Consider this your open thread for Kelly Ripa’s return to Live this morning. I’ll be updating with the notable details as they happen and we’ll probably have another full post with analysis tomorrow. Strahan’s controversial exit and Ripa’s hurt feelings have created the most press that Live has received in years. They’ll surely have the highest ratings today as we try to see how Ripa and Strahan handle co-hosting duties. My prediction is that they’ll address things briefly, claim that everything is fine now and then move on. They’ve been working together for four years after all. We’ve heard that they’ve disliked each other for some time, and that even prior to Strahan’s announcement they didn’t talk off camera. These two are used to being fake nice for the show, and they’ll suck it up and continue to do that until Strahan runs out the clock and leaves for Good Morning America in September.
Strahan was at an event yesterday where he talked about his move to GMA. It sounds like he’s shading Ripa for giving so much information to the press, but he talks around it.
“To me it’s a testament, not just to me, because as I said, everything is a team. It’s a testament to Live, from [producer Michael] Gelman to Kelly [Ripa], for them to say, ‘You are good enough to be here’ and then I go there, and I do well enough to get a job for two days at GMA and then they say, ‘Well, you know what, we really could use you here.’ It’s a team. It’s ABC. It’s a group. It’s a family,” Strahan said of his exit, which is planned for September. “So for me, I don’t look at it as if I’m leaving one show in a lurch. I look at it as if, ‘You know what? I’m needed in this part of the family for now.’ … I think it’s just unfortunate how everything seems to be for a lot of people outside, because everyone has an opinion, without understanding what’s going on and that’s why. … You take the high road. If you argue with somebody who doesn’t know what they’re talking about and people see you arguing they don’t know who’s the fool.”
It may seem like a family to Strahan because he’s been kept in the loop while Kelly had to wait until right before the public was told to learn about it. I don’t understand why they did that to her, but the fact that she wasn’t talking to Strahan might have had something to do with it. In no way am I blaming her for the way she was treated, and I do think she should have been brought into talks much earlier, as we discussed yesterday.
Kelly made her point to the brass, she’s proven that she’s a valuable asset to ABC and we’ll have to see how it plays out today and in the next few months. Will they keep Live on the schedule or replace it with an hour more of GMA?
Update: Kelly came on in a red jumpsuit. She opened with “Our long national nightmare is over” and then she joked that there were snipers in the audience with tranquilizer darts if she went too far off message. She thanked everyone for their support and said she took some time off to gather her thoughts. “After 26 years with this company, I earned the right [to do that].” She said she gained perspective and that this has “started a much bigger conversation about communication and consideration and most importantly respect in the workplace. I don’t consider this just a workplace this is my second home.” She also talked about how their team is devoted to one another, said “we are family” and that “apologies have been made.”
She stated that “Our parent company has assured me that Live is a priority. There is a commitment to this show, to the people that work here and most importantly to you, the viewers.” Kelly was really emotional when she said to Michael “We couldn’t be prouder of you and everything we have accomplished together.” She ended with “My dad, who was a bus driver… thinks that we are all crazy.”
Michael then told Kelly he loved her and called her “the queen of morning television.” Kelly countered that “Oprah is the real queen, how dare you?” They emphasized that it was entertainment and that they were moving on with the show. Kelly then talked about her 20 year anniversary vacation and bragged that she still fit into her wedding dress, which is actually a beach cover up she got for $199 at Barney’s Warehouse.
Keep it classy Micheal, unlike your cohost.
He can do whatever he wants he doesn’t need permission to move on.
+1000
@Bridget I see your point. And I don’t have a huge issue with either Kelly or Michael. I just feel that certain things are being blown out of proportion. For instance, I believe Kelly’s own camp has acknowledged that she was told about Michael’s departure in a meeting. She was upset that she wasn’t given more time to process the info before the public found out. (although the news may have been leaked?) And yet, I’ve seen so many commenters say things like “I cant believe nobody bothered to tell Kelly that her co-host was leaving before making a public announcement!”.
Maybe it’s just me, but I do feel that there’s a reason significant difference between ‘she found out shortly before public’ vs ‘nobody bothered to tell her and she found out through the press’. Both may be wrong, but the latter is so much worse than the former. So when I see so many people exaggerating the truth, it almost makes me feel compelled to defend the network even though I agree that they could have handled things better.
ETA: whoops. Replied in the wrong place. Get kinda confused when there are so many replies😀
I just don’t understand why his co-worker needed to be involved in his job negotiations. It’s odd to me. Should they perhaps have told her a tad sooner? Yes. Did she need to be at the table? NO!
I think she wanted to be involved in the future direction of the show — as in, whether it gets cancelled or not. Honestly, that’s what the conversation about this issue sounds like to me, not about the future direction of Strahan’s career.
Whether she handled it correctly I have no idea — only the person directly involved can know. But I think the issue was about the larger picture (i.e potential cancellation).
