Holly willoboughly

[midnightblue12]

Ok I know I've spelt her surname wrong... but here we are. We all know who I'm talking about!

I just don't understand why social media has turned on her, almost blaiming her for allowing Phillip S antics to go on?

Why is she responsible for his actions????

And for those saying "she must've known"... maybe she didn't! Maybe she kept out of it or maybe she didn't know the full one and puts.
Why so she being Blaine's. Am I missing something??!

No.

I don't believe in a lot of things I once did.

People are broken, is what I now believe.

We made systems to cope and deal with selfish, inept and all the rest of it, people, based on expensive, difficult for victims, inquiries and safeguarding reviews.

Totally agree with this

Because they’re his employer. They’re the ones promoting him. He lied to them, but they had powers to launch a full investigation, which none of his colleagues did.

I remember reading at the time that Ruth put a complaint in about PS because he was rude towards her - nothing at all to do with MM, unless that wasn't made public at the time because it was being covered up? Has it been confirmed RL complaint was about PS relationship with MM?

There was a video circulating when they were doing an 'on LW next' link and RL was talking and PS cut her off and she was visibly pissed off. That video was supposed to be the incident she complained about. I did think complaining about that was ridiculous, she works in tv, she knows timing is key and the producers would've been the ones who wanted to cut her off not PS - it seemed over the top for something so small, so maybe that wasn't it at all. It never did make sense.

As an aside, I watched the Rolf Harris doc on ITV yesterday - he too claimed he waited till the child he raped from a young age was of an age of consent, it's the go-to excuse so people being sceptical about PS statement is understandable really.

But by all accounts they did and PS lied and MM covered for him.

Then when it was on the verge of coming out in 2020, he lied to them again and used the show to come out as a smoke screen.

To be honest though, I haven’t seen anything that proves ITV knew for a fact this was happening. I could have missed that.

I thought they were in the same boat as Holly. No substantial proof they knew so we can only take their word for it.

There' s some interesting stuff on Twitter about this:

Allegedly the runner confronted her outside the National Television awards after PS had him thrown out:
https://twitter.com/missglasgow88/status/1662559180287365121

I also saw an interview clipped with a man who said he'd worked on the programme and neither of them were very nice.

Not true. She's shrewd when she needs to be and her husband, agent, manager were there to support and advise her.
She turned a blind as they all knew and it was a clique of PS, HW and 4 seniors.
They socialise outside of work without the other T.M staff, go to each other's houses, holidays etc.
Phil was outcast as he didn't tell her about his brother's trial.
He would've not wanted that coming out as it would activate what's coming out now.
They all realised it would come out and he was the one to take the fall for his actions (which aren't illegal) and they'd plead ignorance to the affair.
She plays dim when it suits.

Then when it was on the verge of coming out in 2020, he lied to them again and used the show to come out as a smoke screen
I also wondered if ITV were aware of the relationship and were okay about it. Maybe deciding to do this coming out episode just for PS. Being a support.

PS lied to HW and his wife, both of whom have close personal relationships with him, thus more likely to believe he wouldn’t lie to them and to want to believe him.

ITV are in no such position - if both PS and the guy lied to ITV they’re in a position to take an objective view - which is that even if this one instance is not true, there are just far too many rumours around this man for him to be a good representative for this or any company. He may be very unfortunate, and he may have unaccountably accrued completely untrue stories around him, however, given what happened with other male celebrities’ behaviour coming to light, the sensible course is to end their association with him.

ITV could have protected itself as well as its employees had it taken this line.

HW was manipulated by PS
I think she may have been. No matter how savvy we think we are we've all been hooked in my master manipulators at times in our lives.

I think he manipulated everyone including his wife and the men he was involved with. Why is HW is more liable for not sussing him than his wife?

It does not matter of Holly is dim or shrewd, she can't safeguard her own children, her colleagues or the public, she should not be (as this is the thread title) in a position power and power as she is inept.

Influencers should receive safeguarding training.

