1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. We have updated the board style and hope you like it. If you don't, you can switch back by going to https://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/index.php?misc/style Select V Bulletin 3.0 style.

Olympic gold medallists Sale, Pelletier divorce

Discussion in 'Great Skate Debate' started by Sylvia, Jun 4, 2010.

  1. Perky Shae Lynn

    Perky Shae Lynn Well-Known Member

    They were acting like a couple off the ice while David was still married. You don't hold hands and have PDAs all over the place with someone you are only partners on the ice. It was the worst kept secret in Canadian skating. Just like their separation last year. :rolleyes:
  2. The Observer

    The Observer Active Member

    Yup. You've got it.
  3. Japanfan

    Japanfan Well-Known Member

    So reporters should have written a story with the headlines 'Married Skater Strays for Current Skating Partner' at that time. And another 'Married Skaters Strays' headline during the time of their separation, when Jamie apparently disrupted a hockey players' blissful marriage and family life, and David got intimate with a skater much his junior in years.

    I really hope our figure skating reporters have better things to do than that - more important skating news to report.

    People Weekly and Entertainment Weekly thrive on dishing up the dirt on celebrities. Jamie and David aren't such visible celebrities that those publications would follow their marriage and relational antics closely.

    People and Entertainment Weekly focus on all the titillating aspects of celebs' live. For example, problems between Angela Jolie and Brad Pitt have made headlines for weeks running. And the situation between Tom Cruise, Katie Holmes and their baby is another commonly investigated subject.

    However, Sale and Pelletier's actions/behavour are less news worthy. Maybe they will get a spot on Canada's 'Entertainmant Tonight' at some point, but probably not much more can be expected.
  4. screech

    screech Well-Known Member

    So do most international ones - that's where the jobs are. Heck, half of Hollywood is Australian these days.

    Speaking of gossip love, I'm Canadian and I, on a daily basis, check out Perez (annoying as he is), Just Jared, Dlisted and Lainey. I fully admit that I'm a gossip whore, though I skip over the celebs I don't care for and usually only pay attention to the super hot ones, or those involved in shows/movies that I enjoy. Basically, I'm a bored person and looking at the insane stuff amuses me.
    Andora and (deleted member) like this.
  5. overedge

    overedge Janny uber

    I think you're confusing reporters choosing what information to write about vs. reporters actively concealing information.

    Look at how much space or airtime figure skating routinely gets in Canadian sports news coverage (which is not much, especially compared to coverage of football, hockey, basketball, baseball, etc. etc.). Now imagine that you are a sports reporter covering Canadian nationals and you know the limited amount of space or airtime you have to tell your story. What are you going to use that space or airtime for? Reporting the results of the competition, or reporting "Jamie and David's PDA"?

    Sorry, but making that choice is not a coverup or a conspiracy.
  6. Perky Shae Lynn

    Perky Shae Lynn Well-Known Member

    You completely missed my point. Of course there was no "cover-up" or conspiracy. For goodness sake, S&P were never that important. I am simply saying the truth was rather neglected in order to create a STORY. It happens all the time.
  7. MacMadame

    MacMadame Cat Lady-in-Training

    I think it's more that when reporters did chose to write about Jamie and David and did chose to write about their relationship, that many (not all) also chose to gloss over the timing of it and how that impacted David's first wife. That's a bit different than saying "their relationship isn't important enough to talk about". They were clearly talking about it. That's more "this fact is inconvenient to the picture I'm trying to paint so I think I'll just leave it out."

    The same with Jamie and Craig's supposed affair. There were definitely stories at the time about the show and about their pairing. The reporters writing those stories could have mentioned that the winning couple had a romantic relationship off ice and that would have been very in keeping with the type of piece they were writing. But, for whatever reason, they chose not to mention that.

    I think it's interesting what the media does and doesn't report on, what they deem important for us to know, what they are willing to sacrifice to tell a particular story (which may or may not fit the facts). I think it's important to be an informed consumer of the news and understanding how they operate is part of that.
  8. hongligl

    hongligl New Member

    To be honest, I can't imagine how Sale and Craig could have an affair. They had zero chemistry on ice. I dare to bet that the relationship will not last long as there appears to be no profound affections. It would be more convincing if Shae-Lynn and Claud were the object of a story, they had such amazing chemistry. Shae-Lynn and Claud also showed much better skills, and IMO they should have won.
  9. Sabrine Tornston

    Sabrine Tornston Active Member

    I only noticed one person suggesting a cover-up. Everyone else is annoyed that the media manipulated us. They sure had time to write about Jamie & David's "perfect love story" - in fact, it was shoved down our collective throats before, during and after SLC. Surely, journalists had seen David's wife at competitions (when he was a nobody and she supported him); but the inconvinient timing of J&D's relationship was quickly forgotten. Because it didn't fit the story.
  10. overedge

    overedge Janny uber

    Sigh. I don't know how many different ways I can explain this, but the media - or at least the parts of it I was familiar with at the time - basically didn't care. At the time when (allegedly) Jamie and David got together, they were an up and coming pair team, and the media were excited about their future competitive possibilities. The romance part was at best a secondary part of the story.