She should have absolutely had NO say in Michael’s job negotiations, but she SHOULD have been informed before it was made public. She should have been informed and they should have had a meeting about the future of her show, with her front and center. But this whole idea that she should have been part of any decision regarding a coworker… no. She is not his supervisor.
She’s not just a co-worker though, her name is on the brand. She’s been with the show for fifteen years and it’s been successful in large part because of her and her personality. The people behind the scenes can come and go, they can have off days where they just coast, they don’t face public flak if things go wrong. As the public face of the show, she has a huge responsibility to it, and therefore is entitled to know what’s happening with it.
She and Michael have a five-year professional partnership, even if they’re not best friends in real life, they have a partnership and I think she’s entitled to know if he’s considering breaking it up as it impacts her too.
She had no right to be involved in his job negotiations, but she should have been informed sooner.
Exactly Perplexed! Exactly and the fact people don’t understand that is shocking to me. She doesn’t give a flip about Strahan he really isn’t important I mean let’s be real he can’t do live without her, and will now just be a part of a larger team at GMA.
Kelly however, can carry a show on her own has proven she is a star (although I’m not crazy about her) and does what to know the direction and plan for HER show. Micheal is a non factor it’s about her show.
Seriously what is hard to understand about that? And how has Michael kept it classy?
Ninks, agreed. I’d even go so far as to say that she should have been consulted about a plan for his replacement. As people have said, I tend to think if she’d been a man she would have been more involved in the whole thing rather than simply shut out.
@Ninks, Finally, someone who gets it. Kelly is the show, co-host can come and go but Kelly was the one they kept around. If she wasn’t important to the show they would have axed her a long time ago. I agree that she doesn’t need to be involved in Michael’s job negotiation but they should have told her about their decision soon as it was made. ABC is trying to turn Michael into their golden boy. He’s also going to be the host and executive producer of a revival of The $100,000 Pyramid airing on ABC this summer.
Strahan is also a football analyst on Fox NFL Sunday. Once he decides to leave that show I’m willing to bet his male counterparts are going to be in the know.
Am I the only one seeing Gillian Anderson’s face on the header cover for Kelly’sand Michael post?
@ninks totally agree with you. She isn’t just a co worker. This effects her and the future of her show. It’s not like he worked in an office with 50 people and he didn’t tell his cube mate he was leaving. It’s just the two of them everyday, putting on a show.
But Esmom, Kelly was informed 4 months before Michael was scheduled to leave. Furthermore, they aren’t going to hire a replacement right after leaves. They have a trial period where they test different hosts to see who is a good fit. Kelly has been through this process twice before (when she was auditioning for the show and when Regis left) so she knows how it works.
Perhaps she should have been told earlier. However, some people are making it sound like she was informed of the change the day before Michael left. And then ABC swooped in and hired a replacement without consulting her.
It’s not as huge of a deal as people are making it to be, imo.
I doubt she’s upset about Michael’s job prospects as much as she is that her bosses at Disney are treating her like garbage. I’ve worked for a massive NY media company and can confirm that no matter how high up you are and how long you’ve been loyal to the company, they have no qualms about pulling your career out from underneath you if that’s what “suits the company” (ie: makes them the most possible money). Kelly is right to be pissed. They basically put her show in massive jeopardy without ever giving her a heads up or a chance to prepare for a save. The fact that they may add an additional hour to GMA because of all this could/would be the nail in Live!’s coffin. Hopefully the PR frenzie will save the show and lead to a nice big bonus for her and her staff.
Not 4 months anymore, GMA is now saying he needs to prep through the summer. So you know, doesn’t look quite as good for him.
Before Kelly returned there were several reports that she wanted him to leave before his scheduled August departure. It was supposedly one her conditions when she agreed to return. Are you implying that she wanted him to stay longer and this is another sign of disrespect? I’m sure it would be awkward for both of them to continue hosting their show together and they are both relieved that they only have a month left.
It may appear that I’m anti-Kelly based on some of my posts. I actually quite like her and am not that familiar with Michael. ( Not a big football fan and I haven’t watched ‘Live’ much over the past few years. )I just think the whole thing was blown out of proportion, and I kind of feel sorry for Michael for getting caught in the media storm.
I am just frustrated that people are taking things as evidence of some sort of personality flaws. Kelly’s an ungrateful brat for being upset, Michael is a smooth operating professional for giving 4 months notice. The notice was being brought up a lot, and if its being used as evidence of his professionalism, shouldnt the shortened notice be a factor? Honestly, I have no real issue with Michael, I just think some of the things people are saying are kind of gross.
My take? We’re talking about Kelly being unhappy and taking a couple of extra days of vacation to collect her thoughts. I can’t believe the condemnation she’s gotten.
Michael, I can’t blame for wanting the GMA gig – he seemed like an odd fit for Live, because I never got the impression that he thought it was his audience. And it wasn’t his choice to keep Kelly in the dark; I blame ABC for that. But I dislike the comparison that’s being made, as though the woman is getting hysterical and needs the big strong man to have the level head. Does this make more sense?
