection there. However, I think once the interview went on,
it became quite apparent what side Peers was on. Yeah,
the amount of smoke they would have blown up her
ass to actually get her to agree to do the interview,
(17:14):
and then the tables would turned sue quickly. Now, during
this interview, Fiona did claim to have only met Richard
a few times, and she did deny sending him forty
one thousand emails and one hundred letters. Instead, she claimed
that she sent him only a handful of emails and
that he must have made up the rest himself. It's
(17:34):
funny because rather than denying the fact that she contacted
him via email, she just kept saying, oh, how would
someone possibly send forty one thousand emails in the space.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
Of a year.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
It's like, yeah, I don't know if that's a good
enough defense, And then she also said, oh, I don't
think I did, and he's like, well, how do you
not know if you've sent that many emails. She also
denied that she's been convicted of stalking Richard or being
sent to prison, and also claimed to be a lawyer,
and she revealed her plans to sue both Richard and
Netflix for defamation. She did reiterate that she personally wouldn't
(18:04):
be suing them. She also said that her boyfriend was
a lawyer and he wouldn't be suing that she would
get a other lawyer to do so. Apparently she has
been dating this lawyer for five years now. While she
said the show was defamatory, she also claimed to have
never watched any scene of the show, and in one
notable moment during this interview, she also boasted about having
(18:26):
a photographic memory, but was then unable to tell peers
her law school grades. So there were just so many
moments where peers managed to trip her up and make
her look silly. This interview did her no favors whatsoever.
There were so many inconsistencies, and at some points I
felt like Peers was actually trying to help her out,
but she just didn't take the bait at all, and
(18:48):
some of her remarks about Richard have quickly become viral
memes on TikTok. Let's throw to one of them.
Speaker 3 (18:54):
Leave me alone, please get a life, get a proper job.
I am horrified what you've done.
Speaker 1 (19:01):
When I first saw these memes circulating, my first reaction
was to send them on and have a bit of
a laugh. But when you think about it, it's actually
really sad that this mentally ill woman is being taken
advantage of by a huge broadcaster and being mocked for
all of our entertainment. This is also not going to
be good for her legal case, because this will be
used as evidence against her. What I found most surprising
(19:25):
was following this interview, Fiona came out and admitted that
she was paid only two hundred and fifty pounds for
this exclusive, and it turned out that she had turned
down a number of other morning shows. She said that
she felt used by Peers and that the questions were
rapid fire to try and trip her up. She also
said it was fast paced to catch me off. God,
(19:46):
has she not seen any other interviews by Piers Morgan
because that is just his interview style. I do wonder
if these morning shows didn't offer her any money, because
ethically it looks really wrong to pay an accuse stalk
her to get their side of events. Like I mean,
if this was a male stalker, a male older stalker,
(20:06):
I don't think that we would give them any airtime
at all, let alone pay them for their time and
their side of the story. The UK aren't really known
for their media ethics and Piers has faced a lot
of backlash from mental health campaigners and survivors of stalking
over his decision to interview Fiona. Many people have called
it irresponsible and bizarre, and I would agree with them. Yeah,
(20:27):
because after Baby Reindeer, Ed Richard did tell the media
that the real person who inspired Martha was very mentally unwell,
and he also did urge fans not to try and
find her. So it was an interesting decision for a
broadcaster to then go and spotlight this woman.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
Well.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
While he did give her a platform to share her
side of the story, Piers Morgan was always going to
interrogate her. He fired questions at her and he did
pull apart her story. Yeah, I think plenty of journalism
students could learn a lot from watching Peters's interview techniques.
While many people people are questioning the ethics over this interview,
it is clear that he pulled this interview off pretty flawlessly.
(21:06):
He demonstrated that he definitely has talent in interviewing people.
He gave her enough room at the start of the
interview so that she felt comfortable to share her side
of things, but then he was very clever on jumping
on all of her inconsistencies in an attempt to trip
her up and to get her to admit what she
had been accused of. While this may have been a
masterclass in interviewing, it was not in ethics, because while
(21:29):
Fiona may have agreed to do the interview, it's quite
clear that she probably wasn't mentally fit to actually make
that decision or fully understood the repercussions of that decision.