    Then when Jamie and David became top-ranked skaters, the media had limited space to cover the actual events, and used that space to report on the results of the competitions, or other things that were going on. Like, say, that business at the SLC Olympics. Again, the romance part of it was a secondary consideration.

    Call that manipulation if you will, but I have yet to see or hear anything that convinces me that there was some collective effort to write the magical love story, and a collective effort to leave out information that contradicted that story. Other than the fact that Jamie and David were an off-ice couple, their previous entanglements or how they got together simply weren't of that much interest.
  11. Really

    Really I need a new title

    Well, maybe not here in Canada where we generally don't give a rip about our celebrities' private lives. But obviously some people figure there must have been some sort of collusion because their relationship wasn't splashed all over the place.

  12. kwanfan1818

    kwanfan1818 I <3 Kozuka

    If the writers saw them obviously together when he was obviously still married, and they had such limited space, they could have dropped the entire romance part altogether. A mention of "who are also an off-ice couple" is a lot different than the fairy story that drove interest. (I, on the other hand, almost stopped liking their skating, because the story was so gag-inducing.)
  13. Japanfan

    Japanfan Well-Known Member

    ITA. But I don't think that the media's not reporting the details of Jamie and David's personal lives is relevant to an analysis of the media's hidden agenda. They just aren't very important.

    Precisely. Most Canadians don't even remember who Sale and Pelletier are and have zero interest in their personal lives.

    And I would guess that Jamie and Craig were extremely discreet about showing signs that they were in a relationship during Battle of the Blades - especially considering that the announcement about the divorce was not made until some time after. It was not particularly relevant to the competition and suggestive behaviour doesn't = facts. One media source posted on this thread did mention the relationship some time after the competition was broadcast, but I gather that it was based on speculation. Hardly astute reporting.

    If Craig divorces his wife and officially becomes an item with Jamie, it might merit a mention in the news at some point. For example, if they attend a red carpet event Canadian ET might pick it up. But if Jamie and David continue commentating - which I doubt they will - the media is no more likely to give personal details about them than it does about other commentators.

    But again, it's really not important. Jamie is not Lindsay Lohan and Craig is not Tiger Woods.
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2010
  14. Pratfall

    Pratfall Active Member

    I'd be surprised if David ,at least, didn't score some commentating gigs in the future. He's generally well spoken ( better than Jamie ), and even if you don't always agree with him, he often makes some thoughtful observations.
  15. ildah

    ildah New Member

    Yes I think David will try to continue in commentating, as evidenced by his gig for NBC last autumn while Jamie was doing BOTB. He is intelligent and witty. I guess Jamie and david can kiss goodbye a future in commentating with CTV for future Olympics, Worlds. Being divorced with 2 households always leaves both parties poorer, no matter what your financial situation is, and I would have thought that media work brought in good money.

    As for Jamie and Craig being discreet because of the "separation" not being public at that time, don't you think that might have more to do with Craig being a married, well respected member of the community, with 3 growing kids at the time of BOTB???

    And anyway I don't think the divorce was in the bag until early 2010. I think they were back together, trying to mend the relationship in Sept-Dec. They were very much together, shopping at Roots, appearing in the Grey Cup parade together in November. A couple planning a divorce doesn't shop together and have their picture taken, cuddle on the couch at a BOTB party in October and then 6 months later in SOI not be able to barely stand the sight of each other.

    I just don't think either of them had a commitment to their marriage, I don't think they had any kind of long term doomed relationship or any more relationship issues than any of us. I think they got blindsided with a classic 'year after the birth of the first child' marital crisis (number one time for affairs for all marriages, even us ordinary mortals) and that domino-ed into personal life crises for both of them and power shifts in the marriage, all the usual stuff that if you try to weather and get through you come out the other side a lot stronger. They just seem to both take marriage lighly IMO. I think it was the usual get the ring, get the wedding, get the baby goal that lots of young people have now, especially young women, and then it's like 'hey you mean we might have really hard, not fun times and we have to work really hard every single day on our marriage????? So just like in highschool, let's break up.

    Both of them are going to have some eye opening. I think there will be lots and lots of chapters ahead for them and they won't find the new, easy smooth perfect relationships they probably both think they're going to find. Let's face it, when you both have someone new at the time of the breakup it smooths the waters temporarily. Now they both have baggage, David 2 marriages, Jamie an affair which has broken up a marriage. What an inauspicious start to a new life. I'm not impressed. Luckily for them, most people outside the skating world could care less and only hear of see of them randomly, so if they keep their mouths shut and their relationships private they might not come off looking sleezy. Right now I think the whole thing is sleezy in case you hadn't guessed :lol:
    maggylyn and (deleted member) like this.
  16. Latte

    Latte Well-Known Member

    What she said.