@Bridget – my take is that Kelly demanded that they remove Michael earlier. Those were the reports from early on (i.e. she was not returning until he left) so to me this makes Kelly look worse.
Re: taking the time. She could have professionally showed up after the announcement and told her bosses that she was going to need extra time to think about things and add a few days this week. Instead she opted to make this entire situation dramatic by calling out sick immediately after the announcement.
She doesn’t have a normal job. She’s expected to be chatty and happy on camera, not sullen and pissed off. I see no reason why calling in sick was unacceptable. And folks are naive if they think a man would have been given the same level of consideration.
Oh, here we go. Crap all over the woman who dared to ask for a little respect. We have a loooooong way to go for equality, still! Maybe in another 100 years.
What does this have to do with her being a woman? Do we have a reason to think that she would have been involved in more meetings about her cohost leaving the show if she was a man? I’m sorry, I just don’t see it. It sounds like she’s pissed that ABC cannibalized her cohost for another show. A man would probably feel the same way.
I disagree – she could have EARNED respect in a lot of different ways and I don’t think her stunt helped her. Again, she is a co-host and while emotionally and professionally invested in the show that investment does not make her a decision maker. Clearly she deserved to be told in advance but she behaved as if this was her show when in reality you could likely swap her out without too big of a ratings dip IMO.
“What does this have to do with her being a woman? Do we have a reason to think that she would have been involved in more meetings about her cohost leaving the show if she was a man? ”
Um, yep
@V4Real, sorry, I don’t remember all my male colleagues sitting in on the meeting last time I quit.
What I’m saying is that there are a host of reasons why she may not have been involved earlier in the process. This doesn’t feel like an instance of sexism to me.
I was thinking the EXACT same thing Talie when I started reading the comments! Thanks for saying it. I don’t even watch or like Kelly, but obviously she got treated like crap and good for her for standing up.
@ tealily
But that’s just you. And I’m pretty sure Michael didn’t just quit, he was offered another job with the same network.
So is the sexist part that her male colleague was offered the job and she wasn’t? Please explain which part of this you are seeing as sexist, because I am not seeing it.
I don’t think people are saying she should have been art of the negotiations. But she should have been informed that her partnership was going to change, and she should have been informed more than a few hours before the public, half hour after the show ended.
She could have been informed about the process along the way, that she would need to do the very long sit with a bunch of different cohosts to test their chemistry again, and then the news could have been presented by both Kelly and Michael on a show that was scheduled after there had been a meeting or two about the message. Instead, the story was told to outlets away from the show – which makes it about one person in a partnership instead of the people involved.
The sexist part of this is if Kelly was leaving Michael would have been notified months before, and probably in on the discussion about how the transition was going to work. How do I know? Well I worked for some of these lovely men for many years and this is their m.o. Men are the head honchos and women are accessories, even if they let them believe they are more.
People don’t understand television shows are not like regular jobs. Even though Live has been successful with replacements this is generally not the case in most of television, usually the show dies. Also, with the stars of the show It’s almost like working at a big company and the CEO or someone high up leaves, everyone of a certain level of power generally knows, and Kelly should have been included in the conversation. This is why when Oprah was asked about it she looked at the reporter like they were nuts that Kelly didn’t know. Anyone working in the industry knows what this meant, and it is generally done to women to put them in their place. I think there is more to this than meets the eye, but I guess we will find out. Think about it if they were concerned about Kelly’s reaction, so much that they were going to tell her minutes before it goes public, why not wait for her vacation in two days. Instead they release it two days early and all the gossip goes on which makes both Kelly and the network look bad, and Michael somewhat, but the network puts its spin on things to make Kelly look bad the most. Plus I think Michael’s full time move to GMA is probably a mistake. Too many anchors and you know someone is going to fall off that band wagon soon, but good luck to him.
Why do you feel it needs to be HE ‘vs’ SHE? It isn’t that at all & until folks with your line of thought change that dialog; there won’t be equality
The show LIVE is not getting canned and she will have a replacement. She was given 4 MONTHS prior notice of his departure. Michael has consistently given her due credit professionally. He has said consistently that she is the show and that she has helped him.
With that said, Michael is a successful pro-athlete that is continuously advancing his career when opportunities strike him for his benefit. Sad that no one was paying attention to that harsh reality of who he really is.
He did not act outside of his character and neither did she. Now that she is over the news, she will be fine.
The thing is, she was given about 20 minutes notice prior to the public announcement. Not cool.
Amen. I got a promotion recently and we had to be all hush hush because one other coworker had tried out for it and didn’t get it. She didn’t know I applied (nobody did because I’m discreet) and when she found out I got it she stopped coming in for several days. Bawled and cried and generally acted a FOOL. She stayed on another 6 weeks and made life hell on us all. Because she felt “betrayed”. Um, I don’t owe you any explanation. And neither does Strahan.
+10,000
It appears to me that no matter how her mouth smiles, her eyes always say, “get the hell away from me, I hate all of you.”
