Cowell admits viewers may have been "misled" and apologises

EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
Forum Member
✭✭✭
He insists though if they were misled it was unintentional (at his press conference today).
«134

Comments

  • Red+BloodedRed+Blooded Posts: 4,676
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    about what, did he mention what one he's sorry for. Mary.
  • EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    about what, did he mention what one he's sorry for. Mary.

    About whether there would be a sing off or not.He admitted that they may have been misled on this and apologised for it,but insisted it wasn't intentional.
  • user1234567user1234567 Posts: 12,378
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Does anyone have a link for the press conference?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6,345
    Forum Member
    "may have been misled" - complete shizzle.

    there's more to it than that. i don't trust a single word that comes out of his mouth anymore. Every word sounds insincere.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6,345
    Forum Member
    Does anyone have a link for the press conference?

    there's not an actual link but the articles relating to today's conference have youtube clips at the end :)
  • broadshoulderbroadshoulder Posts: 18,758
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Even if it was unintentional it really was incompetence.

    Not letting Louis or Dermot know and still not having it in the X-Factor script is a balls up.

    He's been rumbled.
  • Unigal07Unigal07 Posts: 22,326
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Unintentional my backside - it's really not difficult to inform the viewing public before the lines open or at the very latest at the end of the Saturday show that there will be a sing off, and that our votes "alone" will not save our favourite.

    I'm glad he's apologised but it's not been without a lot of wriggling and protest.
  • Red+BloodedRed+Blooded Posts: 4,676
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Eurostar wrote: »
    About whether there would be a sing off or not.He admitted that they may have been misled on this and apologised for it,but insisted it wasn't intentional.

    shouldn't he bring Mary back, if it was intentional.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 18,013
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Refunds offered?
  • EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Unigal07 wrote: »
    Unintentional my backside - it's really not difficult to inform the viewing public before the lines open or at the very latest at the end of the Saturday show that there will be a sing off, and that our votes "alone" will not save our favourite.

    I'm glad he's apologised but it's not been without a lot of wriggling and protest.

    Of course it was intentional.Dermot was deliberately vague and ambigious on Saturday and using weird legalistic phrases.They were clearly keeping their options open in case Cher needed to be saved.
  • EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ardwark wrote: »
    Refunds offered?

    Good point : if he acknowledges viewers "may have been misled",does that not put last weekend's result entirely in doubt?
  • user1234567user1234567 Posts: 12,378
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    there's not an actual link but the articles relating to today's conference have youtube clips at the end :)
    Thanks and *sulks* :mad: Last year there was a link for the conference, I'm sure I watched it through one of DS's articles :(
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6,345
    Forum Member
    Thanks and *sulks* :mad: Last year there was a link for the conference, I'm sure I watched it through one of DS's articles :(

    Yeah it's a bit weird because i remember watching all of last years on here unless they upload it in full later on? :confused: Hope so! :D
  • user1234567user1234567 Posts: 12,378
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Yeah it's a bit weird because i remember watching all of last years on here unless they upload it in full later on? :confused: Hope so! :D
    I'm glad you remembered as well. I was beginning to think I was imagining it :eek: Maybe it will go up tomorrow. They might be letting the press print whatever headlines they want first to maximise sales *fingers crossed*
  • Scratchy7929Scratchy7929 Posts: 3,252
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Even if it was unintentional it really was incompetence.

    Not letting Louis or Dermot know and still not having it in the X-Factor script is a balls up.

    He's been rumbled.

    He may have made a big mistake there.Ignorance is no defence in law.If somebody actually sued $yco for Innocent misrepresentation I think he would loose now.If the red tops sponsored someone to take $yco to court, who voted for Mary I think they would win.A precident would be set then for other claiments.
    Not sure this will happen - but there is an opportunity there.Not sure what OFCOM could do though apart from rap his knuckles a bit.
  • grimtales1grimtales1 Posts: 46,695
    Forum Member
    "may have been misled" - covering his ass. We WERE misled and it was gross stupidity, even if unintentional.
  • grimtales1grimtales1 Posts: 46,695
    Forum Member
    Eurostar wrote: »
    Good point : if he acknowledges viewers "may have been misled",does that not put last weekend's result entirely in doubt?

    Hmmm... if it does couldnt he put Mary back in?
  • Red+BloodedRed+Blooded Posts: 4,676
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    grimtales1 wrote: »
    Hmmm... if it does couldnt he put Mary back in?

    exactly,
  • George7George7 Posts: 840
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Too little too late Simon. You took the public for fools and clearly they're not.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,809
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You really do have to laugh.

    Ofcom comes out and says that there was no foul play.

    Simon comes out and says sorry guys we did mislead you but we didn't mean to hurt you so it's okay.
  • LaVieEnRoseLaVieEnRose Posts: 12,836
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    grimtales1 wrote: »
    "may have been misled" - covering his ass. We WERE misled and it was gross stupidity, even if unintentional.

    I don't believe for a second that it was "unintentional". This sums up my opinion:
    Eurostar wrote: »
    Of course it was intentional. Dermot was deliberately vague and ambigious on Saturday and using weird legalistic phrases.They were clearly keeping their options open in case Cher needed to be saved.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 18,013
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Clip HERE
  • EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    grimtales1 wrote: »
    Hmmm... if it does couldnt he put Mary back in?

    Cowell has come very close to admitting that Mary was illegally eliminated from the show today,without realising he has done so.
  • LMAOLMAO Posts: 3,471
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    When the judges were voting, Dermot made a complete song & dance about being REALLY REALLY clear that they were voting for who they wanted to put through to the final, as opposed to other weeks where they were voting for who they wanted to send home. To me it sounded like a legal issue for him to be so adamant about the change so they MUST have known it wasn`t a normal singoff like all the others, as Simon keeps trying to claim it was.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6,667
    Forum Member
    LMAO wrote: »
    When the judges were voting, Dermot made a complete song & dance about being REALLY REALLY clear that they were voting for who they wanted to put through to the final, as opposed to other weeks where they were voting for who they wanted to send home. To me it sounded like a legal issue for him to be so adamant about the change so they MUST have known it wasn`t a normal singoff like all the others, as Simon keeps trying to claim it was.

    Yes, this - I might be wrong, but didn't he also say something about wanting to make sure it was 'completely transparent'? To me, that's a huge red flag. In the past, he's never made as big a deal out of it when judges say that they're keeping someone, as opposed to sending someone home.
Sign In or Register to comment.