I thought the show was about his life? Arn't the kids in his life?
He's making it look like they are only in his life when cameras are present and he's being paid..but I'm sure that's not true.
Then again he did describe a party with his children that never took place to fit in with a magazine's deadline.
Ms Katona also provide the world is a mysterious place by writing about how pleased to was to meet Mr. Andre's children at the party....that never took place.
He's making it look like they are only in his life when cameras are present and he's being paid..but I'm sure that's not true.
Then again he did describe a party with his children that never took place to fit in with a magazine's deadline.
Ms Katona also provide the world is a mysterious place by writing about how pleased to was to meet Mr. Andre's children at the party....that never took place.
I hope to god bunny that Peter has done more with his kids in three months than two trips out! So he must be doing other stuff with them that is not a money making exercise.:p
You got me there Pink, I should have been clearer:D These are the two publicized outings where a film crew were in tow, so must be for his reality show. There is also the recent holiday and whatever other filming he does. If Andre is being followed 24/7 by a film crew, its not unreasonable to speculate that the children are filmed every time they are there - unless he has Harvey who cant be filmed.
Until the show is aired, one doesnt have any idea how much will be edited by Hendrick. Maybe he will realize that using the kids so much, is not seen to be positive, and edit accordingly. But what else would he show if he edits the kids????
He's making it look like they are only in his life when cameras are present and he's being paid..but I'm sure that's not true.
Then again he did describe a party with his children that never took place to fit in with a magazine's deadline.
Ms Katona also provide the world is a mysterious place by writing about how pleased to was to meet Mr. Andre's children at the party....that never took place.
What??? :D Absolute ROFLMAO-copter That's hilarious, any more details?
Pete has to keep pimpin' out the kids because nobody's interested in him on his own. Resorting to a Jim'll Fix It rip off shows just how low he's sunk on the zeleb ladder.
Of course people are interested in him on his own, he'd have no career at all if people weren't interested, but I guess he thinks the kids make his show MORE interesting.
As for what Katie will think, she's in no place to carp. She pimped the kids out for the past 9 years and still refuses to shield Harvey away from the spotlight even though she's admitted he's afraid of flashing lights.
There is a big difference in the kid's own father allowing them to be filmed and their step-father (who was already on his way out) releasing a pic to the media without either parent's consent.
But... whoever thought filming this trip out was a good idea need their bumps feeling. It's a sensitive time for the children as it is having their step-father move out and their mother in LA and splashed all over the papers. Seriously bad move on Pete's part!
Agree it's creepy about the omnipresent Claire!!
Claire is ever present on TV in all of her clients' reality TV shows, not just Pete's. I think she loves the limelight herself!
Unfortunately for them, yes. And he'll continue to pimp them out, instead of protecting them from the media glare for as long as he can squeeze the cashola out of it.
And Jordan will continue to pimp out poor Harvey, and he's far more vulnerable than J & P.
Of course people are interested in him on his own, he'd have no career at all if people weren't interested, but I guess he thinks the kids make his show MORE interesting.
As for what Katie will think, she's in no place to carp. She pimped the kids out for the past 9 years and still refuses to shield Harvey away from the spotlight even though she's admitted he's afraid of flashing lights.
In the same way that people slow down to look at car crashes and watch programmes about serial killers. It's fascination moreso than interest. They want to see what desperate levels Andre has sunk to in order to earn a few quid, or get himself a bit of publicity. If he thinks featuring the kids humanises him, it doesn't. It makes him look like a lowlife who's happy to exploit his kids, irrespective of what it's doing to them on an emotional level.
Of course people are interested in him on his own, he'd have no career at all if people weren't interested, but I guess he thinks the kids make his show MORE interesting.
As for what Katie will think, she's in no place to carp. She pimped the kids out for the past 9 years and still refuses to shield Harvey away from the spotlight even though she's admitted he's afraid of flashing lights.
and that`s why I consider her to be " worserer " than him,,she`s quite willing to use her more vulnerable child to further her career no matter what , the objections she has to her other children are because she shares them with HIM and doesn`t have total control, if she really cared about the effect of fame on her children then she would withdraw them ALL from the public view
In the same way that people slow down to look at car crashes and watch programmes about serial killers. It's fascination moreso than interest. They want to see what desperate levels Andre has sunk to in order to earn a few quid, or get himself a bit of publicity. If he thinks featuring the kids humanises him, it doesn't. It makes him look like a lowlife who's happy to exploit his kids, irrespective of what it's doing to them on an emotional level.