That’s Botox for you. Her smile doesn’t reach her eyes, because those muscles are paralyzed.
I understand what you are saying, however, I think it goes deeper than that. I just don’t find her television persona to be genuinely…umm, personable. She seems so forced, even in the appliance commercials I have seen- it’s as if she derives no joy at all from her work endeavors.
I feel the same way about Ellen, NotSoSocialButterfly.
I think there’s a lot of persona at play – much more so than genuine behavior.
I think Kelly and Ellen are both fake as f@ck
So, am I the only one who thinks this whole thing is stupid?
No, you’re not.
Something made out of nothing. Like now we are adding another incident to some National Discussion on Women in the workplace. This is something that happens every single day. Regis did basically the same thing IIRC (please correct me if I’m wrong).
I just think there are a lot of things that are not being discussed. Michael seems to be just holding steady. Again I think Kelly’s friends need to STOP. I’m sure Andy makes decisions on his show without a group consult.
As she said, her dad seems to agree with you.
No, not at all.
Hell no. You’re making $15 MILLION a year to do what exactly? Oh yes, brain surgery.
The slow road to hell just made another pit stop.
I understand what you’re saying and I thought that at first too. But the thing is, she makes that momey because she earns it. People (not me) like her and watch her. Just because she makes a lot of money, doesn’t mean the male brass should ignore her and effectively tell her to sit down and shut up. She absolutely should have been included in these decisions.
It’s sort of stupid. The media coverage was stupid. But I think her feelings were valid. She should have been given the respect and consideration of being notified in a more appropriate way.
No you aren’t. It was totally overblown. I didn’t tune in because I thought it became ridiculous. People were trying to use this as some big social statement when it was just some people behaving poorly in corporate America. Shocking.
@delta Juliet. I agree wholeheartedly!
Why click, read, and comment in that case?
Watching now. She is being the humble, I love this show ABC. With that being said, she looks like she’s ready to burst into tears. OMG much adieu about nothing, maybe not to her, but to me. Okay Michael’s on saying how much he loves her. Okay that’s all I can take. Might puke at the lovefest.
People is reporting that Michael is now leaving on May 14th. So I guess she demanded he leave sooner? Wasn’t he supposed to leave in September?
Did they report his happy dance as well?
GMA is saying he needs to prep over the summer. Isn’t it pretty standard to take time off before jumping onto the morning show like that?
Or he DEMANDED to leave earlier rather than put up with more of her unprofessional behavior. 🙂
Moving on up to GMA
The way she stood the entire time during intro. felt a little awkward to me, and the fact that the camera was so closely zoomed in on her. But overall I think it was the best way to break the ice and move on.
Red power suit!
There’s a certain amount of acting involved in trying to keep one’s emotions together when you find out about certain news (i.e when Kelly found out about Regis’s exit on air, I think?), and if you have to present yourself on national television, I’ll admit I’m a little baffled as to why ABC wouldn’t just tell everyone involved ahead of time (so many thoughts would be racing through your head as the camera is plastered on your face, wouldn’t it — i.e is my job safe?).
She did keep it classy. She focused on the company and workplace respect. I don’t know why some people consider this about her wanting to get in Michael’s business. She is a principal in a business, and didn’t ask (to my understanding) to be involved in Michael’s negotiations, but given that the fallout IS going to involve her, she did merit better notice, not just before he left, but before she had to react on camera.
The live audience was clearly waiting for her to say something about the situation, and she did — without shade on Michael. I agree the smile is not completely in the eyes, but she seemed pleased to assure the staff publicly that Live (and their jobs) are secure for now.
I don’t even care that much about this show, but I think she’s been unfairly bashed.
I’m baffled by the amount of women who think Kelly’s behavior of not showing up for work and throwing histrionics via leaks to People mag “earned her respect”. And if you don’t think that way you are either sexist, a self-hating woman or a $20, 000 a year job earner. I guess someone needs to let Hillary Clinton, Condi Rice, Ivanka Trump, Albright and other women who were ACTUALLY in positions of higher power know they are doing it all wrong.
Although Ophrah and Wendy Williams are both waving their #team Kelly flags, Oprah has never said behavior like this got her to her position of power, only playing the game but smarter in a male dominated field. Ditto Wendy Williams who said she would have shown up in her red power suit looking fabulous and doing a great job but would be throwing under the radar shade. Either way they would have shown up to work!
I don’t know if Kelly’s behaviour was correct, but I think her situation is different from Hillary Clinton’s or the other women listed. Those ladies, with the exception of Ivanka, are in diplomatic positions and are not in entertainment. They are required to behave with a certain kind of decorum. They also have advisors/consultants who map out what statements they’re going to issue in order to maintain that image of diplomacy. They’re also not on tv where they have to react to news just given to them, barring something really huge like 9/11 where everyone has to be on tv immediately to give a statement — I can believe these women, when under high stress, throw just as many tantrums as their male counterparts but it’s most likely all done in private and classified. I’ve heard those audio tapes of JFK swearing up a storm when he was ticked off about something, but the info only comes out decades later when it’s safe to release the info.
