It's just funny that you agree to Pete doing what he's doing and you think it's 'right' but if it was Katie you'd be saying something totally different - which I'm sure you have in the past.
Funny ? Not a word I'd use in a discussion on cancer,but you are of course entitled to that opinion.
But if Katie Price - someone you are very vocal about was to do the same it would be wrong? :rolleyes:
Im no fan of KP but I can assure you that(heaven forbid)if any of her family were to get this awful illness...I would have no problem with her talking about her pain. As I said in an earlier post I don't have a problem with ANYONE talking about their pain because cancer affects the whole family.
I was reading an interview with Lisa Riley in a magazine the other day and she talked about her mother's cancer and how it was affecting her and how she is dealing with it.
The way I see it is this: it is true that no one has the right to tell someone how to act in times of grief but when you are a minor zeleb and broadcasting your every breath to the media, people will comment.
Cancer is a very sensitive topic for many myself included and I think that's why people object to it being used to sell magazines and newspapers the way that it is. Appearing on the front of a magazine with a old inappropriate photo is in bad taste. As is the headline.
Peter and his family will be going through a difficult time- however is it right that such a private, sensitive matter is used to gain sympathy and generate work? does Peter need to tell the public every little detail? No he doesn't. But by selling stories it's gaining him sympathy and playing up to the devoted family man image. Not to mention being a nice little earner. If it were me I could not make money out of my siblings illness. Not could I use it to get myself work. It's in very bad taste, his brother has a disease, he shouldn't be used as a ploy to get Pete headlines. But then there in lies the problem; the ony headlines Pete has had recently has been down to his personal life.
When Kylie Minogue had cancer did we get regular updates from Dannii? No. Some things are just private and do need to be played out. A concept lost on Peter!
The way I see it is this: it is true that no one has the right to tell someone how to act in times of grief but when you are a minor zeleb and broadcasting your every breath to the media, people will comment.
Cancer is a very sensitive topic for many myself included and I think that's why people object to it being used to sell magazines and newspapers the way that it is. Appearing on the front of a magazine with a old inappropriate photo is in bad taste. As is the headline.
Peter and his family will be going through a difficult time- however is it right that such a private, sensitive matter is used to gain sympathy and generate work? does Peter need to tell the public every little detail? No he doesn't. But by selling stories it's gaining him sympathy and playing up to the devoted family man image. Not to mention being a nice little earner. If it were me I could not make money out of my siblings illness. Not could I use it to get myself work. It's in very bad taste, his brother has a disease, he shouldn't be used as a ploy to get Pete headlines. But then there in lies the problem; the ony headlines Pete has had recently has been down to his personal life.
When Kylie Minogue had cancer did we get regular updates from Dannii? No. Some things are just private and do need to be played out. A concept lost on Peter!
I cannot understand how anyone can fail to see the logic of your post Goldbear86.
The way I see it is this: it is true that no one has the right to tell someone how to act in times of grief but when you are a minor zeleb and broadcasting your every breath to the media, people will comment.
Cancer is a very sensitive topic for many myself included and I think that's why people object to it being used to sell magazines and newspapers the way that it is. Appearing on the front of a magazine with a old inappropriate photo is in bad taste. As is the headline.
Peter and his family will be going through a difficult time- however is it right that such a private, sensitive matter is used to gain sympathy and generate work? does Peter need to tell the public every little detail? No he doesn't. But by selling stories it's gaining him sympathy and playing up to the devoted family man image. Not to mention being a nice little earner. If it were me I could not make money out of my siblings illness. Not could I use it to get myself work. It's in very bad taste, his brother has a disease, he shouldn't be used as a ploy to get Pete headlines. But then there in lies the problem; the ony headlines Pete has had recently has been down to his personal life.
When Kylie Minogue had cancer did we get regular updates from Dannii? No. Some things are just private and do need to be played out. A concept lost on Peter!
BIB...Like I asked DD earlier....How do you know that any money he may have received in relation to talking about the cancer went into his personal account? For all you know the money is going to be used to pay for his brother's treatment.
