Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Stews and News: Below Deck Med in the Media


  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

(edited)
40 minutes ago, dleighg said:

It seems strangely difficult to find out what he posted. I know they don't want to amplify bad messages, but I'm curious. Any clues?

It was disgusting, I won’t post the image and will spoiler the description for those that don’t want to be exposed:

 

a naked black women in bondage hanging from the ceiling with a look of terror. With the caption “when black men have been doin you wrong your whole life and you decide to date the nice Caucasian guy Pete from Whole Foods.”

Edited by biakbiak
  • Useful 1
(edited)
3 hours ago, scrb said:

You wonder if the casting people on these shows bother to look at the social media history of these people.

Will they do so in the future?

This post was from April (and reposted 2 days ago) of this year but I can’t imagine he didn’t have other equal vile stuff.

MTV has announced that they are having a third party go through all of their people’s social media for offensive things. Of course announcing it allows people to scrub their shit, which I am honestly surprised so few people do. So maybe Bravo will follow suit.

Edited by biakbiak
  • Useful 2
  • Love 8
1 hour ago, The Ringo Kidd said:

So wait a minute. They are going through people’s social media to find things to cancel them?

Is that what it’s come too?

 

1 hour ago, The Ringo Kidd said:

Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party?

They were getting a lot of pressure, at least on social media.

Several networks have already fired reality show cast members for tweets and most of the ones fired are apologizing or not protesting too much about it.

If Bravo left the people with those posts on the air, the pressure would probably build, with talk of boycotts and such.

 

I think to an extent, #MeToo set the precedent, as people with sexual harassment or assault in their pasts were fired.

Call it cancel culture or whatever but fame and fortune isn't guaranteed now if you've behaved badly.

BTW, racist posts on social media equate to being politically persecuted by McCarthyites?

 

  • Love 16
1 minute ago, scrb said:

 

BTW, racist posts on social media equate to being politically persecuted by McCarthyites?

 

Yes they equate exactly. Pernicious or even illegal views that were held in your past that you might renounce and recant lead you to be fired, blacklisted and unemployed.

I suppose they can go to a re-education camp and do a penance but somehow I don’t think that is enough for the mob at this point.

The movie studios gave the same excuse during the communist frenzy.

Stassi is in fact the new Dalton Trumbo.

  • Love 8
5 hours ago, biakbiak said:

It was disgusting, I won’t post the image and will spoiler the description for those that don’t want to be exposed:

  Reveal spoiler

a naked black women in bondage hanging from the ceiling with a look of terror. With the caption “when black men have been doin you wrong your whole life and you decide to date the nice Caucasian guy Pete from Whole Foods.”

There really is no emogee to express the vileness of that guys post. 

  • Love 10
(edited)
4 hours ago, The Ringo Kidd said:

So wait a minute. They are going through people’s social media to find things to cancel them?

Is that what it’s come too?

Don't companies look through a person's social media to see if they should hire them.

Peter was a sleaze anyway.  I think he was the one who called his boss "sweetheart" or something like that.  What a creep.

He needs something.  Anybody who's post something like that probably doesn't see black women, black people as human beings, because why would you post something like that, as an adult?

From what I've seen of him in the show, he doesn't see women as human beings either. 

Edited by Neurochick
  • Love 19

Well, he's either finally wised up, or someone clued him in. When this first broke today, his Facebook was not only still up, it was public. It's since either been shut down, or he's made it not only private, but also changed the pic to a generic blank face. It was his Tigger looking self and his son when I saw it earlier. From the general skimming I did, he was hung up on the stock market and there was a recent post that seemed to be dogging women, or at least one, who apparently didn't see the wonder that is Pete. Honestly, the post was a hot mess and I wasn't sure what I was reading, but the comments from his friends basically were asking who turned him down and told him to post their names so they could go after her/them. I was surprised there wasn't any recent posts about Below Deck, there were a few from before it started, including a super classy one of a picture of him and Hannah that he captioned she could be the six6 and he could be the nine9. So honestly his firing should really come as a surprise to no one, least of all him. 

  • Useful 1
  • Love 11
11 hours ago, dleighg said:

I'm curious as to how they "fire" someone when the show has been filmed. I know nothing about how this all works, but don't they get paid for the episodes they filmed? Or is it actually by the minute they appear on TV?

Other networks pay x amount per show. If they aren’t shown, they don’t get paid. So editing him out, he doesn’t get a check. They usually have a morals clause that allow them to fire them for cause. That picture was cause for sure.