Because Kelly Ripa is in the entertainment industry where apparently Christian Bale swearing at a DP is considered not too bad or Jennifer Lawrence’s director can get away with abusing women, I think I view Ripa’s handling of the situation through a different lens — the kind of lens the entertainment industry uses. Through her industry’s lens, her behaviour seems tame to me. Oprah has headed her own company since her 30s (I think?) so I don’t even know if she would have ever had to face Kelly’s situation. I assume Oprah as the head of her company tells all her employees ahead of time when she’s about to do something, which would explain her reaction to ABC.
Just because other people in the industry behave worse doesn’t mean she’s handled this well, though. I really don’t understand why people seem to be so fervently on her side about this.
Like, I said, I have no idea if she did the correct thing. We’ll probably only know years down the line whether this worked in her favour.
I think I might be on her side simply because I don’t understand how hard it would have been for ABC to give her a heads-up. What was the point of the secrecy? I don’t get it. These people go on air to show what their faces are feeling- – why not just tell them ahead of time? unless it’s some weird power control thing to mess with people’s heads or even to prevent them from getting the idea that they have a right to negotiate outside of the company and find other more favourable paths? (i.e I believe this is what NBC did with Conan).
I suppose I should clarify that I think the tactics used in the entertainment industry are different from what I think would be used in people’s every day lives, and I think the people in those industries use the behaviours the highers-up have modelled for them to follow. So it’s not like I think this behaviour is good, but I think the higher up create a system of behaviour that others feel they need to use. I don’t think ABC would have a problem issuing their own narrative of what went down if she had kept quiet. Therefore, when an entertainment personality like Kelly responds in kind by creating their own narrative I assume they’re using the tactics created by the company itself. So my perception of Kelly’s behaviour has to do with how networks have handled their employees in the past — i.e leaking information to create a certain perception of a network star, going to the press themselves with their own sources, etc. Would I have handled myself the way Kelly has? I don’t know and I’d prefer not to since my personality is quite different. But she’s in an industry that is quite cutthroat and has no problem cannibalizing people they value (i.e NBC with Conan O’Brien, NBC with Ann Curry) and issue their own leaks through the press so it is through that particular configuration of behaviour that I view how Kelly responded.
Similarly, with politicians I view how they behave through how their industry operates. I also don’t believe any of those politicians in power have always behaved with decorum — years later, we find out that they had vengeful hit lists and what not, and I would venture to guess were more immature than Kelly’s but we don’t find out about it until years later.
I get what you’re saying and I think you’re right, we should probably be factoring that in. What is considered “professional” in her profession is not the same as in ours. But I don’t think her reaction will make the situation better for her or the show in the long run, and may in fact hurt it. I sure as heck wouldn’t want to work with her after that stunt.
Tealily – in preceding days, I was on Kelly’s side. Today, I agree with you. This is why.
1. Kelly’s walk about outside her apartment with book in hand, Goliath vs something whatever. Childish taunting considering how many jobs her actions were affecting;
2. Andy Cohen statement about this in favour of Kelly. Now that is just mean girl ganging up and is completely unprofessional.
This isn’t a small matter at work. This is about a person’s career, a tv show which employs a lot of people, and major millions in salaries. To behave this way with all of that at stake…no more Team Kelly for me.
In future, I’d avoid her like the plague in any setting as well.
I felt Andy Cohen was just giving his opinion because..well, I don’t know why. But I didn’t think his opinion was ordered by Kelly for him to speak, and I don’t see what kind of leverage he would have (in comparison to someone like Oprah) to sway anybody’s opinions on the matter.. I felt he was acting on his own behalf….because a lot of media personalities have been giving their opinions in general. Since he’s part of the Housewives brand, he seems like a talkative type that would generally talk out of turn and bluntly, and possibly crudely, for whatever reason (to get his name in the news? Idk).
Andy Cohen seems like a Z-list celebrity who doesn’t command any kind of respect like Oprah does, which is why I assumed he was shocked about someone not wanting to keep the Live gig permanently. Would anyone actually take Cohen’s opinion seriously? (even though objectively I do think there’s truth in what he’s saying in terms of the brutal nature of the entertainment industry, the cushiness of the Live job, and GMA not being a guarantee of long-term success for anyone). Like, who would listen to Andy Cohen of all people on this?
@ Preplexed as you said JFR was upset and swearing BEHIND THE SCENES, not calling TIME magazine to say he is mad and wants his VP fired.
Oprah did not wake up one day to owning her own show. She started out as a small town reporter and climbed her way up to the top in an industry that does not favor dark skinned African-American women or overweight women. She talked about how hard she had to work, bite her tongue and just always try to be smarter. Never anything unprofessional as not showing up for work (that really bothers me), or stating she won’t come back to work until her co-anchor leaves.