People, like yourself, who find him uninteresting find him uninteresting.
Others, like me, find him interesting.
You could say the same of everyone in the entertainment industry I would have thought.
And it's not compulsory to watch his show. He gets plenty of viewers without you.
In the same way that people slow down to look at car crashes and watch programmes about serial killers. It's fascination moreso than interest. They want to see what desperate levels Andre has sunk to in order to earn a few quid, or get himself a bit of publicity. If he thinks featuring the kids humanises him, it doesn't. It makes him look like a lowlife who's happy to exploit his kids, irrespective of what it's doing to them on an emotional level.
No I don't think so, he does have fans who watch just for him.
As does Jordan. I don't watch her at all not even for the car crash effect.
The odd snippet of the children on either show, imo is harmless, that is not to say that an entire programme/series should revolve around them. As of yet, I am still unsure of KP's motives in wanting the younger two removed from the public glare as Harvey has been exempt leaving me to believe that she is doing it to spite PA. I think she is petrified on seeing the kids in the papers with PA and Elen. Baring in mind it was quite ok for her to be photographed playing happy familes in the park with the kids and AR last year, the same rule does not apply to him.
If she genuinely cared about the childrens feelings now they are getting older and are becoming aware of this publicity, maybe she should reign in her outrageous daily publicity drive. These recent weeks have not done her any favours.
I can't see how after 5 years, she decided it's now time to shield Junior, everyone knows who he is, the children at school will comment about both his parents. Something about this isn't right...I suppose we will have to wait and see.
Totally agree with this.
I can't see a problem with the kids being seen in the course of a family event, whether with Kate or Pete.
People who take the moral high ground about the kids, should be more concerned about the fact that their mother introduced a stranger into their lives and their home, and then got rid of him just as quickly.
I can't see a problem with the kids being seen in the course of a family event, whether with Kate or Pete.
People who take the moral high ground about the kids, should be more concerned about the fact that their mother introduced a stranger into their lives and their home, and then got rid of him just as quickly.
Well I completely agree with you, even if that isn't what the thread is about.
I don't like to see the children being exploited (and yeah, I do think that's what's happening. People can't say that KP is exploiting them but PA isn't. They either both are, or neither of them are). Yes, it's fine to have little snippets of them here and there, but these kids have been exposed to the limelight from day one, without having a say in it.
I am mystified as to KP's decision to try and stop PA using Junior and Princess, but not Harvey. If I was trying to be completely fair I could say that it was because he is not Harvey's father nor his step-father any more (although he was FAR more of a father than Dwight Yorke). But it's more likely to be that she's trying to spite him, based on her track record.
I still don't understand why Claire has to be such a presence in her client's lives. All people in the public eye tend to have agents, but none are so visible and vocal as Claire. I think this is why people - including myself - think that she is pulling all Peter's strings and he is just her puppet.
I can't see a problem with the kids being seen in the course of a family event, whether with Kate or Pete.
People who take the moral high ground about the kids, should be more concerned about the fact that their mother introduced a stranger into their lives and their home, and then got rid of him just as quickly.
You'll find that this will be brushed under the carpet, but hey, here's a stick to beat PA with!! :rolleyes:
In all fairness, I would be mortified to go to school and jeered at by my schoolmates because my mother was papped in LA snogging the face off (allegedly) and spending the night with a guy she'd just met than been shown on my dads tv show!
It is quite normal for managers to accompany their people to all interviews and TV appearances - they are just generally not seen on camera. I suppose it is partly because of the cameras for their TV show that Claire or her business partner are so much in view.
She has been working with Pete for 17 years and it will now be a close friendship. While she no doubt advises him, arranges everything for him etc., I am not sure she has the complete power over him that some people believe. He probably trusts her judgement, which is perhaps not always ideal, but Pete will no doubt have the final say.
As for the cupcake trip, maybe Claire's child was there too and that is why she was actively involved.
