fearne cotton - the most tallented young woman in the UK

124

Comments

  • Brighton BhelleBrighton Bhelle Posts: 723
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6M93SDCl-g

    Is this Fearne Cotton at the beginning or have I had too many lagers?

    The Oasis footage is from 1995, so unless Fearne was doing TV at 14, the footage at the beginning with Tuffers is recent.
  • pwuzpwuz Posts: 685
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The company she keeps is disturbing.
  • 21stCenturyBoy21stCenturyBoy Posts: 44,493
    Forum Member
    pwuz wrote: »
    The company she keeps is disturbing.

    What a dreadful thing to say :(

    I take it, of course, that you're making insinuations based on her relationship with Ian Watkins?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 827
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    pwuz wrote: »
    The company she keeps is disturbing.

    well done. be very proud of yourself
  • pwuzpwuz Posts: 685
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    What a dreadful thing to say :(

    I take it, of course, that you're making insinuations based on her relationship with Ian Watkins?
    your not allowed to talk about that...

    Talking about Moyles.

    Not impressed she's been linked to slave trade slurs
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 827
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    generally I would support the right to talk. I would engage in foxing DM on many many occasions. But pwuz, this is not a game, this is one of the most utterly utterly vile things ever reported in most peoples' lifetimes. you need to stop.
  • Jon RossJon Ross Posts: 3,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    bornslippy wrote: »
    well done. be very proud of yourself

    Shouldn't you be on Facebook harassing H from Steps? :rolleyes:
  • pwuzpwuz Posts: 685
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    bornslippy wrote: »
    generally I would support the right to talk. I would engage in foxing DM on many many occasions. But pwuz, this is not a game, this is one of the most utterly utterly vile things ever reported in most peoples' lifetimes. you need to stop.

    We shouldn't talk about things if they are vile?

    They should just be silenced and forgotten?
  • Jon RossJon Ross Posts: 3,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    pwuz wrote: »
    We shouldn't talk about things if they are vile?

    They should just be silenced and forgotten?

    That's the position a lot of people take. Brush it under the carpet, write them out of history, pretend they never happened. Easier to do that than to confront the truth and complexity of human behaviours.
  • 21stCenturyBoy21stCenturyBoy Posts: 44,493
    Forum Member
    It's one thing discussing it, it's quite another to be making thinly veiled accusations about somebody not involved with the case at all.

    There's no other reason why you'd bump an old thread on today of all days.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 827
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Jon, I do not accept, under any condition, circumstance or context, that rolled eyes smilies are appropriate here. The guy on the other thread did not respond to your comments. I suggest he may have deliberately distanced himself from your 3 grin smilies and that is to his credit. The gravity of this does not allow for banter, irony, satire, whether it is knowing, whether it is tangental or otherwise. I appreciate you hold a different view. I implore you to consider, just this time, that you may be wrong
  • Jon RossJon Ross Posts: 3,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    bornslippy wrote: »
    Jon, I do not accept, under any condition, circumstance or context, that rolled eyes smilies are appropriate here. The guy on the other thread did not respond to your comments. I suggest he may have deliberately distanced himself from your 3 grin smilies and that is to his credit. The gravity of this does not allow for banter, irony, satire, whether it is knowing, whether it is tangental or otherwise. I appreciate you hold a different view. I implore you to consider, just this time, that you may be wrong

    I don't agree with you but I appreciate the care you put into writing a sensible and eloquent post instead of name-calling like last time. ;)
  • pwuzpwuz Posts: 685
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It's one thing discussing it, it's quite another to be making thinly veiled accusations about somebody not involved with the case at all.

    There's no other reason why you'd bump an old thread on today of all days.

    I haven't accused anyone. She's pictured right at the top of the daily mail.
  • pwuzpwuz Posts: 685
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Jon Ross wrote: »
    That's the position a lot of people take. Brush it under the carpet, write them out of history, pretend they never happened. Easier to do that than to confront the truth and complexity of human behaviours.

    That's the thing I find more disturbing,

    Something awful has happened, let's try to ignore it, forget about it, not talk about it and let it all happen again.
  • Caligula75Caligula75 Posts: 1,186
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    She has been off her radio one slot a lot recently.