Hilary, Condi, Albright, etc are all women who have been on the spot with a camera aimed at their face to answer questions from pissed off congressmen and various host country reporters. Not every word the speak is scripted. I lost count at 100, in terms of times Hillary gets rude personal questions aimed at her from reporters and she has to not react how they wanted her to.
I’m afraid that in order to defend Kelly, one has to dismiss every other woman who has managed to keep it professional when screwed over. She sounds like special snowflake territory that the banner of sexism is being twisted around in order to fit.
“d JFR was upset and swearing BEHIND THE SCENES, not calling TIME magazine to say he is mad and wants his VP fired.”
He was swearing ON TAPE. Why this was even caught on tape, I have no idea, but I don’t know if I would count that as behind-the-scenes necessarily. The tape is up there on Youtube, but he lived in a different time when the media protected politicians.
“I’m afraid that in order to defend Kelly, one has to dismiss every other woman who has managed to keep it professional when screwed over”
I’m not dismissing these other women. WHAT I DID SAY is that I view Kelly’s behaviour through the lens of the entertainment industry. Kelly was leaking stories, but as far as I could tell ABC was too. Her behaviour was patterned on what they were doing. It seems as though even Strahan was leaking at various points. They were all leaking — they were all playing the same game.
I’m also not even sure that I brought up the notion that what happened to Kelly was sexist. I’ve mentioned what happened to other men in the industry. What I did bring up is that she plays in an industry that operates by different rules.
Politicians, etc. are all in positions of power, but what they do for a living behind the scenes is very different from what Kelly does. Their decisions have gotten people killed in various countries whereas Kelly’s decisions affect only her. Some of these women may be more “mature” and “poised” in public but their decisions have been life-altering for other people in other countries. And what I read in biographies is very different from the information I would get on a gossip board. So, yes, how I view her behaviour will be through a very different lens — a lens that doesn’t affect me the way politicians’ behaviour does. This shouldn’t be hard to grasp.
Some of these women are powerful but beyond that do I think every decision they’ve ever made is correct or that power in and of itself commands moral respect? Not necessarily. Just because you’ve reached a certain level of power doesn’t mean you’ve operated ethically at all times. Yet what these women in positions of power have done have far greater ramifications for their country and globally than what Kelly does speaking about ABC to the press. So of course I will view her behaviour through the lens.
Also, my intent was not to dismiss Oprah. What I do feel in Oprah’s case is that she achieved her success so young that I don’t know what situation in her 40s is analogous to what Kelly would be going through now. When Oprah was working her way up she was still in her 20s and dealt with those situations appropriately and accordingly (as I assume Kelly did in her 20s when she was working on a soap opera). However, once she reached Kelly’s age she was ostensibly THE BOSS of EVERYTHING and she would be the one giving the heads-up to everybody, not waiting for anybody to give the heads-up to her. Oprah had reached a position of power where she could chew someone out on national television for lying to her about what they had put in a memoir and for making her look like a fool — that’s how great her power is and continues to be, and I respect what she has been able to achieve. I’m not sure why anyone saying that Oprah is at a level of power where she calls the shots would be considered dismissive.
I work for a company and one of the Vice President’s is leaving. Guess who got a heads up before all staff were notified? The President. The President was told, then we were told and then the media was informed. That’s my only real issue with this… it’s not that it was Kelly’s decision to make and she should have been a part of the conversation. It’s about the fact that she wasn’t given a heads up and that is disrespectful. I don’t think its Strahan’s fault, I blame the network.
1.) Kelly’s not the president of the company. 2.) The information was apparently leaked. (Right? Isn’t that what happened?) She would likely have bee informed well before the public if that had not been so.
The information wasnt leaked in the way you are implying. The bosses sent out a company wide memo intending this to be Kellys heads up. They basically intended her to find out at the same time as the production intern. That memo was instantly then leaked to other outlets.
My understanding is that Kelly was informed in a private meeting with Michael and some executives. Shortly after the meeting, the rest of the company was informed via email. The email was leaked to the press.
So I guess one could argue that they shouldn’t have sent out a memo right after they told Kelly. They could have waited a few days before telling the rest of the company. But she did not find out through the press or an email like a lot of people are saying. She was told to her face in a meeting.
@Goldie, so really what more does she want? She was told in a private meeting. They weren’t expecting her to go on screen and react publicly to the news immediately. Maybe they should have been more wary of the news leaking, but not foreseeing that has nothing to do with how much the company values Kelly. It really seems like she is taking something that isn’t actually about her and making it all about her.
Kelly is an “employee” of the network. She is not in a managerial position nor is she a producer. That is the whole point. She got told when the rest of the “staff” was informed. Naya – not only was there a memo but management had a meeting with her, Gelman and Strahan. That was the meeting where she went “Crazy” – US Weekly’s words. You make it sound like she was informed by a Dear John letter. That was not the case. A meeting was held and she was informed the same time the world was.
Exactly ! She is part of a team and the team was told at the same time. Is she putting herself above the team? Cuz if she is, that’s gonna bite her.