I would happily lay into ITV staff of someone wants to start a thread.

HW problems now are:

She doesn't know how this will blow up - will there be a wider investigation within ITV etc? Will there be new revelations? Will the runner tell all (most likely including details of other relationships on the show not just about PS)?

What will Schofield do next? Will he do a sob story or will he try and burn others too?

What now for This Morning? Is continuing on the show a good idea? Remember it sounds like she just struck a new deal with ITV in order to oust Schofield. They stuck their necks out to back her. Something that now might be a poison chalice.

If she leaves, what does she do? Does she lean on her husband to get her a new gig? How does this make her husband look? Does it damage HIS reputation too?

How do her previous statements look? How has her last one come across? The fact that she only mentions her own feelings and how hurt she is sound tone deaf in the context of Schofield doing a bunch of briefings to save his career. She's doing the same and it doesn't wash well and its getting picked up on.

How many more statements are going to be needed? Does she need to do a full sod story interview about how she was duped....?

And then theres the timing on all this.

Its a right mess for her.

None of this is about what she knew when for me. Theres two issues: what she does now and what she did despite what she DID know.

Its about how her brand was so closely intwined with Schofield's (whether their friendship is real or fake is somewhat irrelevate tbh). She wanted an image of being Phil's Bestie. AFTER the rumours with someone who had shit all over a woman for decades by using her as a beard. Which she DID know and didn't see a problem with because 'be kind to the stunning and brave rainbow man' and lets just sweep the inconvience of how he used his wife for years to protect his image from damage because that was THE most important thing. His Coming Out now looks (even more) dreadful and her support was very much part of the optics of that.

She DEFINITELY knew there was bad blood with Schofield from Ruth and Eamonn. She can't deny that. She picked Phil's side of the story over theirs. They are seasoned professionals who had a significant amount of experience behind them who got spooked at Schofield. They weren't unrespected nor naive novices. Their actions about how seriously they took things, really should have been an alarm bell. They are now getting very different PR choices and optics as a result. And they are directly being compared to her choices. Thats hard to kick back against. Especially if her defence strategy is mirroring Schofield's and centres on damage limitation and her image rather than 'upon reflect I think it is appropriate for me to support seeking a full and thorough transparent investigation into whether there was a problem with Phil's personal and professional conduct'

You can say a LOT here about her choices and how she handled things over the years WITHOUT talking about what level of blame for HIS actions she should carry. Because there are certain things she absoluetely DID know and she made judgment calls INSPITE of these red flags. It shows she had flawed judgment and where her priorities lay. She can't argue that aligning herself SO closely with Schofield wasn't a risky move.

Thats why I ultimately struggle to see her as a victim or to feel sorry for her.

I don't think she can be blamed for 'not doing more' or being complicit in someways with his actions. Thats just sexist bullshit. But she CAN be questioned over what she was directly responsible for.

A lot of the comments on the thread about not seeing a problem are part of the same issue. If you willfully fail to see an issue then you don't have to adjust your world view or change your behaviour. Its easy. You just carry on like before in your happy smiley world where everyone lives happy ever after where no abuses of power happen. If you see an issue that forces you to make a choice to 'do something' or at least see the world in a much darker way. Which isn't pleasant.

HW's situation can be summed up in a single, sentence which should be a mantra to all in positions of influence like her:
“We must all face the choice between what is right and what is easy". ~Albus Dumbledore

I would love to discuss influencers using children, exploiting them etc in another thread. The public does not need to know little Brian has a micropenis in TV or whatever, whilst Brian gets no money and is out there for all to exploit now.

Agreed.

What PS did is a sackable offence in most companies. And many companies would have taken the line that, even though they found no hard evidence of wrongdoing, at the very least, PS had shown lack of judgement to get himself into a compromising position that brings the company into disrepute, so he would have to go regardless. The further benefit of that is that if it had actually been true, despite the lack of evidence, the company would have protected other young men and its own reputation going forward.