As far as im concerned this issue is just being used as. another stick for the PA haters to beat him with.
You do it whatever way the patient wants. This patient wants to be with his wife brothers in this fight & Peter Andre is arranging that. His choice. And if Peter Andre refused to talk about it then I have no doubt he'd get crucified in the press for not being open & frank....for being "secretive"...."what are they hiding ?" "oh look ,they are sneaking him into the UK....yeah,kept that out of his column...." on & on it would go.
We know he is coming and we know it is what he wants and we know he has MASSIVE strong family backing. And I wish them all well.....because they are all affected & in this together.
I don't think anyone is criticising Peter for lettin his brother stay so he can access the best treatment. (assuming it is)
It is laughable tha you say that he would have been criticised for being secretive had he kept quiet- wasn't his father over here getting treatment for something? He wasn't criticised for "sneaking him in" Peter has been criticised and rightfully so for using a distressing topic like cancer as publicity for himself and no doubt in time his show.
There are millions of celebs who have had family members suffer and not used it to further their career. Dannii Minogue for one. Jeff Brazier when his ex was going through cancer said very little and still continues too. Kym Marsh- her father has been quite ill recently I understand and she has commented saying its private. You don't see her on the front of OK in a bikini saying her dad might die.
BIB...Like I asked DD earlier....How do you know that any money he may have received in relation to talking about the cancer went into his personal account? For all you know the money is going to be used to pay for his brother's treatment.
As far as im concerned this issue is just being used as. another stick for the PA haters to beat him with.
We know he is paid for his column, unless he does it for free which I highly doubt. Therefore he has made money out of it. As for the second bit- well that is speculation that he alone is paying for his brothers treatment? Either way he is making money out of his siblings suffering.
I am not a "hater", but I think it's disgusting that a private personal family matter is being paraded all over magazines and newspapers complete with tacky photographs and tacky emotive headlines designed to shock.
I don't think anyone is criticising Peter for lettin his brother stay so he can access the best treatment. (assuming it is)
It is laughable tha you say that he would have been criticised for being secretive had he kept quiet- wasn't his father over here getting treatment for something? He wasn't criticised for "sneaking him in" Peter has been criticised and rightfully so for using a distressing topic like cancer as publicity for himself and no doubt in time his show.
There are millions of celebs who have had family members suffer and not used it to further their career. Dannii Minogue for one. Jeff Brazier when his ex was going through cancer said very little and still continues too. Kym Marsh- her father has been quite ill recently I understand and she has commented saying its private. You don't see her on the front of OK in a bikini saying her dad might die.
BIB....How is it furthering his career?
According to his haters on here this has been career suicide for him and everyone has turned against him over it. :rolleyes:
We know he is paid for his column, unless he does it for free which I highly doubt. Therefore he has made money out of it. As for the second bit- well that is speculation that he alone is paying for his brothers treatment? Either way he is making money out of his siblings suffering.
I am not a "hater", but I think it's disgusting that a private personal family matter is being paraded all over magazines and newspapers complete with tacky photographs and tacky emotive headlines designed to shock.
BIB...I have already addressed the issue of his column, it is not relevant to your argument because he has been paid to write that column for over 2 years. He would still have been paid for the column even if his brother's cancer had not been mentioned in it.
BIB...I have already addressed the issue of his column, it is not relevant to your argument because he has been paid to write that column for over 2 years. He would still have been paid for the column even if his brother's cancer had not been mentioned in it.
I mention his column as you asked how did we know he had gained financially from talking about the subject- and you are correct he has had the column for years but he's mentioned it in there he has been paid- he's had a front cover on Ok and perhaps a bit inside- he will have been paid for that. The same as he will be paid when the story is repeated in newspapers.
It's my opinion he's using this to further the little career he has left. Selling your soul is PAs bread and butter. If its not having digs about a split that took place years ago and using his kids as props. The problem is people can see past the poor Pete routine now. But his management just can't seem to take him off the professional victim merry go round. His music career hasn't taken off so that just leaves him selling himself, his children and now his poor brother. Nothing is sacred to him. The guy has no shame.
