Chapter 60: Shade and Scheananigans

Published Sep 27, 2024, 6:08 PM

The guy behind the guy. Juliette, Rachel's publicist, is letting you in on all of the secrets behind this week's VPR headlines.

This is Rachel Goes Rogue. Well, hello, welcome to Rachel Goes Rogue. And I am not Rachel Savannah Levis. This is Juliette, publicist and producer. And because Rachel is on an amazing vacation, I'm taking over today to just go over the headlines from a PR perspective. I'm going to add my perspective of twenty four years doing public relations in the entertainment industry and just give people some different things to think about. Okay, so we're going to go through some headlines today, and the first one is all about how Britney Cartwright translated reality show fame into real life money to change. Okay, we know her from the shows, and now she is definitely taking off, and she's got ownership in the businesses and the buyers and the restaurants, and then she also has got some collaborations with brands like Jenny Craig. Now she's got a divorce happening with Jack's and her businesses are starting to thrive. So look, I think kudos to Brittany first of all. Right, so she's on the up, and this is the thing that's key when you say, what should she do next? To leverage the eyes she has on her right now. In the entertainment industry, on the way up is key. And what I mean by on the way up is it's when the most eyes are on you and you are feeling the most popularity and the most trajectory forward. And if you use those that momentum, and you can harness that and put it towards everything, you are going to succeed. You're going to take those fifty minutes and really make them last. I think in her case, she's gotten away from some dead weight and she is a free woman, and you know, what could be next for her is really the limit if she's got a great team around her and she tells her story properly. She's a mom, she's a single mom, she's a woman. She can be dating. The thing of it is is you and I look at them as our titles in life. I'm a mom, I'm a mother, I'm a wife. When you are in this part of the industry, you look at them as categories. So which category can I talk about? Where can I project my brand to? And each one of those equates to money, So she could really there's no this guy's the limit for her. Right now, I do think she is maneuvering her fame very very well. And again, if she continues on the trajectory she's at, if she has a good team, if she stays on the straight and narrow, she can do insane things. And you know, we saw it with Ariana. Arianna leaned into her scorned woman and cheated on woman, and the fans rallied behind her. Same thing with Brittany. She's gone through a toxic relationship and she's a single mom and she had to move out of her house with her kid. She's got the fans sympathy and support, and if she can be good to her fans and pick smart brands, she's gonna continue to go well. And I think right now she's already separated her name from Jack, so I don't even think she has to concentrate on that. He's the father of her kid, so they're gonna have to interact and hopefully they can cope in a healthy way. But I think from a pr perspective, if she really uses this fifteen minutes of fame smartly, this guy is her limit and she should continue to make those brand deals and endorsements and bring in as much cash as she can. I'm sure she could do a book. I'm sure she could do other television shows, whether it's a Dancing with the Stars appearance, whether it's a game show appearance. So if she keeps riding this train, Brittany's going to be okay, and kudos to her. Let us look at the next headline. I love this one because Emily in Paris, Emily in Paris star Lily Collins couldn't get into the Vanderpump Rules sandwich Shop. Okay, first of all, that's my favorite show and it's my guilty pleasure. So when it comes on with the new season, don't call me for two days because I binge it. So love her love the show Modern Day Carrie Bradshaw updated version. So basically in this article that was by Marie Claire, she says that the line was down the block, but she couldn't get a sandwich. She needed a sandwich and she couldn't get her sandwich, and in despite her disappointment in missing out onto something about her sandwich, Lily Collins only had nice things to say about Maddox, then something about her. Instagram replied at Lily Collins, if you're reading this and still need that sandwich. We got you, girl. So let's talk about that for a minute, because the possibilities is a she was walking down the street and wanted a sandwich and saw the line and said no way. Because in La there's a restaurant in every corner. So me personally and my family, we won't wait in the line for anything. There's too many restaurants. But it is also possible that she has assistants and team members that could have or would have gone and caught that sandwich for her. It's possible she would have called ahead and pre ordered it and had somebody to go pick up that sandwich for her. Why do I bring that up because I'm going to give you a little insight on how the entertainment industry works a little bit. In the background. Each talent that you see, each actor, singer, whatever, a person that you're a fan of, they have multiple teammates, whether it is their publicists, their manager, their agents, and each one of those entities has many many clients, and entertainment, believe it or not, is kind of a small world, So you could have relationships with these different publicists, managers, etc. And sometimes you do favors for each other. So sometimes you might say, hey, can you give you my neighbor or my best friend who's also publicist to Lily Collins or manager, could you give us a shout out or do something kind for