Author |
Message |
Abby7
Member
07-17-2002
| Friday, December 16, 2005 - 7:27 pm
yep, it is odd after you "get to know someone on tv". randal fits much better. i agree with you PAMELA.
|
Luvmykitties
Member
01-02-2004
| Friday, December 16, 2005 - 11:02 pm
For anyone interested, I just started listening to today's archive of the Fishbowl, and they are talking about The Apprentice finale, and Rebecca is supposed to be on. (the program is also going to talking about Survivor and TAR8 finals) www.thefishbowl.com
|
Wendo
Member
08-07-2000
| Friday, December 16, 2005 - 11:40 pm
I think it's interesting that people think Trump shouldn't have asked Randall about hiring Rebecca into the organization; that somehow, he shouldn't have put Randall in that "position". This is a guy who's taking an upper level management position in Trumps organization. How is asking that person (one with several degrees and years of business experience) a question about hiring someone he's worked with putting him in an awkward situation? If anything, Randall just poorly handled the answer to the question; he showed an inability to think quickly on his feet despite the circumstances. Give a crappy answer, you're going to get a crappy response. Had Randall been more adept at responding to Trump, I don't think people would be reacting so poorly to him today. Heck, he didn't even have to say yes or no; he could've just said to Trump, "That's an interesting question and something we could discuss more about tomorrow." Or whatever. As far as racism is concerned, please. It's called trying to do a twist on tv for entertainment (hiring two apprentices). Not some racist plot to keep the "black" contestant from being the one and only apprentice.
|
Bastable
Member
07-09-2002
| Friday, December 16, 2005 - 11:52 pm
I agree, Wendo. It's not like Randal didn't have the choice, anyway. He said he didn't want to share, and so it didn't happen. Sounds respectful to me.
|
Tabbyking
Member
03-11-2002
| Friday, December 16, 2005 - 11:58 pm
as far as how great randal was, how many times was he upstairs doing nothing while others were working their butts off? how many times did we hear people ask where he was? how many times were others doing something all alone and execs would ask where randal was and if he was going to be helping to set things up? i thought he sucked this last challenge. sorry, but i don't think he was all that great at the last event. as for rebecca, i was surprised at the yahoo execs basically telling them NOT to ask for money. it would be considered an insult. did these people not realize it was a FUNDRAISER? i think rebecca was maybe confused by how much influence yahoo was supposed to effect. i think yahoo didn't know what was going on! i still think if they had given the gifts at the beginning and even told people there were gifting envelopes inside for their convenience, they may have gotten some money at the initial event. i am sure they got some money later, but the amount was never disclosed. trump put yahoo on the spot with his 'they should donate' comment and they did donate. did donald?! i think there were problems with both contestants at the last events. randal was no prize, that's for sure and rebecca should have told the yahoo people to stick it...in nicer words, of course! nope, no evidence of racism in donald's hiring of randal. i just feel it wasn't really smart of randal to say no to hiring rebecca when it was clear trump expected him to. IMO, of course.
|
Luvmykitties
Member
01-02-2004
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 12:58 am
Yahoo definitely disturbed me with this event. It seemed like they wanted to throw a Holiday party for the VIP's instead of a charity. I thought it was very poor of them to pretty much demand that donations not be solicited - at a "charity" event. Both events and participants were given to Randall and Rebecca. They didn't have a choice in which charity or sponsor. Even the celebrity guests were already provided (execpt Piscipo ended up having to back out and they needed to find the replacement) I think there was a difference in the way the 2 different events' sponsors and charities handled it. I can understand why Rebecca handled her's the way she did. The Autism Speaks charity was very adamant about what they wanted, and hounded Randall about what he was doing for them throughout the preperation of the event. She really stayed on Randall's back. Outback seemed to be seemed pretty laid back (as far as I can remember). Autism Speaks definitely took the "client" role. It was the exact opposite for Rebecca. Yahoo was pretty adamant about their demands, and the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation seemed pretty low key. They only supplied one sign? I do think Rebecca could have pushed Yahoo a bit more about the fact that it's supposed to be a charity event, but I think there was only so much she could do given what was supplied to her. The Sponsor took a "client" role, and Rebecca acted accordingly. If she didn't satisfy Yahoo and they criticised her, I wonder how the task would have been perceived in DT's eyes? I wonder how Rebecca and Randall would have handled each other's tasks? I think that the fact that even DT didn't make a huge deal out of it showed that Yahoo was just a poor sponsor. Yes, it was brought up that Rebecca didn't get any money, but he didn't constantly pursue that issue. He even said "well I hope Yahoo makes a big donation". And obviously Yahoo realized how bad their decision looked.