I really must try and get some sleep though.....it's Mother's Day tomorrow (today).
Yeah, it's infected though.:( nurofen is my new best friend!! After anti biotics! I just can't sleep it's too sore. Anyhow I'm off to try. Thanks for the chat everyone!
Yeah, it's infected though.:( nurofen is my new best friend!! After anti biotics! I just can't sleep it's too sore. Anyhow I'm off to try. Thanks for the chat everyone!
Nurofen does help. Hope the pain subsides soon and you manage to get some sleep.
I don't hate Peter Andre .. I don't know him well enough to hate him. I just don't like the actions of the man.
On the topic of payment for his column/content of column . . Yes he will of been paid for it and IMO did not have to go into such heavy detail about his brothers illness. Peter could of mentioned his brother had a serious illness and he was going to do everything he could to help him. But from today he would be keeping his treatment etc private.
The comment about how the press would hound him for info just doesn't stack up... The press didn't hound Kylie or her family..
The way I see it is this: it is true that no one has the right to tell someone how to act in times of grief but when you are a minor zeleb and broadcasting your every breath to the media, people will comment.
Cancer is a very sensitive topic for many myself included and I think that's why people object to it being used to sell magazines and newspapers the way that it is. Appearing on the front of a magazine with a old inappropriate photo is in bad taste. As is the headline.
Peter and his family will be going through a difficult time- however is it right that such a private, sensitive matter is used to gain sympathy and generate work? does Peter need to tell the public every little detail? No he doesn't. But by selling stories it's gaining him sympathy and playing up to the devoted family man image. Not to mention being a nice little earner. If it were me I could not make money out of my siblings illness. Not could I use it to get myself work. It's in very bad taste, his brother has a disease, he shouldn't be used as a ploy to get Pete headlines. But then there in lies the problem; the ony headlines Pete has had recently has been down to his personal life.
When Kylie Minogue had cancer did we get regular updates from Dannii? No. Some things are just private and do need to be played out. A concept lost on Peter!
This ^ and the fact that in my experience supporters of people suffering from such potentially fatal diseases spend their time and energy encouraging the sufferer in a positive fight against their illness, not writing them off in magazines by stating "if it spreads it could be fatal" even before the verdict was in fgs:mad:
Tara, I've addressed the points that you've made yet again last night several times. Lol, I'm reading these boards on my iPhone so there isn't enough room on the screen to see who the author of each post is, keep confusing Nicola's posts for yours, remarkably similar way of writing, even down to the syntax!
Anyway, as I've said before, it is just ludicrous to say that it would be "strange" or "callous" for Peter Andre not to talk to the media about his ill brother. I find it strange and callous that people think that what Peter is doing is normal and acceptable! And to say that people would criticise Peter if he "sneaked" his brother in to the country. Err..why on earth would people criticise him for that?? I think most people would be relieved if Peter kept his gob shut and kept private matters private.
As for your continuous analogy that "people should be allowed deal cancer how they want", well that is just not a comparable analogy to what Peter is doing. Peter is entitled to deal with his brother's illness exactly how he pleases in his own private life, whether that be that he offloads on his friends, or clams up, or goes out partying, it's his own business in his own private life, and like every issue in one's private life, it's our prerogative to deal with exactly how we please. However, this is NOT Peter's private life we're dealing with here. Peter has made his brother's illness public property. He's made it into a nice little headline spinner, and invited us "in" to the drama. Once you sell a story to a celebrity magazine, you have no right to plead about "your private life" and crib about people criticising you.
Tara, I've addressed the points that you've made yet again last night several times. Lol, I'm reading these boards on my iPhone so there isn't enough room on the screen to see who the author of each post is, keep confusing Nicola's posts for yours, remarkably similar way of writing, even down to the syntax!
Anyway, as I've said before, it is just ludicrous to say that it would be "strange" or "callous" for Peter Andre not to talk to the media about his ill brother. I find it strange and callous that people think that what Peter is doing is normal and acceptable! And to say that people would criticise Peter if he "sneaked" his brother in to the country. Err..why on earth would people criticise him for that?? I think most people would be relieved if Peter kept his gob shut and kept private matters private.