us. That's saying that happen. I don't have firsthand knowledge. I'm saying it's a different kind of a perspective depending on the relationships that happen in the entertainment business. It is possible that somebody asked for a little bit of a book for it, right, and or it was created. And I'll give you an example. I had a very very high profile boy bander who was in one of the top boy bands in the world, who was going through a very public breakup, and I called a publicist friend of mine who had a high profile client, and we arranged for them to go out on a date so that, you know, he wouldn't look like he was crying at home over this breakup. Right. So my point in saying all these things is sometimes they're manipulated. Also, Lily Collins went on Watch What Happens Live and said the statement, my guess is that she needed to find a tie in to the show to go. You know why was she there as a guest, and she wanted to incorporate herself with the fans and the storyline and something that was positive. I don't think Lily Collins would dive into scandaval or Jackson Brittany and have to pick a side. This was something that is lighthearted and were already you know, talking about and complaining. So she could be relatable and have a connection to the show and to Andy and give the show a plug without picking something that was you know, controversial or you know, could get her backlash. So she said it in a great way. So I am sure that it was really about a connection with the fans and being connected to the Bravo sphere in a lighthearted way. I am not surmising in this situation. I am just saying there are multiple possibilities from a pr perspective. At the end of the day, if she wanted a sandwich and she didn't get her sandwich, that's kind of a bummer. And I think they need to hire more people if the lines are that long, because you want to serve your people and they missed out on a really great photo op. I think what's interesting, you know, one of the questions we have here is what factors contribute to the phenomenon of food spots becoming so popular that not even celebrities can avoid the lines. Again, if you're you know, you'd get to the front of line, if you were the talent, and if somebody there was looking out for her, they would have brought her to the front too. But look, I think when you use celebrity endorsements, I don't know if people go there because of the sandwiches or because they want the chance of running into Ariana and Katie. And that is the beauty of partnering with a celebrity for a brand for business. Is it brings the buzz. There's the hope that they're going to get a glimpse of those people. That's why people go to the restaurants such as Sir etc. I don't know if it's for the food. It's more about Wow, what if we get to see the cast? How fun is that? It's a different kind of an experience. So yes, there are so many restaurants that you see that have a celebrities name out front that they have just licensed to use. There are some celebrities that do actually partner and get into the business. It's a lot tougher that way. They actually have to work at it, so a lot of times they just license their name. But it definitely drives the consumer there, and obviously it's successful or all these people wouldn't do it. And dare we say that since there was such a long line that the sandwiches are actually good. I don't know. I've never had one of their sandwiches, and there are very few sandwich shops. There's one in particular in Santa Monica that I always say is memorable to me. But you know, if you're a sandwich junkie, then you know, and their sandwiches are good by all means power to them. I'm all for women owned and women backed businesses, So let's go. Okay. So that's my thoughts on my favorite Emily in Paris. The next headline, shemus Say accuses Rachel Loves of weaponizing the justice system against Ariana Maddis. She basically accused her of weaponizing the justice system again, this time against Ariano Maddox About the videos and the scan of all, what do I think about this article? Well, in my opinion, this is the second time that Sheena is making defaming claims towards Rachel that she is weaponizing the legal system. The first one was about the restraining order and why I have to bring this up before I go it into the next one is that she knew we weren't coming. Sheena knew we weren't coming. The restraining order was being dropped, we were not pursuing it, and she chose to go stand on the courtroom steps with her attorney and weaponize the legal system, because when you don't show up for a restraining order, it goes away. And I have all the receipts and the emails to her attorneys saying we weren't going. I called the judge's clerk and let them know, and they were very grateful because they knew it was going to be a circus if the two ladies showed up, so they were happy to hear we weren't coming. Obviously, then they must have called and said they were, or they I think they brought TMS. You forgot who it was that came and covered it. But that is weaponizing the legal system, because, plain and simple, we'd already said we weren't coming, and I tried personally to negotiate a peaceful resolution for both of them, and their attorney said not unless Rachel denied that the assault ever happened, which we were not willing to do. Now here's the bigger thing of this in the sense of scandaval, and Rachel's suing the people that she's suing, just like Sheena should never have put her hands on Rachel, which she admitted to, pushing her against the wall on television with her hardest might, and whether it was a slap or a punch, et cetera, it's still an assault. It's illegal. And Arianna shouldn't have sent videos anywhere it's illegal. And Tom should not have filmed Rachel