If the show is anything to go by, she was
portrayed as a very lonely person who didn't have a
big support group around her, and if that is the
case in real life, it means that she wouldn't have
(21:50):
had the support of friends of family to actually step
in and say this is a bad idea. I mean,
she did mention that she hadn't told her mum about
the interview. It's clear watching this interview that there's two
possibilities at play. The first possibility is that Fiona is
telling the truth and that Richard and Netflix have overly
exaggerated this story and her character and passed it off
(22:12):
as a true story. If this is the case, a
woman has been defamed and both parties have left themselves
open to legal action. I don't think that that is
the case, but that is one scenario. The other scenario
that is more feasible, in my opinion, is that Fiona
did do all of these things that she's been accused of,
and the media are parading around a mentally ill woman
(22:32):
for clicks and entertainment. And the worst thing is that
we're all lapping it up. Like I personally, as soon
as this interview dropped, I couldn't get enough of it.
I just could not stop watching it. It was such
compelling viewing. So I think we do have to have
a look at ourselves as well. I couldn't help but
also think that Piers Morgan has opened her up for
a counter defamation case because she kept making comments about
(22:56):
how Richard gadd is psychotic and mentally ill himself, and
also making derogatory comments about Netflix. Yeah, and I think
even just mental health. Aside from this, the ethics of
giving an alleged stalker the opportunity to give their side
of the story and rebut a victim's claims, I think
is just very unjustifiable. I think that gender, as I
(23:18):
touched on, has really come into play with this decision.
If this was a fifty eight year old man who
stalked a much younger woman, we wouldn't have opened up
the possibility to hear his side of events, and I
don't think that he would have been spotlighted in this
way in this show. Richard also made the point the
police didn't take his matter seriously due to it being
(23:38):
a woman who stalks him. And this is despite the
fact that in Baby Reindeer, Martha actually sexually assaulted Richard's
character on the show, So if any of that is true,
and then also an alleged sexual predator has also been platformed,
the whole thing is just uncomfortable. I don't understand how
it's even gotten to this point, and I think Netflix
(24:00):
are really to blame for it because they didn't have
to come out and promote this as a true story.
They could have easily said based on a true story.
They clearly have all of the receipts. I think that
it's quite clear that there's a lot of evidence to
prove that this did happen to Richard. And I just
feel so bad for Richard. You know, he's put it
very bravely, put all of his darkest moments into this
(24:23):
show out for the world to see it. But ethically, Sophie,
if they had said based on a true story and
people found this real Martha, then it wouldn't have such
massive repercussions for this person. I just have found this
interview to be so disrespectful to Richard, and I think
what is so scary about this is this is far
from the end of the story. People are saying that
(24:45):
we are seeing Baby Reindeer two play out in real life,
and through taking part of this interview, Fiona has become
somewhat of a celebrity. In the interview, she even spoke
about getting a potential book deal where she was going
to expose her side of the story and as we speak,
she probably has a ton of reality show producers or
documentary makers who were knocking on her door offering her
(25:06):
money to be involved, and I don't think that she
should be able to profit on allegedly any of this
behavior that has taken place. In saying that, though, do
you think Richard could have avoided this by changing a
few things up, particularly sharing the exact messages that she
shared that were available on Twitter. I think it's a
tough one because when the show exploded in popularity, he
(25:28):
made a point of saying, I have tried to conceal
the real people's identities by making the character slightly different. However,
when we did meet the real life Martha, she looked
bang on to her the actor on the shows absolutely uncanny. Yeah, resemblance.
It was spot on. And also I've seen a lot
of memes floating around saying that all of the other
characters look very much like the actors as well. It's
(25:51):
not just in appearance though, it's the fact that they
would easily know that those tweets were available and could
be searched. But I also think why does he he
necessarily have to protect someone who made his life a
living misery and how it protects him from a defamation case.