The odd snippet of the children on either show, imo is harmless, that is not to say that an entire programme/series should revolve around them. As of yet, I am still unsure of KP's motives in wanting the younger two removed from the public glare as Harvey has been exempt leaving me to believe that she is doing it to spite PA. I think she is petrified on seeing the kids in the papers with PA and Elen. Baring in mind it was quite ok for her to be photographed playing happy familes in the park with the kids and AR last year, the same rule does not apply to him.
If she genuinely cared about the childrens feelings now they are getting older and are becoming aware of this publicity, maybe she should reign in her outrageous daily publicity drive. These recent weeks have not done her any favours.
I can't see how after 5 years, she decided it's now time to shield Junior, everyone knows who he is, the children at school will comment about both his parents. Something about this isn't right...I suppose we will have to wait and see.
This is what she said in a recent interview
"Price said: "They're at an age now where Junior is like, 'Mummy, I am famous. Kids at school say I am not famous but I am,' and I thought, from those remarks, that it's time to take them out. Harvey has no idea about any of it."
I looks from that like the other kids are starting to pick on him because of his media exposure rather than that of his parents
I can't see a problem with the kids being seen in the course of a family event, whether with Kate or Pete.
People who take the moral high ground about the kids, should be more concerned about the fact that their mother introduced a stranger into their lives and their home, and then got rid of him just as quickly.
That aspect of Katie's life has never concerned me...if she'd have bought a different guy into the house every weekend, then I would be concerned, but bringing one man into the house months after the relationship with Pete fell apart, being serious about the relationship enough to marry, then realising that he has to go if he didn't work into he family dynamic leaves me with no concerns at all. I see no evidence to suggest her relationship with her second husband has harmed the children.
Parents moving on and getting new partners is a fact of life. It didn't work out but then most relationships don't. Some people see recreating a family unit as putting the children first. Any family councellor will tell you that a happy family needs a happy mummy. I doubt a lonely, bitter Katie would have been beneficial to the children at all. People have the right to live by their own moral standards but they have to let Katie live by hers, so long as the children are ok.
That aspect of Katie's life has never concerned me...if she'd have bought a different guy into the house every weekend, then I would be concerned, but bringing one man into the house months after the relationship with Pete fell apart, being serious about the relationship enough to marry, then realising that he has to go if he didn't work into he family dynamic leaves me with no concerns at all. I see no evidence to suggest her relationship with her second husband has harmed the children.
Parents moving on and getting new partners is a fact of life. It didn't work out but then most relationships don't. Some people see recreating a family unit as putting the children first. Any family councellor will tell you that a happy family needs a happy mummy. I doubt a lonely, bitter Katie would have been beneficial to the children at all. People have the right to live by their own moral standards but they have to let Katie live by hers, so long as the children are ok.
'Months' wasn't long enough. He wasn't introduced gradually, and she should never have married him less than a year after.
Moving on is one thing. But not that soon. The kids would still have been confused.
In the same way that people slow down to look at car crashes and watch programmes about serial killers. It's fascination moreso than interest. They want to see what desperate levels Andre has sunk to in order to earn a few quid, or get himself a bit of publicity. If he thinks featuring the kids humanises him, it doesn't. It makes him look like a lowlife who's happy to exploit his kids, irrespective of what it's doing to them on an emotional level.
People slow down to watch car crashes or programmes about serial killers because they're interested, fascinated, whatever. People read about Peter because they're interested, fascinated, whatever! If people weren't interested, be they fans or detractors, they wouldn't bother paying him the slightest bit of attention.
And how do you know what people want? You think his fans think he's sinking to desperate lows? No, that's what his detractors will think. You think he looks like a lowlife, his fans will disagree with you.
People, like yourself, who find him uninteresting find him uninteresting.
Others, like me, find him interesting.
You could say the same of everyone in the entertainment industry I would have thought.
And it's not compulsory to watch his show. He gets plenty of viewers without you.
Nobody who writes about Pete on a regular basis is uninterested. They may claim to find him boring etc, but if they thought he was that boring, they wouldn't bother with him. Or, as I've said before, there's another possibility - they must enjoy being bored!
That aspect of Katie's life has never concerned me...if she'd have bought a different guy into the house every weekend, then I would be concerned, but bringing one man into the house months after the relationship with Pete fell apart, being serious about the relationship enough to marry, then realising that he has to go if he didn't work into he family dynamic leaves me with no concerns at all. I see no evidence to suggest her relationship with her second husband has harmed the children.