  • Useful 2
  • Love 9

I support Bravo not wanting to continue to work with him anymore. Don't invite him to the reunion, fine. But I can't believing their editing future episodes to reduce his time on screen. Counting deck crew, stews, chef and captain, there are only 9 people on the show full time. I feel like editing him out is going to mean leaving major storylines out.  

  • Useful 2
  • Love 1

There are 4 cast members in the deck crew instead of the usual 3 so it should be okay.

But they were giving him a lot of camera time in the first couple of episodes of the season with his "sweetie" thing and pursuing "Lana" whats her last name.

Otherwise the guy didn't have much charisma, unless being a douche bro counts as charisma.

You never know with Bravo.

 

 

 

  • Love 7
On 6/17/2020 at 1:04 PM, biakbiak said:

It was disgusting, I won’t post the image and will spoiler the description for those that don’t want to be exposed:

  Reveal spoiler

a naked black women in bondage hanging from the ceiling with a look of terror. With the caption “when black men have been doin you wrong your whole life and you decide to date the nice Caucasian guy Pete from Whole Foods.”

Thank you for not posting that disgusting photo. I heard he was trying to defend himself, by saying he dates different races and likes BDSM. How is a photo of a naked black woman in shackles reminiscent to slavery acceptable to look at much less post or find sexually appealing? 

  • Love 5
On 6/17/2020 at 3:03 PM, The Ringo Kidd said:

Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party?

All employers now have either contracts or formal guidelines spelling out that they can hire/fire at will, or for a morals clause. Yes, moral & Bravo seem to be contradictory. But anything they get flack from, or effects their bottom line, they can use that clause.

Many employers or even schools are looking at the employee/student online history, using it to exclude people. That “joke” from 10 years ago might just bite you. Even cleaned up, computer geeks can restore. 

  • Useful 1
  • Love 10
50 minutes ago, Thumper82003 said:

All employers now have either contracts or formal guidelines spelling out that they can hire/fire at will, or for a morals clause. Yes, moral & Bravo seem to be contradictory. But anything they get flack from, or effects their bottom line, they can use that clause.

Many employers or even schools are looking at the employee/student online history, using it to exclude people. That “joke” from 10 years ago might just bite you. Even cleaned up, computer geeks can restore. 

So what?

Pete is a bad example because his transgressions are so recent.

But searching through someone’s past writing or even their beliefs that they now renounce is the essence of McCarthyism.

  • LOL 1
  • Love 5

Sandy can't keep her mouth shut.

https://www.eonline.com/news/1156729/captain-sandy-teases-drug-bust-more-on-explosive-new-season-of-below-deck-mediterranean

Spoiler

So what I'm piecing together is that now that has Bugsy on board, she fires Hannah due to non-logged prescription drugs. Which, IMHO, is weak sauce since we all know Hannah suufers from anxiety (see season 3) and we've seen how other Captains have handled their crews prescription meds (see Kat/Captain Lee season 1). 

I'd bet money Sandy told Bugsy if she came back as a 2nd she'd get her the Chief spot. Shady as fuck. And she wonders why Hannah doesn't trust her or interact with her on social media. 

 

  • Useful 4
  • Love 7
1 hour ago, snarts said:

Sandy can't keep her mouth shut.

https://www.eonline.com/news/1156729/captain-sandy-teases-drug-bust-more-on-explosive-new-season-of-below-deck-mediterranean

  Hide contents

So what I'm piecing together is that now that has Bugsy on board, she fires Hannah due to non-logged prescription drugs. Which, IMHO, is weak sauce since we all know Hannah suufers from anxiety (see season 3) and we've seen how other Captains have handled their crews prescription meds (see Kat/Captain Lee season 1). 

I'd bet money Sandy told Bugsy if she came back as a 2nd she'd get her the Chief spot. Shady as fuck. And she wonders why Hannah doesn't trust her or interact with her on social media. 

 

That’s shady was hell if that’s what goes down. As if I didn’t hate captain famewhore enough. 

  • Love 10

While I agree that the producers ultimately decided to let Bugsy come back, it was for a 2nd stew role, which makes me wonder why Bugs would return for a 2nd stew role years later??

Spoiler

Sandy is already out in the press trying to sell her story. First on why she didn't fire Lara, 
(Hannah didn't tell he) which we saw was a lie, and now with the "drug bust".  Sandy knows from season 3 that Hannah suffers from anxiety and is prescribed medication.  If she uses the non-logging of these meds as a reason to fire Hannah, she forces the producers hands. That's what I think she does, and I think Bugsy & Malia were in on the plan. 

