Home› Radio and Podcasts

Sarah Kennedy Interview

«1

Comments

  • ShrewnShrewn Posts: 6,840
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #2

    “I have no quibble with the BBC,” said Kennedy. “But please put this in your piece. I would give my two feet to know who’s got it in for me at the BBC. Is it Alan Dedicoat? I have known for an awfully long time that I have got an enemy at the BBC and I would love to know who it is.

    What a bizarre interview. So does she think Deadly put the boot in then??
  • ftvftv Posts: 31,668
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #3
    So it's everyone's fault except hers
  • Sven945Sven945 Posts: 4,217
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #4
    The Guardian have covered the interview with the headline "Sarah Kennedy: I don't have a drink problem". Tomorrow's front page headline will be "Pope: I'm not Catholic" or "Bear: I don't shit in the woods".
  • Phil AnderPhil Ander Posts: 1,556
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #5
    In some ways one of the worst prts of the interview is the implication that the slurring in a programme in August was a one off.

    I know not if SK has'had a drink problem. What I do know is that nobody can do anything for an alcaholic if he/she is not prepared to admit they have a problem.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,346
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #6
    What a bizarre thing to say about Alan Dedicoat!
  • confuddledconfuddled Posts: 3,758
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #7
    i read this in print this morning (and have re-read it) and there is no mention of alan dedicoat, how odd!! but i do think sarah is probably right in that certain bods at the beeb where out to get her!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,346
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #8
    confuddled wrote: »
    i read this in print this morning (and have re-read it) and there is no mention of alan dedicoat, how odd!! but i do think sarah is probably right in that certain bods at the beeb where out to get her!

    How weird! Yes I do agree with u too. I miss her on the radio!
  • Sven945Sven945 Posts: 4,217
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #9
    littlemunchkin wrote: »
    What a bizarre thing to say about Alan Dedicoat!

    She was probably pissed.
  • confuddledconfuddled Posts: 3,758
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #10
    Phil Ander wrote: »
    In some ways one of the worst prts of the interview is the implication that the slurring in a programme in August was a one off.

    I know not if SK has'had a drink problem. What I do know is that nobody can do anything for an alcaholic if he/she is not prepared to admit they have a problem.

    you also can't treat a condition that doesn't exist!
    why don't we just stay away from the drink theory, especially now as sarah has denounced those 'urban myths'.
  • FM LoverFM Lover Posts: 50,777
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #11
    Sven945 wrote: »
    She was probably pissed.

    It is possible that if she had a later night than she would have liked the night before and enjoying a few glasses of sherry that she could have been still under the influence the morning after, especially with little sleep.

    She wouldn't have been the first DJ to turn up for work the worse the wear for alcohol.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,346
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #12
    confuddled wrote: »
    you also can't treat a condition that doesn't exist!
    why don't we just stay away from the drink theory, especially now as sarah has denounced those 'urban myths'.

    I agree.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 38
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #13
    confuddled wrote: »
    you also can't treat a condition that doesn't exist!
    why don't we just stay away from the drink theory, especially now as sarah has denounced those 'urban myths'.

    Anyone with an addiction will ALWAYS deny that addiction until reaching rock bottom. The first step on the road to recovery is to admit it to oneself.

    Former p1sshead A.L.
  • BIDIE-INBIDIE-IN Posts: 1,734
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #14
    FM Lover wrote: »
    It is possible that if she had a later night than she would have liked the night before and enjoying a few glasses of sherry that she could have been still under the influence the morning after, especially with little sleep.

    She wouldn't have been the first DJ to turn up for work the worse the wear for alcohol.

    I posted this on the other thread but, IF her bosses were so worried about her allegedly broadcasting whilst under the influence, how come they were perfectly happy for her to DRIVE to and from her job at the BBC?

    Not much employer duty of care there. And yes, I know that someone with a drink problem will be the last to admit it, but times have changed since the days of boozed up newsreaders/presenters and I just cannot accept that she would have been allowed to continue to broadcast if she was over the limit, let alone get behind the wheel of a car and drive in London traffic!

    The BBC bosses who are supposedly making these claims should perhaps ask themselves why THEY allowed her to continue?

    Or was there no actual evidence of alcohol?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 249
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #15
    That photo's certainly from the archive :p
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 249
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #16
    Phil Ander wrote: »
    In some ways one of the worst prts of the interview is the implication that the slurring in a programme in August was a one off.