without her consent. It's illegal. There are two things can be true. At one time, the scandal was an unfortunate decision making, and we don't need to go into that bad mistake. That's one thing. Two things can be true. So on the other side, these behaviors are still illegal, and it's one hundred percent rational to sue or take legal action for such illegal activity, which is also true. And at the end of the day, illegal activities get legal consequences. And I think people are failing because they love the show or they love Ariana and they feel bad for Ariana. They're failing to see that illegal behaviors still have legal consequences, So that is not weaponizing the justice system, and talking about it in this way is not only defamation, in my opinion, but it's also it's also purposefully trying to drive a narrative that's not true. Because people don't search deep into the Internet to find all of the facts. They read headlines. So what does Sheina do. She's giving them a headline so everybody can repeat, Oh, Rachel's weaponizing the justice system. She's not. She's standing up for what's right because what was done to her is wrong, which is completely separate from the scandal, which was also wrong. Why do I think Sheena feels that Rachel's legal actions are an additional attempt to hurt Ariana when they could just be to actually fix Rachel. It's because it's much Look, Sena knows where her bread is buttered, right, it's much more profitable to be on the Ariana train and to hit your wagon to that. And you know, remember, let's not forget this show. Vander Punt Rules was founded on Sheena's cheating, and that's how the show came to be right and she's a longtime player, and she gets a paycheck as that show keeps going. So it's in her best interest from a business perspective to to follow the money and to make the show come back and be successful because she gets paychecks. Right in this entire situation, you know the words that come to mind for me, your deflection and reframing, right, because at the end of the day, Sena assaulted Rachel, and Arianna and Tom did illegal things towards Rachel. Those are the facts, and those have actually been confirmed by a judge that though there was enough illegal activity or things that happened for the case to move forward. So if that if there wasn't, they would have thrown it out and we wouldn't still be having this conversation. So trying to reframe it once again and keep putting messaging out that's negative towards Rachel is in their best interest. Plus, negativity in the PR world and in the world of social media is much more popular than something positive. When somebody says something positive, they leave a positive comment, they say something nicest about somebody, what's left to say? You kind of go, yeah, okay. But when somebody brings in something negative, everybody can go, oh yeah, you know, oh I feel that way too, or could you believe they did this? It's more of a conversation starter. And so for the show, for Sheena, for any of these people that jump on them, I'm going to bash Rachel today train it creates more conversation, it creates more relativity for them. So from a pr perspective, in my opinion, that's why they continuously attack her and say to say she's weaponizing the system is just ill informed because she's using the legal system in the way it was meant to to go after the people that hurt her and that purposefully did illicit and illegal activities towards her. Again, two things can be true at once, and in this case, the scandal happened, and so did all the illegal activity. At the end of the day, Guys, just even thinking about if this reality show, if it wasn't even a show, take the show out of it. Somebody filmed her without her consent, somebody sent that video around, and somebody attacked her and pushed her against the wall, getting a restraining order, taking a lawsuit to the next It's perfectly reasonable behavior when those kinds of things are done to you. So I just hope that people look at it from a little bit more fair para goggles, And that's what I have to say about that. Okay, more Sheena Pump rules. Sheena say on what she'd say to Rachel Levis, and she basically goes into I mean, it's interesting to me that she says that she's back on Zola and she spoke about her former friendship and they're trying to figure out if there's a reboot. I've also seen her ask for a producing credit, which I thought was interesting too, And she says Rachel and I were good friends and I had such a soft spot for her, but maybe it was actually more like a blind spot. But if I could tell her one thing today, I'd probably tell her to drop the lawsuit against Ariana again, as I just said, hitch your wagon to the most profitable train and you stick with it, and it makes more sense for her. Although it would make fascinating TV for Sheen and Rachel to have a conversation, right, I do find that interesting. Nobody has approached Rachel about even considering to do that. It's much easier safer to bash her, and it's more guaranteed you're going to get some pickup on that, but it would make fascinating television to actually have them sit down and have a conversation and talk about it. But nobody's interested in that. You'll notice from their end, you know, her saying she did enough damage there. I don't think Arianna needs to be involved in the lawsuit at all. Well, if you were a lawyer and you knew the laws and you knew what was done to you, I don't know, she know, maybe you would sit down and let people run over you and do illegal things to you. But Rachel's not going to do that, and she isn't doing that. And nobody gets a free pass when you do something illegal to hurt somebody else. It was done with intention. Those videos being talked about was