Parents moving on and getting new partners is a fact of life. It didn't work out but then most relationships don't. Some people see recreating a family unit as putting the children first. Any family councellor will tell you that a happy family needs a happy mummy. I doubt a lonely, bitter Katie would have been beneficial to the children at all. People have the right to live by their own moral standards but they have to let Katie live by hers, so long as the children are ok.
However, she's already looking for another man and possibly even husband no.3, and by the time Junior's 14, I'll bet he'll have seen several 'uncles' come and go.
People slow down to watch car crashes or programmes about serial killers because they're interested, fascinated, whatever. People read about Peter because they're interested, fascinated, whatever! If people weren't interested, be they fans or detractors, they wouldn't bother paying him the slightest bit of attention.
And how do you know what people want? You think his fans think he's sinking to desperate lows? No, that's what his detractors will think. You think he looks like a lowlife, his fans will disagree with you.
His fans obviously have no problem with the kids being pimped out and exploited then? Figures.
All this moral highground about the kids being exploited tends to make me sick tbh. It's a bandwagon that everyone has jumped on, whether they like KP, in which case its PA doing the exploiting, or it's the other way round. Does it really matter? They haven't exactly been sold into slavery.
I don't give a monkeys about whether the kids are on tv. I like seeing them. And as a parent who was daft enough to take her kids to one of these auditions to be a model, I can well understand why anyone would want to show their kids off.
I can't stand her, but exploiting her kids would come at the bottom of a list of her demeanours. The main thing is that the children are cared for and loved. What KP said was the sensible thing, that now the kids are older, it's not a good idea. Now whether she actually means that, or whether she's just trying to get onside with the public, who knows. But to hear people talking about the kids being exploited or pimped out, is ridiculous, because there are genuine cases of this happening to unfortunate kids, and they don't go home to a loving parent after it.
Comments
He's making it look like they are only in his life when cameras are present and he's being paid..but I'm sure that's not true.
Then again he did describe a party with his children that never took place to fit in with a magazine's deadline.
Ms Katona also provide the world is a mysterious place by writing about how pleased to was to meet Mr. Andre's children at the party....that never took place.
ROFLMAO!!!!!! i despair!!!
You got me there Pink, I should have been clearer:D These are the two publicized outings where a film crew were in tow, so must be for his reality show. There is also the recent holiday and whatever other filming he does. If Andre is being followed 24/7 by a film crew, its not unreasonable to speculate that the children are filmed every time they are there - unless he has Harvey who cant be filmed.
Until the show is aired, one doesnt have any idea how much will be edited by Hendrick. Maybe he will realize that using the kids so much, is not seen to be positive, and edit accordingly. But what else would he show if he edits the kids????
What???
Of course people are interested in him on his own, he'd have no career at all if people weren't interested, but I guess he thinks the kids make his show MORE interesting.
As for what Katie will think, she's in no place to carp. She pimped the kids out for the past 9 years and still refuses to shield Harvey away from the spotlight even though she's admitted he's afraid of flashing lights.
http://www.ok.co.uk/posts/view/23239/World-Exclusive-Peter-Andre-finally-reunited-with-Harvey
And the retraction wasn't even a retraction!
Claire is ever present on TV in all of her clients' reality TV shows, not just Pete's. I think she loves the limelight herself!
And Jordan will continue to pimp out poor Harvey, and he's far more vulnerable than J & P.
OK magazine isn't known for its factual accuracy.
If that's what matters to you, you probably shouldn't buy it.
He certainly is.
Not getting at you Rose, I know you're only quoting others, but I detest the term "pimp out" used in relation to children.
There's no suggestion that they're being sold for sex as far as I'm aware. :eek:
People, like yourself, who find him uninteresting find him uninteresting.
Others, like me, find him interesting.
You could say the same of everyone in the entertainment industry I would have thought.
And it's not compulsory to watch his show. He gets plenty of viewers without you.
No I don't think so, he does have fans who watch just for him.
As does Jordan. I don't watch her at all not even for the car crash effect.
Totally agree with this.