We'll see what happens as the season plays out. Sandy overestimates her own value to the franchise, not sure that public sentiment will be on her side.

 

  • Useful 1
  • Love 4
(edited)
Spoiler

Except that we had a similar scenario on season 1 of BD with Kat & Captain Lee and the correct way to handle it.

I get that you & Sandy hate Hannah, but if that's how it plays out, it's messed up. Not to mention the wrong message to send re: mental health issues in the workplace.

Now if Hannah's vaught snorting hydrocodone, that's another story...

 

Edited by snarts
  • Love 14
Spoiler

I do not recall what happened with Captain Lee.  How was it handled correctly?  Hannah has lied to Sandy at least twice now--hooking up with a guest on charter and the "one coke" incident.  If she has pills that she was supposed to declare and she didn't, that is on Hannah.  And the perhaps the last of "second chances".

And if it's on Sandy, not Hannah, why didn't production step in and stop her from being fired.

I'm not sure if it's hate.  Maybe more disdain for a snotty, lazy, egotistical, condescending supervisor. 

 

  • Love 2
On 6/19/2020 at 8:15 PM, The Ringo Kidd said:

So what?

Pete is a bad example because his transgressions are so recent.

But searching through someone’s past writing or even their beliefs that they now renounce is the essence of McCarthyism.

You of course realize that there is a material difference between a United States Senator bringing the full weight of the United States government against individuals doing something that they constitutionally had a right to do - organize politically (much as I don't agree with communism, the communist party has a right to exist) - vs. employers deciding that someone's public statements are either repugnant to them or too much of a headache to handle?  I mean, the "government holding hearings and threatening people" is kind of a huge part of McCarthyism that you are just glossing right over. 

  • Love 17
22 minutes ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

You of course realize that there is a material difference between a United States Senator bringing the full weight of the United States government against individuals doing something that they constitutionally had a right to do - organize politically (much as I don't agree with communism, the communist party has a right to exist) - vs. employers deciding that someone's public statements are either repugnant to them or too much of a headache to handle?  I mean, the "government holding hearings and threatening people" is kind of a huge part of McCarthyism that you are just glossing right over. 

It is destroying someone because of what they said in the past and now claim to not believe anymore. They are very analogous situations.

Many victims of McCarthyism were not called up in front of a government committee. They were blacklisted by the powers that be in the entertainment industry.

The other thing that is the same is the absolute  glee that they feel in destroying people’s lives.

  • Useful 1
  • LOL 2
  • Love 3
14 hours ago, biakbiak said:

More spoilers abound:

  Hide contents

When Hannah is fired Aesha comes and takes the second stew position after Bugsy is made Chief stew and Kiko leaves at some point and is replaced by Malia’s boyfriend Tom.

 

Seems to be a required aspect now, to have one or more major departures every season.

They will give a lot of screen time to cast members in the lead up to them being fired or quitting, like Parker from BD Sailing Yacht.

Among the current BDM cast, there are a couple of low-drama deck hands who get minimal screen time so they probably aren't going anywhere.

But OTOH, those who create drama may also be given a longer leash because they're creating "good TV" like that Danny Z. guy who stuck around a lot longer despite repeatedly flouting rules.

  • Love 2
(edited)
On 6/27/2020 at 12:49 PM, scrb said:

Seems to be a required aspect now, to have one or more major departures every season.

They will give a lot of screen time to cast members in the lead up to them being fired or quitting, like Parker from BD Sailing Yacht.

Among the current BDM cast, there are a couple of low-drama deck hands who get minimal screen time so they probably aren't going anywhere.

But OTOH, those who create drama may also be given a longer leash because they're creating "good TV" like that Danny Z. guy who stuck around a lot longer despite repeatedly flouting rules.

I haven't been watching but binged to get caught up last night.  I really like Hannah but its pretty clear she's not a great leader and the chief stew job is not for her.  She really doesn't seem into the whole thing so getting fired isn't surprising I guess.  I think something must have happened in between seasons because her vibe has been gloomy since the first episode.

I do really like Malia.   She really is a good leader, I think.  

Edited by Jextella
  • Love 1
On 6/17/2020 at 6:08 PM, Neurochick said:

Don't companies look through a person's social media to see if they should hire them.

When my daughter was applying for colleges, we were told by several to avoid posting controversial matter on social media.  Colleges look and acceptance can be revoked.  Same goes for criminal records - or so we were told.

  • Love 2

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...