ITV sent a completely wrong signal to his colleagues and the public that he had been investigated and vindicated.

I recently heard someone day that it is not the first person in the room in this case RL who is brave, it is the second person in the room who backs them that is! Holly made sure she was not in the room.

Ummm interesting.

Have all the celebs cancelled Phil from their social media ? Can't see any links to him.

She DEFINITELY knew there was bad blood with Schofield from Ruth and Eamonn. She can't deny that. She picked Phil's side of the story over theirs. They are seasoned professionals who had a significant amount of experience behind them who got spooked at Schofield.

Ruth had a spat with PS because he was rude to her, that’s what her complaint was about not his conduct with young men. Professional rivalry and dislike is now being rebranded as knowledge and wisdom. Eamon is a pompous, self-regarding, right-wing twat who was sacked because research found he was unpopular with viewers. ITV replaced him with someone even worse with whom he now a personal beef. Rebranding EH as Father Christmas is ridiculous.

Not reallyZ because that could have easily been spun into ‘ITV sacked me because I am gay’.

or ‘how homophobic rumours ruined my career’.

ITV is run by people, these people will ah e had a pre-existing relationship with him.

My point is that if Holly believed him and ITV bosses (who are people) believed him. What’s the difference between the 2.

Holly could have distanced herself. Holly could not have gushed about brave he was and about how he will always have her support. Holly could have decided to make a natural move away from doing everything with him. She could have protected herself.

I simply don’t agree that if Holly believed him it’s fine. If people at ITV, believed him, they are responsible for his actions.

Lorraine told us all that presenters in ITV are actors with a script. The same can be said for politicians, they say it is showbiz for ugly people.

If you remember Bridget Jones baby, they have her feeding the script though their ear.

R L and EH come from a journalist not musical theatre background like PS!

An ITV thread may be useful.

We can't have influencers who can't safeguard in the UK.

If you watch the video, the clip that Ruth is introducing is from Emmerdale and she is about to talk about the grooming storyline. Before she gets to that point, out of nowhere, P abruptly crashes in and shouts “We’re out if time” or something.

You can still hear her saying “grooming” over his shouting, Janet Street-Porter starts laughing. Ruth says “well I only had a few more words to say” and he continues to drown her out by shouting “Yes, thank you goodbye”.

P was probably paranoid that she was onto him and had deliberately chosen the grooming storyline for her link with him. Coincidence? Maybe.

It was just after this that she complained, then later lost her job. 🤔

“A man groomed a male teenager and you want to spin this into a story about the poor womenz being blamed blamed for his crime. Have a fucking day off! She knew what was going on …”

Kind of proves my point, really. Any crime may be that a man groomed a male teenager … so why does the alleged crime often become a discussion about ‘she knew’?

One of the classic actions of a groomer is to groom the most likely whistleblower. Can’t be true about X, he’s nothing like that, we’ve even been on holiday with him.

Etc.

In holiday with him and her son.

It does not matter of Holly is dim or shrewd, she can't safeguard her own children, her colleagues or the public, she should not be (as this is the thread title) in a position power and power as she is inept. where does that end? Should the same be said about his wife?

What about the wife of any other criminal? The wife of a paedophile who is caught with images on their computer? Should it be argued that they must have known so clearly cannot safeguard their children?

Bearing in mind that it’s very easy for a wife to fane ignorance once the perpetrator has been caught, damage limitation as it were. Except that some wives and friends definitely don’t know. And in an industry where rumour and gossip is rife, it doesn’t necessarily follow that everyone should believe what they’ve read on social media rather than the actual person standing in front of them.

If you watch the video, the clip that Ruth is introducing is from Emmerdale and she is about to talk about the grooming storyline. Before she gets to that point, out of nowhere, P abruptly crashes in and shouts “We’re out if time” or something

@dayswithaY yeah I've seen that on Twitter but tbh I think that was just a coincidence. I doubt PS was even listening to her and would've had the producer in his ear counting down.