When I was Teaching we had Pre planning.. the time teacher return to school before the kids.. The First day of Pre planning our Principle that we loved had a breakfast for us and we were all talking about what the year would be. The next day we were told that she would be leaving. She was told that morning and she told us. Another year our principle was there one day and the next a new person was coming in.
This is just an example of how this happens in every area. The people that make decisions make them for the reasons they want. We get emotional and scream it is not fair. They call it business.
I dont think this reflected well on Ripa and I dont anticipate Live doing well after Sept. unless they find another host that people will want to see. Ripa cant carry that show on her own.
No one can carry that show on their own. It’s a two-person format show. You need two with great chemistry to bounce off of, which is what makes the show work.. That’s the whole point and why it’s no easy task finding that person, like for Regis when Kathy Lee was leaving. It took quite awhile to find Kelly. The success of the show is dependent on that dynamic.
She won the battle but not the war. Ben Sherwood (head of ABC News) and the other Disney execs will remember this. Watch for it next year during contract renewals. She did not play the game smartly.
Everything would have been fine if they had told Kelly earlier and made her sign an NDA. That they didn’t do that, and kept her completely out of the loop despite knowing that the decision would directly affect her, says a lot about the ethics of the company. This has nothing to do with Michael or how they both feel about each other.
Also, she might have felt betrayed because “he could have told her”, but then again, NDAs kinda make that impossible if simply breathing a word about it meant the cancellation of the contract. Entertainment contracts aren’t like others. The NDA not only could’ve cost him BOTH jobs, but also money in fines. I understand completely why he didn’t say anything. They were both justified in their actions and their emotions.
The real bad guy(s) here is ABC.
You’re right, they should have made her sign an NDA when they gave her the news in a private meeting before going public. Guess they where expecting a professional and reasonnable reaction.
She found out the day it went public. That was unprofessional and uncalled for by the company and execs. You don’t have to like her to see that her reaction, given the route the company took to keep this under wraps, is completely justified. She was emotionally upended and professionally routed.
Again, the bad guy isn’t Kelly or Michael. It’s ABC.
It could very well be possible, that she was vying for the same spot Iat good morning America that he was. If, indeed, GMA is a promotion, then why wouldn’t she have sought it?
The thing is I think they has a closer friendship than others realized. When he was inducted into the Football Hall of Fame in Canton, Ohio she & Mark attended. I know that bc I live in the Akron area (20 mins away from Canton) & it was a huge deal Kelly Ripa was in NE Ohio. I don’t think you would fly across the country to small town Canton, Ohio for a colleague. Unless the network made her, which idk. I wouldn’t have expected her there tbh. So I think that’s why she’s also hurt. She probably expected a more personal approach from him prior to the big annoucement.
That was in 2014.I have noticed over the last year or so they don’t seem to socialize outside of work anymore.They used to mention going out to dinner or discuss events they both attended.They rarely do that anymore maybe because of his GMA schedule,IDK.
he has like 8 jobs, and she has 3 kids and a marriage plus numerous evening engagements for ABC. I can’t fault them for not having as much time for each other.
Bottom line, the issue is just about respect and nothing else. To say that she deserved to find out with the rest of the world that her co-host was exiting a show that her name is on is simply ludicrous. No one says she has any say in what his career decisions are, just simply she should be informed before total strangers.
A name that could easily be removed and replaced (see Regis and Kathie Lee). Unless she’s a producer of that show, she has no ownership and say over how this show is run. Sorry.
Of course her name could be replaced, that is the entertainment industry. But ABC realizes she is a big money maker for them or they would not keep her name on the show. But as it stands her name is currently in the title of the show and as such, as a sign of respect, she deserves to be told as soon as Michael made his decision to move on. Not moments before the rest of the world, even if it was in private. When she was added to the show, I am certain that the company informed Regis well in advance and even asked his opinion. So I guess you are saying she doesn’t deserve some common consideration. Because all I stated is she deserved to know immediately when Michael made his decision, not that she had any say in what his decision was. The way the company handled it was to treat her as if she didn’t matter. And if that is true that she doesn’t matter and doesn’t make them a ton of money, then she shouldn’t have been told immediately. But they aren’t going to pay Her 15 million dollars a year if it isn’t warranted; so obviously she is essential and should be treated as such, with RESPECT.
+ they gave her the news face to face in a private meeting. How is that finding about it with the rest of the world ?
I agree. She carries that show as well. IMO she is the face of the show and the show cannot go on without her. Michael leaving is really no big deal, but the way they disrespected her is.
She wasn’t asking for anything inappropriate or out of question or unusual. Just to be shown respect after working for ABC for 25 yrs. She earned and deserved that.
I disagree Michelle, she was asking for more than respect; She was asking for privilege.
But by all accounts they DID tell her before they told “total strangers”. They had a sit down meeting, she was told and then the rest of the company was told. IMO doesn’t matter if it was 20 minutes or 20 months. She was told first and told privately.