I can't see a problem with the kids being seen in the course of a family event, whether with Kate or Pete.
People who take the moral high ground about the kids, should be more concerned about the fact that their mother introduced a stranger into their lives and their home, and then got rid of him just as quickly.
Well I completely agree with you, even if that isn't what the thread is about.
I don't like to see the children being exploited (and yeah, I do think that's what's happening. People can't say that KP is exploiting them but PA isn't. They either both are, or neither of them are). Yes, it's fine to have little snippets of them here and there, but these kids have been exposed to the limelight from day one, without having a say in it.
I am mystified as to KP's decision to try and stop PA using Junior and Princess, but not Harvey. If I was trying to be completely fair I could say that it was because he is not Harvey's father nor his step-father any more (although he was FAR more of a father than Dwight Yorke). But it's more likely to be that she's trying to spite him, based on her track record.
I still don't understand why Claire has to be such a presence in her client's lives. All people in the public eye tend to have agents, but none are so visible and vocal as Claire. I think this is why people - including myself - think that she is pulling all Peter's strings and he is just her puppet.
You'll find that this will be brushed under the carpet, but hey, here's a stick to beat PA with!! :rolleyes:
In all fairness, I would be mortified to go to school and jeered at by my schoolmates because my mother was papped in LA snogging the face off (allegedly) and spending the night with a guy she'd just met than been shown on my dads tv show!
People need to put this into perspective!
She has been working with Pete for 17 years and it will now be a close friendship. While she no doubt advises him, arranges everything for him etc., I am not sure she has the complete power over him that some people believe. He probably trusts her judgement, which is perhaps not always ideal, but Pete will no doubt have the final say.
As for the cupcake trip, maybe Claire's child was there too and that is why she was actively involved.
This is what she said in a recent interview
"Price said: "They're at an age now where Junior is like, 'Mummy, I am famous. Kids at school say I am not famous but I am,' and I thought, from those remarks, that it's time to take them out. Harvey has no idea about any of it."
I looks from that like the other kids are starting to pick on him because of his media exposure rather than that of his parents
That aspect of Katie's life has never concerned me...if she'd have bought a different guy into the house every weekend, then I would be concerned, but bringing one man into the house months after the relationship with Pete fell apart, being serious about the relationship enough to marry, then realising that he has to go if he didn't work into he family dynamic leaves me with no concerns at all. I see no evidence to suggest her relationship with her second husband has harmed the children.
Parents moving on and getting new partners is a fact of life. It didn't work out but then most relationships don't. Some people see recreating a family unit as putting the children first. Any family councellor will tell you that a happy family needs a happy mummy. I doubt a lonely, bitter Katie would have been beneficial to the children at all. People have the right to live by their own moral standards but they have to let Katie live by hers, so long as the children are ok.
I don't really like the term 'pimping out' either but I use it anyway!
'Months' wasn't long enough. He wasn't introduced gradually, and she should never have married him less than a year after.
Moving on is one thing. But not that soon. The kids would still have been confused.
People slow down to watch car crashes or programmes about serial killers because they're interested, fascinated, whatever. People read about Peter because they're interested, fascinated, whatever! If people weren't interested, be they fans or detractors, they wouldn't bother paying him the slightest bit of attention.
And how do you know what people want? You think his fans think he's sinking to desperate lows? No, that's what his detractors will think. You think he looks like a lowlife, his fans will disagree with you.
Nobody who writes about Pete on a regular basis is uninterested.
However, she's already looking for another man and possibly even husband no.3, and by the time Junior's 14, I'll bet he'll have seen several 'uncles' come and go.
Did Pete sue for making him look like a liar and an idiot?
I don't give a monkeys about whether the kids are on tv. I like seeing them. And as a parent who was daft enough to take her kids to one of these auditions to be a model, I can well understand why anyone would want to show their kids off.
I can't stand her, but exploiting her kids would come at the bottom of a list of her demeanours. The main thing is that the children are cared for and loved. What KP said was the sensible thing, that now the kids are older, it's not a good idea. Now whether she actually means that, or whether she's just trying to get onside with the public, who knows. But to hear people talking about the kids being exploited or pimped out, is ridiculous, because there are genuine cases of this happening to unfortunate kids, and they don't go home to a loving parent after it.