done with intention. Those videos being sent with horrible texts was done with intention. And I'm sorry. Maybe if it was done to you, you'd roll over and take it. But good for Rachel that she's not. And I'll stand behind her on that. And you know what, Arianna could have approached it with grace. She could have said I was cheated on. Let's not forget there was already huge problems within the relationship and it wasn't going to last, and everybody already knew that, and that's been confirmed and reconfirmed since the since this has all happened. So knowing that you were probably exiting a relationship, you could have just walked away from it. You could have just said I got cheated on, and you know, I'm not happy about it. But talking about those intimate videos and bringing attention to it, that was done with intention from a pr perspective the show, and I know the publicist for the show, she's very good at her job. You know, they rode those headlines. They drove those headlines, and they made vander pumpt Rule season the best that's ever had to beat numbers like The Bachelor's. That was also done with intention and weaponizing the justice system against a woman she wronged. It's not weaponizing the justice system. The just system is there to protect those that have been violated or hurt or illegally, you know, hurt against and Rachel's doing exactly what she should do. She's holding people accountable for their actions. Because nobody on the cast has any problems holding Rachel accountable for what she did, right, They do seem to have problems, however, holding Tom accountable as to the same level of Rachel or you know, Jax, he gets a little bit of a or James Kennedy's seemingly the males get a little bit more of a pass than the females here. But at the end of the day, Rachel has taken accountability for her actions, and she's holding the other people accountable. Why do they get a free pass? Why should they? That is not weaponizing the justice system. And I would love any attorney other than Sheena's to weigh in on that fact and say, if there is a legal activity against your client, do you not take the appropriate legal actions to protect them and right the wrong. They all want Rachel to right the wrong that she did having an affair or relationship with somebody else that was in a relationship. Then Sina goes on to talk about Rachel again and this podcast to say, I hear that she's now basically dedicated her podcast to just talking about her former friend group. She did an episode on Jackson's mental health when she has no idea what's really going on in the situation. So I assume that's more of a money ratings ploy versus what she really wants to be doing I can't imagine it's good for her mental health. Well, I guess my question would she know? Why do you do a podcast? Why do you talk about ra Why do you talk about the cast? Why when the scandal broke and you were all under a gag order, did you continue to bash Rachel and bring on guests to talk about Rachel? Was that a money maker for you? I don't know. I don't think anybody has the right to say what she does or doesn't do. And I think in this podcast in particular, she uses it to process her information, to kind of go through with counselors, with other people, with fans. She explains her experience, and she works through a lot of the stuff that she went through in purpose of shedding light for listeners. So I think her cause is a little bit more noble and that's personal thing. And then she was also asked if she would be okay if the show was canceled, and she said she would be fine with that. You know, I think you don't have a choice but to be fine with if somebody makes that decision for you. You don't have a choice. But I don't care what any of them say. Maybe Ariana wants to be done with it, but it depends what she has in the hopper. But at the end of the day, television time it breeds. It breeds your celebrity, it increases your job opportunities besides and beyond the show. So anybody would want the show to continue because that's how they keep maximizing their fifteen minutes and extending brand deals and making their money. So none of them want it to be canceled. Would they survive They wouldn't have a choice, so of course they would do. I think the cast overall is ready to move on from PPR again. I'm sure. I mean, look, they're all in their forties now, right, so this is not the show was. Like I said, it was originated when Shina had her affair and with a married man with kids, and it's set at a bar, and it's set about dating. They're all in most of them are in relationships or in or out of relationships. I don't know. I would think in your forties you would be tired of doing the same thing over again. But like I said, at the end of the day, it's business, and that business affords them the opportunity to bring in more business. So none of them want it to go away. And what do I think next moves for cast members would be if the show's canceled. I think they'll all try to get on other reality shows. They'll try to do game shows, competitive shows. They'll try to do anything they can to stay on TV. They'll try to write books, They'll try to ride that fame for as long as they can, as they should. It's a good business decision, right Sheena mentions that Rachel talking about Jackx's situation can't be positive for her mental health, yet continues to bring up the fact that Rachel should not be bringing Ariana into a lawsuit. Is this contradictory? Yes, I do think that is contradictory. First of all, who's better to talk about Jackson's journey besides Jack's is than somebody else that shared the show and shared a mental health breakdown and mental health treatment. She can really shed light, which is her purpose in life right now, is