Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

C4 - The Adesina Family breach of contract?

31 replies

LadyFannyofBumStreet · 17/01/2011 21:36

I enjoyed the first two seasons of the Family and was equally looking forward to the 3rd series, featuring a Nigerian family (The Adesina's). However, soon after the series was aired, the eldest daughter Julie (whose scenes were edited in an extremely negative way so as to get bigger ratings) started accusing Channel 4 of duplicitous behaviour, namely not paying her what they initially promised. Unfortunately, she deleted the twits/facebook messages claiming this, but here are some other twits;

"Unfortunately, you haven't heard the worse of it yet. For the whole truth to be told I?ve gotta b stronger than I?ve ever been b4" 5:53 PM Jan 11th via web

" : when i think about how much they edited the truth, i feel beyond disgusted at how low they stooped in the name of money". 12:33 PM Jan 11th via web

Am I unreasonable in thinking that C4 knowingly exploited a poor Black family for ratings?

LadyFannyofBumStreet

OP posts:
tomhardyismydh · 17/01/2011 21:44

would be impossible to tell with out having the contract in front of me. If Im honest i have been watching on and off and It would appear to me that the woman has some very difficult emotional or underlying mental health problems.

tomhardyismydh · 17/01/2011 21:46

hang on, are you a friend of the woman on FB? and Why are c4 discussing her contract on FB. that I find hard to belive

Original poster
LadyFannyofBumStreet · 17/01/2011 22:13

No, I am not friends with Julie. I am a fan of the Family series who couldn't help but notice how differently this family was potrayed and with this new information, it is looking more like exploitation.

In Julie's case, it was obvious that her scenes were edited in a way that would show her to be an angry young woman, with serious anger management issues, or even mental health issues.

C4 have not discussed her contract on FB, so there is nothing to doubt there. Her brother said that she signed a different contract to the rest of them.

OP posts:
Deciduousblonde · 17/01/2011 22:30

Why else would they be screening such a programme if it wasn't for exploitation? they have done it with Wife Swap too..and of course the other seasons of 'The Family'

I don't think the 'poor black family' comes in to it at all. Anyone can be a ratings booster with clever editing.

Original poster
LadyFannyofBumStreet · 17/01/2011 22:33

D.Blonde, have you watched series one and two of The Family? if so, do you have an explanation for why the other Familys were potrayed in a positive light and well compensated in the process?

OP posts:
ApocalypseCheeseToastie · 17/01/2011 22:36

Please don't start/try dragging skin colour into it.

The Indian family on last year were portrayed very well, they were loving and supportive, dad was a lazy sod tho.

The white family weren't portrayed too well either tbh, mum was a pouty vic beckham wannabe, dad was a controlling twat, daughter was a lazy arse gobshite who was always staggering home drunk. The son was lovely tho, I wanted to take him home and make him toast Wink

More fool them for going on the show, we all know how these things work, regardless of colour, and frankly, they can only show things that happened !!

Deciduousblonde · 17/01/2011 22:40

I don't think the first family were shown in a postive light at all.

They have even been on forums themselves complaining about the editing. It happens in all the 'reality' shows. If they didn't cut out the 'nicer' bits it wouldn't make good car-crash TV would it? and I'm afraid that is what it is all about.

ApocalypseCheeseToastie · 17/01/2011 22:43

The daughter from the first family had some hate campaign going on, they went on this morning to moan about it because no one would employ her !!

I think from what I saw the 2nd family had best portrayal, didn't watch any of em much tbh, haven't watched any of this one.

Original poster
LadyFannyofBumStreet · 17/01/2011 23:17

ACT - I will call it as I see it. If you interpret this as 'dragging' skin colour into it, then so be it. My point is they made Julie sign a different contract and presumably said she would be compensated more. They have now decided not to, and it is unfair because this show will have a huge and long lasting effect on her life.

OP posts:
Original poster
LadyFannyofBumStreet · 17/01/2011 23:20

D.blonde, I agree that reality shows depend heavily on editing to make the programme interesting. What irks me is that C4 are refusing to compensate Julie as per the contract she signed (which as I have mentioned before, was different to one that the other family members had to sign).

OP posts:
BuzzLightBeer · 17/01/2011 23:22

Have you seen the unaired footage? Or the contract? Have you anything other to go on other that tweets (not twits) from a disgruntled participant?

twirlymum · 17/01/2011 23:26

Why would she be 'compensated'?
Surely she would be paid?

OldBagWantsNewBag · 18/01/2011 01:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

OldBagWantsNewBag · 18/01/2011 01:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

tomhardyismydh · 18/01/2011 09:35

i was confused from your op I thout you where saying c4 had discussed this with her on FB. was confused as to what you ment by twit. sorry realise now you ment tweet.

so how do you Know she signed a different contract?. anyway its entertainment of coyurse it will be edited to convey what the viewrs want to see, anyone entering into it and understanding this is a fool. and lets face it anyone who makes up a bed in her parents house between the kitcken and toilet and takes advantage and exploites her family in the way she did desrves a bit of there own comupences Is my opinion. she was conveed as an angry woman because she in fact is. always someone to blame for our own short comings. Im guessing she got a real look at herself and didnt like what she sees and is blaming the show.

Original poster
LadyFannyofBumStreet · 18/01/2011 21:36

Twirlymum - People do not do reality shows for free. They either get compensated in one form or another, but it's mostly in cash.

OP posts:
Original poster
LadyFannyofBumStreet · 18/01/2011 21:38

Tom - Her brother said she signed a different contract and Julie did not deny it.

How they potrayed her and the consequences are not as important as the fact that they have now gone against their word and are refusing to pay the amount they agreed on.

OP posts:
twirlymum · 18/01/2011 22:24

I understand they don't do them for free.
Compensation suggests they are to blame for something. Remuneration is payment. Whether it be cash or goods in kind.

Tomorrowslookingfine · 18/01/2011 22:27

Why are the family poor?
From what I saw on the program:

they own a shop
they own a take away
their daughter goes to private school

Original poster
LadyFannyofBumStreet · 18/01/2011 22:28

Oldbag - I have no problem omitting their colour, and focusing on their socio-economic status. If she had the option to seek legal advise, then she would have surely. I don't think she has that option.

BuzzLightBeer

Many thanks for correcting that spelling error. I fail to see what difference seeing the unaired footage or the contract would make to yours or my position; I am sure you know that she cannot make false statements against C4 without running the risk of getting sued for slander.

OP posts:
Original poster
LadyFannyofBumStreet · 18/01/2011 22:28

Tomorrowslookingfine - They are also up to their eyeballs in debt.

OP posts:
Original poster
LadyFannyofBumStreet · 18/01/2011 22:31

Twirlymum - Is that the difference? good to know.

OP posts:
PatriciaHolm · 18/01/2011 22:34

Given she's deleted the relevant messages, I would imagine that she's had legal advice that she can't post such accusations without proof - which would imply she has no proof. It's quite possible that C4 gave her a contract promising pay in return for certain activities - promotional, say - that she hasn't done.

twirlymum · 18/01/2011 22:38

Sorry, reading that back it sounds a bit arsey, it wasn't meant to be. I was just confused.

tomhardyismydh · 18/01/2011 23:18

Tom - Her brother said she signed a different contract and Julie did not deny it.

Oh ok i see it must be true then of course Hmm