|
Sunshyne4u
Member
06-17-2003
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 2:59 am
woW many posts to read today! Something that I havent seen discussed yet is WHY DT put Randal in such an uncomfortable position. I need to watch the repeat of the show but isnt it true that DT named Randall "The Apprentice" and Randall immediately jumped up running to the other contestants for hugs etc. DT was hollaring Randal Randal Come back....It was awkward and I think that DT MAY have gotten his ire up as Randall basically took control of the show and DT lost control of it. DT then threw the question at Randall. Just to see what he'd do?? ********* I dont understand Randall's analogy about winning a Gold then being asked to give it up. There were TWO jobs available. Randall WON the position of Apprentice and CHOSE his job. The other job was second-best. Surely if His job is to be considered the GOLD job, how could the second place job also be considered an equal Gold job?? I just think he is making excuses for his aggressive behaviour. We never saw a hint of this cutthroat behaviour during the interview process. This wasnt a game or even a true competition, it was a job interview.
|
Clutterfree
Member
10-24-2003
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 3:40 am
Kitties, appreciated your analysis of sponsor/charity contrasts in two events, and yes I think Yahoo came off very badly, aggressively saying don't ask for donations. I think Yahoo was doing damage control both in the donation from the audience to the two charities, and in offering Rebecca a job. It was interesting that Rebecca took the: "Thank you, that's an interesting proposition, let's talk about it" approach in response to Yahoo. Would that Randal had done the same in response to Rebecca getting a job. It is interesting that we saw that "cutthroat" side of Randal once before with the taking of all the megaphones, much discussed above. I was thinking we had never seen it. Oh, question for Kitties: how does the fishbowl work? I got to the site, but a little confused how to find out about Rebecca (also site was WAY slow to load possibly due to my dialup connection)....let me know if you learn anything more there! Thanks!
|
Kep421
Member
08-11-2001
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 6:37 am
No one here can accurately state if Trump's decision (to have two Apprentices at this particular time) was predjudical in nature, EXCEPT TRUMP. None of us completely know his heart or his mind. I personally don't think Trump's decision was conciously motivated by race, but I do think I understand what Mpls was saying in his post. Being married to a black man for 32 years and rasing 3 bi-racial children to adulthood, I understand the undercurrent of racism (something I call "unconcious racism") that most whites do not see or understand, or carelessly pooh pooh away as an attempt to either lay guilt on whites or to "get something" by playing the race card. But make no mistake, this "unconcious" undercurrent is there, and it exists in a lot of people....of all different races. Take the owners of a small mom and pop store who had the habit of always having some particular task to do in the area my dh was shopping, and those tasks seem to move around the store as my dh did. Yet I always had to go find someone when I wanted to ask a question. But they were always so friendly and nice to both of us. I personally believe these people were "conditioned" to believe (through news reports and local robberies) that all robberies are committed by black men. I in no way believe they were racist people, but I think some of their behavior was racist in nature. Its entirely possible to NOT be a racist (ie hate people of color), and yet your actions, even good intentions, can be predjudical in nature. And it happens more than most people would realize. My dh himself thought that black businesses could never be as good as white businesses. Not because he thought all black business people were stupid or lazy, but because he thought that black business men didn't have the education, resources and materials available to them that white business people have. Was my dh a racist? No...but his decision was predjudical in nature because he did not patronize black businesses. All of us agree that DT wanted both Randall and Rebecca, but how do we KNOW for sure that DT wasn't subconciously thinking he would need the white woman as a back up if his decision to choose the black man didn't work out? How do we know for sure that DT wasn't subconciously thinking he would alienate some of his white clients if he chose a black man over a white woman? While I'm not convinced this is the case, I still recognize the fact that it is possible DT was considering these options when making his decision. I don't remember seeing many blacks in his upper management and executives, but my memory is very faulty as of late, so please correct me if I'm wrong. PLEASE let me clarify; not having black execs and upper management doesn't mean that a company is racist, but it COULD possibly mean an undercurrent of unconcious predjudical practices are present. as usual...jmho
|
Kep421
Member
08-11-2001
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 6:53 am
ETA: Please note my post doesn't relate to Trump's final decision to actually hire Randal, it relates to Trump's motiviation in his initial decision to hire BOTH.
|
Julieboo
Member
02-05-2002
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 8:40 am
I totally agree with Wendo in her Friday, December 16, 2005 - 10:28 pm post. The more I think of it, the more I think it was fine for DT to put Randal on the spot. He is going to have to make a lot of quick decisions in the future....