to get people talking more about mental health, to debunk the stigma that goes along with getting treatment, and she's dedicated herself to highlighting that, which again I feel is a good move for Rachel and it is healing for her and the way she talks about things is healing for her And if any of the people really listen to her podcast, know the fans and the listeners do They've heard her break down and cry, They've heard her go through the emotions, raw and live. And I I take my hat off to her for being allowing herself to be vulnerable and share with the fans the intention of letting them get behind the scenes and learn from her mistakes. So I think it's pretty positive. I'm not sure what Sheina did to repent for her cheating. I don't know. I don't remember a lot of PR around her saying she was sorry or trying to make amends to the family that she broke up. But you know, it's just me. Oh again. The final thing I will say on that again from the PR perspective, what is she doing. She's using the headlines that including Rachel because she knows those headlines are going to get picked up. Her talking about fun things she did with Brad at home that doesn't get a headline, talking about driving her kid to school, and you know, doing something cute that doesn't make a headline. The negative things and the drawing in the villain, that's what makes headlines, and that's what she's doing. She's using Rachel to make headlines, and she's using her animosity towards Rachel to keep the feud going. I guess I could say this too. In the rap world. There's a lot of feuds. In the music world, there's a lot of feuds. Some of them are real and some of them are very manufactured. And it's because the negativity drives press. And I'm sure you all could look back and dissect a lot of these and figure out how some of them are done with real behaviors and how some of them are just made for publicity. Okay, the next one is Laala Kent is clearing up confusion over Sosa's name for the final time. She's putting her foot down here. This was in People. She cleared up confusion about her daughter's name, saying that I believe it was well. She said that the having this daughter brought her back to life and expressed her excitement about this new chapter of their lives. And I believe that she's not named after me. That was the key point. She emphasized that Sosa is not named after anyone in particular, but simply a name she loves. I think it's a cute name. It's nice. Don't know what it means, but it's a cute name. I have to say, if I took my personal involvement out with this show, Lala is probably the one I like the most. I like her personality. I like that she sort of balls to the walls and says what she says, and she crafts her messages for PR or she makes PR moves. I don't hate Lalla or her personality or what she does. I get her. She's street smart and she's savvy, and that's what this industry thrives off of. Well, they thrive off people that don't get it, and they use and spit those people out. But then the people that get it and play the game that makes everybody money. So Lalla's a moneymaker. What are my thoughts on how public she's making this child so early? This is a very slippery slope. And remember I've been doing this for twenty four years, and I think it's a challenge. If she's going to put the kid in the entertainment industry, she's going to need to be prepared to be with that kid twenty four to seven. If she's going to make a business out of that kid, then she's going to need to parent and be there because this industry is not kind to young people that don't have parental guidance. And there's millions, not millions, there's tons and tons of pop stars out there. I represented Aaron Carter for a lot of years, other high profile celebrities in their moms. The parents sold stories to the outlets. You know, there's a definitely a dark road for kids on the other side. If she can, just like a Kim Kardashian or Beyonce and jay Z, trying to create generational wealth for your kid, I think can be a good thing. You just have to manage it, and you have to be very careful, and you can't for a minute think that it's just going to be okay if you're not around kids. It's weird with kids, you know. And I'm a mom of three. I have two eleven year olds and a sixteen year old. One of them is very theatrical and she loves the spotlight. The other one hates it, terrified of it. Right, you can't make kid do something they don't want to do, No more than my son who's athletic, and the coaches tried to make him a tennis star and said it was my job as a parent to get him to do it. I couldn't make him practice seven hours a day at a sport he didn't like. I didn't have that. I know there are parents that do it violin, you know, the violin tennis. They want their kids to be those stars, and I just am not that person. I think in this situation, you'd never know when the kid grows up how they're going to feel about it. I think if they're following the laws, and if they're making money off of the kid, for the kid, that they have the kup accounts, they have the proper paperwork, they do those things. Because they didn't do that for Aaron Carter, who ended up in million dollars of debt with the irs. The parents profited off of him and it was a very sad story. I wouldn't want that for my kids. After being in business for twenty four years, which is my livelihood and I love it, I would not put my kids in it. Yet, if my kids really chose to be in it, I'm not sure I could necessarily stop them. I think in this situation, what is particularly interesting is she was very vocal about how the first child with Randall, she did not have the ability to do what she wanted to do with that kid. I will say I do understand the mama Bearah mentality