I don’t think Michael Strahan is at fault in any way. But I do think these network executives behave very strangely.
Michael Strahan is a cold-hearted cad. Always has been. Always will be. He cuts people off without a thought. The warm facade is an act. Any woman should run. Should crash and burn at GMA because he has it coming.
OK,Kelly
@colette. Hahah. I really like that Harlequin spin of things Loser.
Haha Kelly lurks, beware. Lol
The only thing I noticed going through his bio was that he seems to leave a relationship right after they have a baby.
I think Kelly handled it perfectly on today’s show. Her name is on the title of the show and she would be considered the owner of the show. I think it is fair that she acknowledge that it was handled poorly and that she needed some time to deal.
I think Michael should have publicly owned the poor handling a little more. He played a role here. He could have insisted that his co-host and equal be kept in the loop, etc.
She doesn’t own anything and if ABC/Disney cared about her feelings they would have informed her.
She doesn’t own that show. Names can be erased with Photoshop. See Regis and Kathie Lee. Their names were on the show too at one point. What is with this sense of entitlement?
Her name is on the title of the show because of consistency …. Regis & Kelly became Kelly & Michael and had Kelly left it would have been Michael & ( ). It is not as if they brought Kelly in to create her own show and then named it after her.
@em. Thank you! Great point Kelly and Michael may have turned into Michael and… ☺
It doesn’t sound like Michael had much to do with the handling of the situation. If he was told not to discuss it, there’s not much that he could do.
Well, unfortunately, IMHO, for Kelly, not getting more advance notice of this is not her biggest problem.
Her biggest problem is that she will be going into contract negotiations next year with a lame duck show that’s jumped the shark. And, THAT is why she’s really upset.
I wouldn’t believe any assurances received from the network. The best of luck to Michael, and I think Kelly was disrespected. Hopefully, they’ll treat her better next time.
That’s show business.
I agree Kelly was disrespected. I’ve only caught snippets of the show here and there, and I’ve always thought she was doing just fine for that type of morning show. I’ve been screwed at my job so I feel for her. Some people are better at hiding their feelings than others.
A well loved, highly contributing coworker of mine was let go because the new administration felt he made too much money. He was treated very poorly in a number of ways. Everyone was upset, but I was so upset my mouth was dry for two days and it was hard for me to make small talk and eye contact with the big boss.
I couldn’t stop thinking about it and trust me, I tried. I know it’s not cool for a woman to be teary and resentful at work. I was also scared for my own job, and it would have been a relief to ride out the shock and feeling of violation for a couple of days until I could calm down and pretend nothing was wrong, like a good girl. Kelly did the right thing to pull herself together before returning, instead of returning the next day when she was still shaken up. She’s an actress and a host and is expected to deal with the unexpected in an entertaining and professional way, but this was a shocking and personal incident, which happened publicly. She’s not super-human. And by the way – the American workplace sucks these days. This society needs to rethink how we are living and working and treating each other.
TMZ and people just announced that Michaels last day at live is on May 13th
If Michael is leaving on May 13 instead of September, as he originally planned, that means the rumors are true that Kelly didn’t want to return to Live if Michael was still there. How spiteful and unprofessional can Kelly Ripa be?! The more she acts the worse she looks. This is not the proper way to conduct yourself in front of a national audience. She must be horrible to work with and her reputation is shot beyond repair. Time to cancel the show.
I didn’t watch the show, but the Washington Post has a video of her speech and an article on how she was a total boss, which after seeing the video, she SO was:
Kelly Ripa’s pitch-perfect ‘Live!’ monologue: How the co-host pulled off a tough moment
http://wapo.st/1Wo1iT1
I’m really tired of Kelly. Michael is always good and when Kelly is not on the show, the show seems better without her. She seems unprofessional and always silly; it’s gotten tiresome.
Companies will treat you how you let them treat you.
Kelly let them know that she wasn’t going to be their fool and as a result has been able to renogotiate a better deal for herself. Some of the people judging her would be stuck being second banana moved around like a pawn but happy that at least they were being obedient. What good is that?
Just out of curiosity, what deal has she renegotiated? The only thing I’ve heard is that Michael is leaving earlier than originally planned. I don’t know if most people would earn respect by acting like Kelly. But Hollywood operates differently than other industries, so she may benefit. Certainly wish her the best.
She proved that she is a bag of emotions with little brain power. She will be marked with a giant F for fragile with everyone smiling at her extra hard and only brining up Disney level innocuous subjects or avoiding her altogether. Trust everyone will be walking on egg shells and treating her with an invisible pat on the head.
Men climb up the ladder because of sexism AND because they learn the rules of the game. Kelley seems to be clueless about this. Irrational behavior and throwing fits (even when the company does you bad) are major ways to NOT get promoted. There are more mature and intelligent ways to make your point. People who don’t know this have never worked in a cut-throat job. She doesn’t seem to be considered part of the family and still doesn’t get it.
Abc does give her respect when they compensate her work.