    Also, from what we heard from the Canadian posters during the Olympics, it seems that the Canadian media did not carry the many, many, annoying news confrences that Jamie and David had daily to complain about how they really won and how they were cheated. Maybe they were and maybe they weren't, that isn't the point. While they whined on US tv, we missed a lot of other sports they we wanted to see. I never forgave them for that. For completely taking over the US coverage. Why the US media let them do it I will never understand.
    When we complained here, the Canadian members made it plain that these news conferences were not shown in Canada. Talk about controling what the viewers see and only showing Jamie and David only in a good light!:eek:
  17. kwanfan1818

    kwanfan1818 I <3 Kozuka

    It must have been the drugs. Or the $$$. Or, perhaps, that any kind of fluff gets more US airtime than curling, bobsledding, skeleton, long-track speed-skating, cross-country skiing... and they were the Fluff du Jour.
  18. Winnipeg

    Winnipeg Well-Known Member

    I think it is media that decides what they will air and will not. If they aired a bunch of time for S and P interviews, it was their decision really not S and P's.
  19. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Agree - it was the media's choice to cover it (and make it into a circus), and in fact I think that S&P and B&S were responding to the interest more than they were actually pushing the story forward.

    I do agree that S&P's agent at the time (Craig something?) tried to leverage the opportunity as much as possible to get them exposure and sign endorsement deals etc, but I don't think he was capable of making it as big as it was, nor were S&P, without media *wanting* to make it a big deal. Skandal sells, and the media jumped all over the opportunity.
  20. kwanfan1818

    kwanfan1818 I <3 Kozuka

    How much of it was repeat coverage of the same press event?
  21. fan

    fan Well-Known Member

  22. WildRose

    WildRose Well-Known Member

    The only thing CTV broadcast was the Olympics. Everything else (Worlds, Canadian Nats, the Grand Prix events, 4 Continents) is on CBC, where Tracy Wilson & Kurt Browning have been doing all the commentary anyway.
  23. Japanfan

    Japanfan Well-Known Member

    The rich, beautiful and famous generally have more opportunities to cheat on a partner or meet a new partner than your average person. And they aren't held back by financial issues such as the cost of splitting up a household, starting two new households, and paying for child care arrangements/child support as single parents.

    Jamie, David and Craig may not be rich, beautiful and famous by Hollywood standards, but they are much closer to that world than most of us. And although marriage usually requires work, divorce rates tend to be higher for celebrities/the rich and famous than they are for the rest of us.

    Perhaps they take marriage more lightly than some in part because they can and because they are surrounded by temptation.
  24. rvi5

    rvi5 Active Member

    I am not certain I completely agree with the part about "meeting new partner" opportunities, depending on the context of your comment. Hollywood stars can never be certain if someone takes an interest in them because of love, money, or furthering their own careers. Because of swarming fans and paparazzi, they also tend to hide away at resorts, clubs, and restaurants which are too expensive for the average person. I would think their selection of potential partners would be limited to a small pool of other rich and successful people. Probably part of the reason why you always read about celebrities dating each other's exes. It may also be an explanation why the divorce rate and multiple marriages appear to be higher with celebrities. Many likely "settle" for what they can get, rather than waiting for a soul mate. Although, Hollywood stars do work closely with each other over periods of months, which present greater opportunities to become closely acquainted with the limited selection of potential partners.
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2010
  25. MacMadame

    MacMadame Cat Lady-in-Training

    I wonder if that's really true or just public perception.
  26. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    I'm with rvi5 in questioning this - famous people have more at risk when they cheat because it can affect their careers. And sure, they may have more people *wanting* to hook up with them, but as rvi5 said, it's harder to sift out who really is into you as opposed to your celebrity/money/connections.

    And in some cases, the financial risk is much greater - look at Tiger Woods and countless others who are sued/screwed by their lovers and then their spouses. They have a lot more to spend, but also a lot more to lose.

    We need Prancer for this part, as she always seems to have the stats on this topic. I agree with MacMadame that there might be a perceived higher rate because we hear about them more, and also because celebrities are often repeat offenders (ie multiple marriages and divorces).

    Agree with this, and also that celebrities - I'm thinking particularly of male politicians - seem to take on a god complex in that they believe the rules don't apply to them, and that they can get away with things the rest of us can't.

    Not sure how any of this applies to Jamie and David :lol: but wanted to comment on the general ideas.
  27. mag

    mag Well-Known Member

    I think the vast majority of divorced couples would be more than happy to have Tiger's "financial" risk. Dividing hundreds of millions of dollars still leaves you with hundreds of millions of dollars. Dividing $50,000 a year with a mortgage and no savings gives you $25,000 per year with two rents and a lot of debt.
  28. The Observer

    The Observer Active Member

    Tiger is the one being screwed? I don't think so. He was the one doing the screwing!
  29. RD

    RD Well-Known Member

    From another perspective, he was likely like that BEFORE he got married, likely before he even met his wife. Is it slightly plausible that she KNEW deep down he was like that, but decided to marry him anyway?? Just sayin'.
  30. zowie

    zowie New Member

    Maybe Tiger knew deep down he would be screwed if he cheated but decided to get married anyways knowing the risks.