too, So I on a daily basis say my kids, my kids, my kids, and my husband says there are kids like, no, don't know, they're my kids, my kids, my kids. Being a mom and having that thing grow inside of you and then you birth it and then you create, you know, help it grow into who it is. It's very hard to kind of let that go. So you feel that you have some sort of an ownership right over the kid, but it comes pretty quickly to your attention that they have a mind of their own and you have very little ownership in them, especially in the teenage years. So I think that her wanting to have control over this kid is a bit of a statement, right or this child's appearances and etc. I know there was speculation did she do it on purpose so that she could put this child into the public eye and make money. I don't know. I think that's pretty far. I wouldn't put it past anybody. I would choose to look at it like she is wanting to share this moment, in this part of their life with this child on television, and get that child a pay check which could take care of a car in college and future and set them up. So I'm going to choose to think about the good side of it, but caution all people that put their kids in the entertainment business that it's not for the faint of heart and that you really have to be involved in it. So I think I think the scariest thing is that if these websites and Instagrams and Facebook's have the right to own your pictures, you don't know where your kids picture is going to show up. And in the case of Bravo and NBC, in the contracts with production, they own that footage for life. So whatever is on the television with you and Sosa, they own for life, and they can use it in any way they want to use it because that's what the contracts say. So for the rest of Sosa's life, the footage that was used of her at the beginning can be used. And if they choose to say that you're a bad mom and for doing this, they can use that footage and make that headline go for as long as they want. So that's a little bit concerning. That's my perspective there, all right. The last headline for today Lisa vander Pump's Dog Foundation settles disgruntled ex staffer's lawsuit. I believe she offered to pay two hundred thousand dollars in damages and she took the case to mediation to settle as opposed to going to court. And in the settlement, I believe it's the details are supposed to remain confidential. She's got a lot of legal challenges, and on this one, I actually I can speak from a personal experience and personal situation too, where I actually had a friend that sued Lisa for stealing their dog clothes. Ideas this was a very wealthy person. And I'm not going to disclose more than that, but I think Lisa has a lot of lawsuits. There's a lot of people that get reputation for not doing good business, and I think that's where she is at right now. She's definitely on the TV path to success and she's making her money, but it does seem like she leaves some lawsuits in her trail. And the Dog Foundation, you know, good for her, that's her passion project. She does a lot of good things for Anna animals, I think, but she you know, businesses first with her, so clearly she's made some decisions that don't make people happy, and good for them for standing up to her and fighting for what's right. And if she settled, it's from a pr perspective one of two reasons. Either she was in the wrong and she knew it, or she just didn't want more negative publicity out there and more lawsuits, so it was easier to sort of settle. But it's kind of funny because it's still in the press that she settled, so you know, and the reason you go to mediation over going to court is to publicly keep those facts private, which is going to be fascinating with all the lawsuits that are happening against the reality moguls and networks and things, because none of them want to go to court. Because discovery allows them to look at all the emails and all of the footage that's on the floor instead of on TV. They're allowed to dig in, I am, and they find things they don't want to that they don't want to be found, and so all discovery is fascinating, and I am sure that Lisa doesn't want all of her business dealings and emails, and let's say she had an angry exchange at one point and said you fing whatever. She doesn't want that out there, right, So I think that mediation is protecting her from having more exposed and more bad publicity. So most people will choose mediation overcourt in high profile situations because they don't want their dirty laundry continue to be aired because it can lead to more headlines and bigger things and illegal dealings, so they don't want to How does this lawsuit reflect larger issues with nonprofit organizations. It's interesting because nonprofits are held to a much stricter ethical code and IRS code. There's a reporting you have to show. I can't even tell you how many people I've repped over the years that use a nonprofit as a text shelter, so you know, they pay people through it. There's a lot of bad stuff that happens. But I you know, look, we need the nonprofits. They do a lot of great work. And there are a lot of nonprofits that do things above board and those are the ones you need to support. So yeah, that is it's a tricky slope there too. You can't raise a million dollars and give a five thousand dollars scholarship. That's all I'll say. How does it affect Lisa's image? Lisa's image is interesting. People either love her or hate her. People in the real world that know her don't necessarily think she's the nicest person in my opinion, and once again these are all my opinions, only my opinions. But on a business standpoint, she makes good money. She makes people or helps people make good money. She's doing show after