|
Taterheadtwo
Member
09-29-2005
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 8:49 am
i think randal felt he, they all worked hard to get the one spot ( the aprentice) he was put on the spot, and felt ( since he was chosen) no it should just stay one selected, i dont fault him at all.... i trully believe randal is very well educated. if he was asked if she should be hired in another venue not as a apprentice but another title, i think he would of encouraged it, but to be asked if he shoud share the apprentice title, after he was selected, he did the right thing, what all of us should of done, i bet even now trumph would agree, the show was all about only being one apprentice, and when randal was blindsided i think he spoke well, to him he was under the impersion it was about only being one aprentice, not more hence his well spoken aprenti statement, which shows his well verse education, i bet the term aprenti is gonna get much media attention, to have hired two would of totaly change the show concept ( which i dont doubt trumph would do to distance himself form the marth show which isnt doing good at all, in fact i will bet both show wont make it back next season, back to only one..
|
Luvmykitties
Member
01-02-2004
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 9:24 am
Clutterfree - if you have dial-up, I think you'll have an issue with Fishbowl. It's a streaming audio broadcast. You can also download it as the MP3 file, but it's 20mb - so that's pretty much out of the question for a dial-up. I'll try to transcribe as much of the "Apprentice" portion of the show as I can sometime over the weekend (hopefully tonight). Rebecca explained why she handled the Yahoo sponsor the way she did. She also explained the seemingly "cold behavior" towards her boyfriend on the boat. She wasn't bitter or sour grapes when asked - quite a few times - about Randal's decision. She did say she was surprised, and mentioned a quote that Randal has on his website: "To Whom Much is Given, Much is Expected". But I'll have to listen again to hear the whole thing she said about it.
|
Luvmykitties
Member
01-02-2004
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 9:28 am
Taterheadtwo - it was already announced that Martha's Apprentice will not be back. She stated that she only planned on doing one season. (I think there's links to articles in the Martha Apprentice thread here) And as I understand it, the next season of the Apprentice (Apprentice 5) has already been taped. And then the following season is supposed to be in California.
|
Costacat
Member
07-15-2000
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 9:46 am
Clutter, GO HERE. You can click the link to "Listen Now" or right-click another link to save the file as an MP3. (TIP: Save it as an MP3; you can control the stream then.)
|
Costacat
Member
07-15-2000
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 9:50 am
I really don't think Randal was put on the spot... he sounded too rehearsed. If he didn't know for sure, he certainly suspected. And I still think he handled it with zero class. As far as the race thing... I would really hesitate to slander someone and call them a racist without any concrete evidence. Doing that is compounding the issue, in my opinion.
|
Rslover
Member
11-19-2002
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 10:00 am
FINALE AFTER PARTY PHOTOS
|
Jimmer
Member
08-30-2000
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 10:16 am
I agree. I’m confident that Randall knew what was coming. After all, the guy has proven himself to be an intelligent individual. If most of us knew what was coming, surely he did as well.
|
Kady
Member
07-30-2000
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 10:17 am
i think if randal was really put on the spot with the question about hiring rebecca, he would have said yes. i think he knew ahead of time the question may come. i believe both randal and rebecca was talked to before the finale and questions was put to them to put thoughts in their heads. kind of like how they do in the diary room on big brother...just inbed the thought.
|
Tabbyking
Member
03-11-2002
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 10:23 am
" but to be asked if he shoud share the apprentice title, after he was selected, he did the right thing" POSTED TATERHEAD i didn't hear trump ask randal to share the apprentice title. he asked randal if he should also 'hire' rebecca. i think trump was waiting for randal to make his first executive decision and to make it a positive one! JMO, of course!
|
Pamy
Member
01-02-2002
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 10:39 am
I think Yahoo knew they would come off badly and I bet they begged DT to let that rep stand up at the finale and say they were donating.
|
Pamy
Member
01-02-2002
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 10:45 am
wow Vanessa Trump is beautiful!! Heidi looked great. I am surprised Oma was there.
|
Luvmykitties
Member
01-02-2004
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 11:05 am
quote:I am surprised Oma was there
Really? I don't think I've ever seen her miss a publicity/photo op... (She also attended the last 2 Apprentice finale) Vanesa is beautiful! I'm familiar with Ivanka, but don't think I've heard of Vanessa before.
|
Pamy
Member
01-02-2002
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 11:23 am
I thought she hated DT, I didn't realize she goes to the after parties.
|
Jimmer
Member
08-30-2000
| Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 11:23 am
It’s funny how things are perceived. Contrary to a few peoples’ opinion, I think that Trump was honoring and respecting Randall, when he asked Randall’s opinion about hiring Rebecca. I agree with Tabbyking that he was giving Randall the opportunity to make his first big positive impact on the Trump organization. Notice that Trump never “fired” Rebecca. Instead, he said, “Rebecca, you’re outstanding. Randall, you’re hired!” Trump could have just as easily turned to Rebecca after hiring Randall and said, “Rebecca, You’re hired!” Instead he chose to honor Randall by asking his opinion.
|
|