As for your continuous analogy that "people should be allowed deal cancer how they want", well that is just not a comparable analogy to what Peter is doing. Peter is entitled to deal with his brother's illness exactly how he pleases in his own private life, whether that be that he offloads on his friends, or clams up, or goes out partying, it's his own business in his own private life, and like every issue in one's private life, it's our prerogative to deal with exactly how we please. However, this is NOT Peter's private life we're dealing with here. Peter has made his brother's illness public property. He's made it into a nice little headline spinner, and invited us "in" to the drama. Once you sell a story to a celebrity magazine, you have no right to plead about "your private life" and crib about people criticising you.
There are a couple of posters that l mistake for each other too.....confusing eh!
I'm totally bemused by the arguement that's he *has* to give us updates about his brothers cancer in his soap opera of a column because, if he didn't talk about it, everyone would alte him for it.
If he wouldn't have made all of this public, how would any of us even know his brother had cancer, let alone that he was coming over here for his treatment? We only know anything because PA has decided to make it for public consumption, like everything else in his life.
It's nothing like when Kylie or Jade had cancer because they were the ones that were ill an of course the media would find out. But would the media find out that a non famous member of a celebrities family was ill if it wasn't made public by the famous one? I doubt it. So the point that we'd all be attacking someone over something we didn't even know was happening defies all logic imo
Comments
You obviously are unaware what a PR team does.
Funny ?
If you sup with the devil its best to use a long spoon.
I wasn't referring to the cancer being 'funny', as you are fully aware.
I'll leave you to chat with nicola...
Im no fan of KP but I can assure you that(heaven forbid)if any of her family were to get this awful illness...I would have no problem with her talking about her pain. As I said in an earlier post I don't have a problem with ANYONE talking about their pain because cancer affects the whole family.
I was reading an interview with Lisa Riley in a magazine the other day and she talked about her mother's cancer and how it was affecting her and how she is dealing with it.
Cancer is a very sensitive topic for many myself included and I think that's why people object to it being used to sell magazines and newspapers the way that it is. Appearing on the front of a magazine with a old inappropriate photo is in bad taste. As is the headline.
Peter and his family will be going through a difficult time- however is it right that such a private, sensitive matter is used to gain sympathy and generate work? does Peter need to tell the public every little detail? No he doesn't. But by selling stories it's gaining him sympathy and playing up to the devoted family man image. Not to mention being a nice little earner. If it were me I could not make money out of my siblings illness. Not could I use it to get myself work. It's in very bad taste, his brother has a disease, he shouldn't be used as a ploy to get Pete headlines. But then there in lies the problem; the ony headlines Pete has had recently has been down to his personal life.
When Kylie Minogue had cancer did we get regular updates from Dannii? No. Some things are just private and do need to be played out. A concept lost on Peter!
I cannot understand how anyone can fail to see the logic of your post Goldbear86.
BIB...Like I asked DD earlier....How do you know that any money he may have received in relation to talking about the cancer went into his personal account? For all you know the money is going to be used to pay for his brother's treatment.
As far as im concerned this issue is just being used as. another stick for the PA haters to beat him with.
I don't think anyone is criticising Peter for lettin his brother stay so he can access the best treatment. (assuming it is)
It is laughable tha you say that he would have been criticised for being secretive had he kept quiet- wasn't his father over here getting treatment for something? He wasn't criticised for "sneaking him in" Peter has been criticised and rightfully so for using a distressing topic like cancer as publicity for himself and no doubt in time his show.
There are millions of celebs who have had family members suffer and not used it to further their career. Dannii Minogue for one. Jeff Brazier when his ex was going through cancer said very little and still continues too. Kym Marsh- her father has been quite ill recently I understand and she has commented saying its private. You don't see her on the front of OK in a bikini saying her dad might die.