But it's not defamat truf. It's true. There's the truth
defense there as well. Yes, I know, but he probably
(26:11):
doesn't want his show overshadowed by having to now go
to court and relive all of overshadowed. This is probably
the best thing for him if he's going to want
to bring out a second series, while mentally it might
be bad for him. I mean, the thing that is
a bit awkward is in the show. In one of
the last episodes, he admitted that he sort of became
obsessed with her and he couldn't let her go. So
(26:33):
a lot of people are saying, is this a way
for her to still be in his life. Journalist Antoinette
Latoufe has broken her silence, saying she was mortified by
the response to her involvement in the inspired unemployeds prank
(26:55):
last month.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
Now.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Alongside Antoinette, high profile feminist you Miss Steins and Clementine
Ford featured at the Love Unboxed event in Sydney last month,
which was marketed as a thought provoking discussion on love
and marriage. Now, the crowd at the time didn't know
that the free Q and a style panel was part
of The Inspired Unemployed's prank show called Impractical Jokers. So
(27:19):
Jack Steele, who is one half of The Inspired Unemployed,
appeared on the panel to give the perspective of a
young male and some of his contributions to the panel
were that he thinks chicks did consent and he really
likes girl writers. Now, he was being fed these lines
because the show was a prank show, so this was
part of a punishment. The backlash was swift, and it
(27:40):
seemed like people were more pissed off at the feminists
that were on the panel rather than at the Inspired Unemployed. Yeah,
they definitely copped it a lot. Now, Antoinette has opened
up on her podcast, explaining that she previously had been
unable to comment about the incident as she and the
other women had signed a non disclosure agreement. That's what
a lot of people did guess at the time. She
(28:02):
admitted that she and the other panelists had completely misread
the situation and was mortified that the audience felt jeeps.
So she explained that producers approached her to host the event,
and she and the other hosts said that they answered
the questions posted them on the panel very seriously, so
they felt as though their audience was still getting something
(28:23):
from the experiment. She said that they really thought that
the joke would be on Jack and that the audience
would enjoy being annoyed at him. However, when the joke
was revealed, the producers were supposed to come up on
stage and back the women and explain what happened, but
they didn't come up on stage, and they were then
left to deal with the upset and the situation as
(28:44):
it unfolded. Well, Antoinette said, the great irony of it
was the three women mopping up. We apologized profusely, and
apologized repeatedly, and we listened and we heard. Then we realized, damn.
We all thought this would land differently. We honestly did
think it would land differently. It's clear they misread the
situation completely. There is a lot of backtracking going on.
(29:05):
Do you think it's fair to blame the producers because
I personally don't think it would have made a difference
if they came out and back them up. I think
it was a bit naive to assume that Jack was
simply going to be the butt of the joke, and
that there wouldn't be men having a laugh about feminism,
because even the fact that this was Jack's punishment to
be put on a stage with feminists who were going
(29:26):
to pick him to pieces, it's clear that the feminists
were the butt of the jokes, not Jack. Maybe it
was this allure of working with the inspired unemployed because
they are extremely popular. Everything they touch seems to turn
to gold, and while they do put out edgy jokes,
people don't normally get too offended by them. They vereem lovable,
they seem untouchable. The inspired unemployed are like teflon. They
(29:48):
have slipped themselves out of this situation and left the
women to explain themselves, which seems to be a reflection
of what happens a lot of the time in society.
I'm looking forward to hearing when Clementine Ford comes out
and what she has to say about Well, if the
NDA has already passed, surely she would have said something
by now. I'm surprised that the NDA finishes before the
episode is aired. That's what's confused me. I'm really interested
(30:09):
to see this episode I think it air or yeah, well,
if it does air, we'll get more of an idea
of what's gone down. I think that is all we
have time for today. Thank you so much for joining
us for this episode. If you have enjoyed it, could
you please make sure you are subscribed on Apple Podcasts
and also Spotify. And if you are a longtime listener
of the show and really enjoy what we put out,
we would really appreciate it if you could leave us
(30:31):
a five start review. If you do want to hear
more content from us, we release a subscriber episode every
Thursday with bonus content. If you're not already an Outspoken
Plus subscriber. All the details to sign up are in
our show notes. This podcast was recorded on the traditional
land of the Ghana people of the Adelaid Planes. We
pay respect to elders past and present.
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.