show, business after business. People love a brit I happen to be married to one. People follow their knees when you hear their accent. It's so weird. People think she's different because she's had a British accent, and she conducts her way herself in a way that people are attracted to. And clearly she has a formula for success because she keeps being successful. So I don't I think all these lawsuits, it depends how many people pick up on the lawsuit, the fact that it was settled. But at the end of the day, again it was settled either because she was in the wrong or she didn't want things to go public. People's attention spans are small they will tend to hold on to the things that are continuously going. So it really depends on how much traction this story gets is as to how it will impact her image. I think from the entertainment industry, they don't care. People get sued all the time, so they're just like, yeah, it's just another lawsuit. They'll keep it moving because she's making the money. What does it show about celebrities putting their name on foundations and organizations. There's two ways. Sometimes people join an organization as a spokesperson, and sometimes they create their own nonprofits because they really do want to help. I have a client that did one for learning disabilities and it is amazing. I have clients that do sports scholarships for kids. I have teamed up all of my celebrities with various nonprofits to make appearances and donations. One of my clients supports Make a Wish and does a tremendous amount for Make a Wish. So celebrities really help draw attention to a nonprofit's cause and they do a lot of good for the nonprofits. I think where they have to be careful is if they tie their name to an organization that's questionable. It could hurt the celebrity tremendously. But you know, it all depends on how it's framed, because they if it's explained that they were just a part of it, and then they found out the nonprofit did bad, I don't think that scars them for life. It's sort of like a little check against them, and if they get several more it becomes a problem. But one bad decision or association shouldn't take them down. Actually, let's talk about that if we have a minute, because there are some other headlines out there that are not Man Apartment. So obviously you know you've got Diddy, You've got Justin Bieber. There's a lot that is that is out there in the headlines right now. And I think what's important in Ashton Kutcher they just went after too. I think it's all about how the celebrity handles the publicity. So if they lean in and they explain it, and they can give a very good statement or explanation, the fans are forgiving. Hollywood is Hollywood is make believe. It's all about this image and what we put out there, so it can easily be torn down and it can be easily forgiven, apologized for and rebuilt if it's handled correctly with the publicity. So all of these I'm not talking about Diddy in the situation. I'm talking about the you know, the damage, the collateral damage on the outside. If it's Justin, if it's if it's Ashton, they're going to have to clarify their their roles in the situation, and they're going to have to separate themselves from the situation. But the one thing I would caution fans because I look at Ashton situation and Justin, who's a new dad, and Justin clearly has gone through a lot of struggles, and he's a nice celebrity, and you don't hear bad things about Justin's behavior. I think the worst thing he did is he had a monkey or the worst thing he did he sped through Calabasas. He's a nice person and you know, people trying to tie him into things. I think that's his story to tell, whatever happened, and whatever he wants to tell when he wants to tell it. So I know that fans they're so curious, and they're curious for the right reasons. They aren't trying to take justice. They want to support him, they want to go after somebody else. But I do think if you don't buy the magazines or you don't click on the headlines, that's the message that tells the publication that you're not going to stand for that or you're not going to take it. And I think that we need to be selective with our clicks the same way that if you you know, if you're against a war, or you know some o their activation and you hold your pocketbook back, it makes a statement. It's the same thing with your clicks. Don't click on it if you think it's just making somebody money at somebody else's peril. So use your power wisely on those. But I do think that all of these are publicity stories and they are publicity driven for click, so be careful with that. Also, Dancing with the Stars, I think this one's quite funny that Anna Delvy. I do find that particularly questionable that they cast her. I have to say ABC Disney Channel that they chose to cast her when she was known for fraud and found guilty, and it's not about forgiveness and redemption. I'm all for those things for people, but it's particularly odd that that corporation of Disney chose to go after a convicted fraudulent person and put her on television, and you see her personality came through. When they asked her what she took away from Dancing with the Stars, she said nothing, whereas Tory Spelling said she had a life changing, wonderful experience, and it is I've had lots of celebs on Dancing with the Stars. It is a legitimate amount of physical work and bonding with people that you didn't know, and so I'm glad for Tori that she got such great experience out of it. And Anna, I think that's just kind of who she is. A leopard doesn't change spots, and I think that's it for headlines. Thank you so much for listening to Rachel Goes Grogue. Follow us on Instagram and TikTok for exclusive video content at Rachel gos Rogue Podcast