We know he is paid for his column, unless he does it for free which I highly doubt. Therefore he has made money out of it. As for the second bit- well that is speculation that he alone is paying for his brothers treatment? Either way he is making money out of his siblings suffering.
I am not a "hater", but I think it's disgusting that a private personal family matter is being paraded all over magazines and newspapers complete with tacky photographs and tacky emotive headlines designed to shock.
BIB....How is it furthering his career?
According to his haters on here this has been career suicide for him and everyone has turned against him over it. :rolleyes:
BIB...I have already addressed the issue of his column, it is not relevant to your argument because he has been paid to write that column for over 2 years. He would still have been paid for the column even if his brother's cancer had not been mentioned in it.
that I am sat here posting on this site at 3.50 in the morning! :eek:
I mention his column as you asked how did we know he had gained financially from talking about the subject- and you are correct he has had the column for years but he's mentioned it in there he has been paid- he's had a front cover on Ok and perhaps a bit inside- he will have been paid for that. The same as he will be paid when the story is repeated in newspapers.
It's my opinion he's using this to further the little career he has left. Selling your soul is PAs bread and butter. If its not having digs about a split that took place years ago and using his kids as props. The problem is people can see past the poor Pete routine now. But his management just can't seem to take him off the professional victim merry go round. His music career hasn't taken off so that just leaves him selling himself, his children and now his poor brother. Nothing is sacred to him. The guy has no shame.
LOl my excuse is jaw ache from wisdom tooth removal!
Ouch....poor thing.
Have you tried Nurofen?
I don't have an excuse, other than I can't sleep.
I really must try and get some sleep though.....it's Mother's Day tomorrow (today).
Yeah, it's infected though.:( nurofen is my new best friend!! After anti biotics! I just can't sleep it's too sore. Anyhow I'm off to try. Thanks for the chat everyone!
Nurofen does help. Hope the pain subsides soon and you manage to get some sleep.
I really must try to get some sleep too.
Goodnight.
On the topic of payment for his column/content of column . . Yes he will of been paid for it and IMO did not have to go into such heavy detail about his brothers illness. Peter could of mentioned his brother had a serious illness and he was going to do everything he could to help him. But from today he would be keeping his treatment etc private.
The comment about how the press would hound him for info just doesn't stack up... The press didn't hound Kylie or her family..
This ^ and the fact that in my experience supporters of people suffering from such potentially fatal diseases spend their time and energy encouraging the sufferer in a positive fight against their illness, not writing them off in magazines by stating "if it spreads it could be fatal" even before the verdict was in fgs:mad:
Anyway, as I've said before, it is just ludicrous to say that it would be "strange" or "callous" for Peter Andre not to talk to the media about his ill brother. I find it strange and callous that people think that what Peter is doing is normal and acceptable! And to say that people would criticise Peter if he "sneaked" his brother in to the country. Err..why on earth would people criticise him for that?? I think most people would be relieved if Peter kept his gob shut and kept private matters private.
As for your continuous analogy that "people should be allowed deal cancer how they want", well that is just not a comparable analogy to what Peter is doing. Peter is entitled to deal with his brother's illness exactly how he pleases in his own private life, whether that be that he offloads on his friends, or clams up, or goes out partying, it's his own business in his own private life, and like every issue in one's private life, it's our prerogative to deal with exactly how we please. However, this is NOT Peter's private life we're dealing with here. Peter has made his brother's illness public property. He's made it into a nice little headline spinner, and invited us "in" to the drama. Once you sell a story to a celebrity magazine, you have no right to plead about "your private life" and crib about people criticising you.
There are a couple of posters that l mistake for each other too.....confusing eh!
If he wouldn't have made all of this public, how would any of us even know his brother had cancer, let alone that he was coming over here for his treatment? We only know anything because PA has decided to make it for public consumption, like everything else in his life.
It's nothing like when Kylie or Jade had cancer because they were the ones that were ill an of course the media would find out. But would the media find out that a non famous member of a celebrities family was ill if it wasn't made public by the famous one? I doubt it. So the point that we'd all be attacking someone over something we didn't even know was happening defies all logic imo