    I'm old school, so prefer Sara Cox big time. Enjoyed Fearne's maternity leave. And today I liked Gemma Cairney over her. In fact I enjoy the ten to one slot every time Fearne is away. I keep hoping the power that be get it. She sucks. She has no personality. She's a sycophant and her anecdotes are tired and false. Nothing natural. I can't believe She got the live lounge after the wonder that is Jo Whiley. I must be old as I simply don't get her appeal...
  • Jon RossJon Ross Posts: 3,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    pwuz wrote: »
    That's the thing I find more disturbing,

    Something awful has happened, let's try to ignore it, forget about it, not talk about it and let it all happen again.

    You and I are on the same page.

    We will never, as a species, be able to deal with the worst aspects of human behaviour until we can approach it in a considered, measured and realistic way.
  • TributeTribute Posts: 820
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    You've gotta love internet white knights.
  • Caligula75Caligula75 Posts: 1,186
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Oh and the lost prophets furore.

    Fearne most likely was associated to him as he's a 'rock star' the same way she's with Ronnie Woods son whatever his name is. I don't see why she's being linked to him it was probably a 'oh look how cool I am I'm with a musician cuz I'm so cool' moment for Fearne. As she's that see through.

    When I think of that particular case that has been in court today I don't think of the celebrity juice loser. She just hitched herself to wrong one that year.
  • Jon RossJon Ross Posts: 3,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tribute wrote: »
    You've gotta love internet white knights.

    Better to be an internet white knight than an internet troll (not suggesting you are BTW - but there's a lot of them).
  • boddismboddism Posts: 16,436
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    pwuz wrote: »
    The company she keeps is disturbing.

    She most likely didnt have A CLUE about his real nature and the poor girl probably feels sick at the mo.

    She has nothing to be ashamed about, these "people" dupe a lot of friends and family to disguise their depravity.

    IM not a fan of hers, but no-one should attack her for this. She has done nothing wrong.
  • Jon RossJon Ross Posts: 3,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    boddism wrote: »
    She most likely didnt have A CLUE about his real nature and the poor girl probably feels sick at the mo.

    She has nothing to be ashamed about, these "people" dupe a lot of friends and family to disguise their depravity.

    IM not a fan of hers, but no-one should attack her for this. She has done nothing wrong.

    That's a fair point. Louis Theroux doesn't deny saying he enjoyed his time spent with Jimmy Savile.
  • SuperAPJSuperAPJ Posts: 10,402
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    pwuz wrote: »
    We shouldn't talk about things if they are vile?

    It's not that but the fact that, at present, it remains illegal to discuss the case on here. Unless everyone goes back to talking about the original topic, this thread's going to get locked.
  • PenelopePopcornPenelopePopcorn Posts: 306
    Forum Member
    I could never understand why FC had got as far as she has with next to no talent until someone pointed out her second name.:yawn:


    Nepotism imho.


    If nepotism explains Ferne's success - how do you explain Peaches' success? :confused:
  • pwuzpwuz Posts: 685
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    SuperAPJ wrote: »
    It's not that but the fact that, at present, it remains illegal to discuss the case on here. Unless everyone goes back to talking about the original topic, this thread's going to get locked.
    It's not illegal to talk about that case as hes pleaded guilty, but the strange people that moderate this forum will delete if we talk about it..

    Anyway back to fearne, she's all over the papers today, wonder how long till she returns to radio 1? or if she ever will?
  • Jon RossJon Ross Posts: 3,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bill Cotton was her grandfather's cousin, she's not as closely related as you might think. She's got where she has due to the media's propensity for taking on thick as sh*t presenters, with bugger all talent in order to appeal to the 'yoof' market, not because grandad's cuz was Controller of BBC1.

    Absolutely spot-on.

    If the Cotton name helped her, it wasn't much. How do people who think she's on TV because of nepotism explain the presence on TV of the equally pointless but nice looking Holly Willoughby?

    The truth is you don't need an awful lot of talent to present on TV and radio, just confidence and a big mouth. As Chris Evans has proved for years. I had to turn the volume control down to half when Evans and Cotton were presenting The One Show recently.
Sign In or Register to comment.