Posted April 13, 200817 yr Women in their reproductive years have a legal licence to exploit their employers and fellow workers Brass neck is the phrase that comes to mind on contemplating the newsreader Natasha Kaplinsky. She is the woman who accepted £1m a year for a new job as “the face of Five News” and who, only six weeks into her contract, announced that she was 12 weeks pregnant. If I were running Five I would be beside myself with rage. Undisclosed sources say her bosses are indeed dismayed that she will be out of action so soon after starting on this hugely paid and hugely publicised role. Apparently she is taking maternity leave in September, for “a few months”, although of course she will have the option of extending her leave and may never return. Meanwhile, instead of the ferociously sexy on-the-ball babe that Five hired, Kaplinsky will be becoming larger and mumsier, she may have a nauseous or difficult pregnancy requiring lots of time off, and at some point her brain will be affected by the amnesia of pregnancy. This is a phenomenon that is now widely admitted, even by feminists (although it is equally often denied when inconvenient); there is even a nasty new fashionable word for a woman in this state - preghead. Luckily there is, of course, Autocue at Five News. And an expensive stand-in will have to be found. See whole article here : http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/c...icle3689919.ece
April 13, 200817 yr well tbh its their fault for paying that clown so much. its totally ott, who but the saddest of pervs would watch the news just to see her overly exagerated features in your face?... is the news more important? is it better? is she that much clearer?... bugger it is! however she has duped her bosses by not disclosing that shes preggers, surely this is wrong.
April 14, 200817 yr It's a bit naughty of Natasha. Hopefully, she'll lose her job and some one else will take over.
April 15, 200817 yr well tbh its their fault for paying that clown so much. its totally ott, who but the saddest of pervs would watch the news just to see her overly exagerated features in your face?... is the news more important? is it better? is she that much clearer?... bugger it is! however she has duped her bosses by not disclosing that shes preggers, surely this is wrong. Well, somehow I doubt she had to fill in an application form or attend a Panel Interview mate..... :lol: :lol: Good on her for taking Channel 5 to the cleaners... :lol: :lol: I really couldn't care less to be honest, they clearly hired her on the most facile grounds (obvious by the way that they advertised the fact) - the fact that they wanted some young "babe" to present their news progs, not necessarily someone with the relative authority or news-savvy of a Carol Barnes or Kirsty Wark. Bugger C5, they've been hoisted by their own shallow-minded, smut-obsessed petard, and frankly they dont get any of the public's money anyway, so who cares....? :lol: :lol:
Create an account or sign in to comment