    I know not if SK has'had a drink problem. What I do know is that nobody can do anything for an alcaholic if he/she is not prepared to admit they have a problem.

    unless you know her personaly how can you know if she has a drink problem or not? she talks about having a enemy in the bbc,well i think she look on here and read the downright insulting remarks about her as well then she would know there is another source of enemy.i have never been her gretest fan,and only listened in when in the car on the way to work but she was no worst than most of the radio 2 lot.she has gone so get on with it ,she wont be there to annoy you in the morning and so until she gets another slot somewhere you lot of moaners can find someone else to pick on.and sara enjoy your rest and good luck in whatever you do next
  • Mapperley RidgeMapperley Ridge Posts: 9,922
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #17
    Well said. As I said in the other thread there are enough posters on here who've been demanding that SK speaks out and tells up whether she has a drink problem. She says no.

    Whatever you lot want to allege - without a shred of evidence - that's up to you. Just remember that posting an unfounded rumour online is just as libellous as printing it in a newspaper. I hope you all get sued.
  • BIDIE-INBIDIE-IN Posts: 1,734
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #18
    Sarah was allowed to go for the twin crimes of being female and over 60.
  • occyoccy Posts: 64,955
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #19
    Today The Mail has there say

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1314119/Who-killed-Bunty-Bagshawe-The-truth-Sarah-Kennedys-departure-Radio-2.html#ixzz10FAIedA7


    The mail sitting on the back foot of the Telegraphs story. Then add Sarah's Biography, her back ground, and listeners comments from the Radio 2 message boards and make up a total Bo&&ocks story to make her look good and bad and there credit for the story. Reading some of the nasty comments are really hurtful. It dosn't matter what you look like at least Sarah delivered to the nation with a good listener following. I like one part the Mail have picked up on " Classic FM" - yes some are at fault for mentioning that, but if we hadn't would it'll been published? I wonder where the Mail will get there information from in the future?
  • Mapperley RidgeMapperley Ridge Posts: 9,922
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #20
    occy wrote: »
    Today The Mail has there say

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1314119/Who-killed-Bunty-Bagshawe-The-truth-Sarah-Kennedys-departure-Radio-2.html#ixzz10FAIedA7

    Another vile piece of nasty journalism from the Daily Hate. Although at least, for balance, they've spokent to the landlord of SK's local pub who says he doesn't think she has a drinking problem.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 60
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #21
    I never thought she had any problems beyond the simple fact that her style of broadcasting was rather tired and dated. It became tedious to hear the sound of cows, donkeys, cats etc inappropriately played over the top of music. Her time checks were also getting more and more bizarre - particularly for an early morning show. I don't think she cared what she was doing really. Her comments to other colleagues had been inappropriate for some time. I also agree with the other poster who said it had become irritating to hear that she just didn't turn up on lots of occasions for her job and Alex Lester would do mammoth stints or Richard Allinson would have to fill in at the last moment - so therefore not the best programming. Let's hope we get someone decent to fill in. Lyn Parsons has been doing a good job, but as it's not her show I guess she can't change the format and make it her own - so it's still largely Sarah's with a different presenter.
  • BIDIE-INBIDIE-IN Posts: 1,734
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #22
    Mapperley Ridge wrote: »
    Another vile piece of nasty journalism from the Daily Hate. Although at least, for balance, they've spokent to the landlord of SK's local pub who says he doesn't think she has a drinking problem.

    The Mail has been one of Sarah's constant attackers, now they have switched sides to decry her leaving the station......:rolleyes:
  • Mapperley RidgeMapperley Ridge Posts: 9,922
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #23
    BIDIE-IN wrote: »
    The Mail has been one of Sarah's constant attackers, now they have switched sides to decry her leaving the station......:rolleyes:

    Quite. And the best it can do is reprint an article from the Telegraph and talk to the landlord at her local pub. Trashy journalism for readers who'll believe anything, so long as it's scaremongering.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,346
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #24
    Mapperley Ridge wrote: »
    Quite. And the best it can do is reprint an article from the Telegraph and talk to the landlord at her local pub. Trashy journalism for readers who'll believe anything, so long as it's scaremongering.

    I do wonder when they will just accept they are a rubbish newspaper and rename themselves The Daily Fail.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,458
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #25
    Thanks to all the threads. I've been wondering for a couple of weeks where the hell she had gone! I really miss waking up to her in the morning, the fact she was hit or miss at least made me smile, even if being half a sleep.
  • mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,307
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #26
    BIDIE-IN wrote: »
    The Mail has been one of Sarah's constant attackers, now they have switched sides to decry her leaving the station......:rolleyes:
    Well, they can't pass up an opportunity to bah the BBC can they ..... so of course change their stance and appear to support her if it suits their anti-BBC agenda.
Sign In or Register to comment.