Caroline Flack - 1980-2020

Love Island seriously needs to be cancelled...it now has a bodycount of 3.

Jeremy Kyle was taken off the air when a 'guest' took their own life.

This sad news was always going to be the result of the amount of abuse she was getting.

 

Yes, three deaths of people linked to the show now.

Its everything that’s wrong with society, most of them are plucked from Instagram because they have an above normal amount of followers, then as soon as they’re on the show they’re all ‘blue ticked and have their accounts taken over. None of them are every day people.

For young people it makes everything about the superficial, and actually promotes being an ‘influencer as a genuine career/way of life.

Not to mention the show itself, I’m slightly torn on this because all the contestants get something out of it afterwards and obviously go on the show based on their own free will. But the concept of making people match up with each other, then deliberately putting them into situations to make them go of with somebody else is just evil. That’s what the entertainment aspect of the show is based on, seeing people ****ed over and their feelings trampled on.

 

It’s on every tabloid newspaper website.

 

Absolutely terrible news.

Not sure it's much to do with Love Island in reality, though.

 

I've no idea who this woman is, but it from what I just read I can't see how this ties back to her former show in any way.

Per the Beeb story, she committed domestic abuse, got fired, had an impending court date and sadly chose to kill herself. Given that the catalyst appears to be the domestic abuse, I'm not sure exactly how that's the show's fault. They did the appropriate thing in replacing her.

Perhaps I'm missing something.

 

Do you know how much money Love Island makes for ITV?

A contestant could kill another contestant and it'd stay on air.

 

I think this is probably correct, other than because it was a very high profile show and so interest in her and therefore pressure on her was much higher.

Very sad.

 

Shows the horrors of social media and evils of the keyboard warriors, trolls and the media

 

Yes, the Sun have taken down/deleted an unflattering article they featured about her from last week

 

Seems The Scum have taken down all their social media posts & articles about her from their website and have published their condolences. They promote a 'You're Not Alone' mental health campaign whilst at the same time hounding their chosen victims and claiming it's all in the public interest.

Hypocritical ****s.

 

Why the **** would anyone want to famous? I can’t think of anything worse in the age of social media and utter scumbag news sources.

 

Making millions of pounds sitting on your sofa and tweeting about brands, I guess.

But yes, I’d absolutely hate to be famous.

 

Money is not the route to happiness. Not even being a genius is a guarantee of happiness, hell look at one of my favourite singers Jeff Buckley. Had money, fame and every man and woman on the planet seemingly at his feet and he still went for a swim with his shoes on. Makes me wonder why these talentless, vacuous feckwits queue up to appear on Love Island to be shot down and forgotten about within 18 months... Obviously that doesn’t apply to Caroline Flack, something equally sinister caused her sad demise.

 

Yes and no. I've been following her TV career for a while due to my age. She presented some CBBC programmes when I was a teen, followed by the reboot of Gladiators, Xtra Factor (that behind the scenes programme for X Factor) and then Love Island (yes I watch some trash, it helps me destress as I literally don't have to think about it).

The media presence started to turn negative for her when she dated Harry Styles, who was in that boy band One Direction (he was 17, she was 31)- this led to all the teenage girls giving her grief along with the tabloids due to the age difference. This criticism followed her onto Xtra Factor and then ramped up with Love Island, something I always thought was really weird given that TV producers clearly thought she was capable enough to host popular TV programmes.

We all then know about her domestic abuse affair, something for which she is technically innocent until proven guilty (though it seems very likely she was guilty). The negative criticism she faced throughout her TV presenting career, fuelled and propagated by the tabloids, unfortunately took its toll on her. She's not the first, nor will she be the last- but as long as it sells those toilet-paper rags then so be it. Love Island will go now, there's no way it can continue after 3 people connected to it have committed suicide and others have entered rehab/sought professional psychotherapy. Unfortunately this is all a part of the growing social media and tabloid culture that won't die soon.

 

TMI with Sam and Mark? (Pointing at the Sky emoji x3 and a hands clasped in prayer emoji)

 

Liked for the written out emojis.

Yeah TMI and Escape from Scorpion Island (remember her more from that, loved that programme)

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

 

Anyone connected with that program has issues. It makes me cringe to see girls barely 20 years old feel the need to have their teeth replaced with veneers. State of it.

 

A show for people with mental health problems in shock at those people showing symptoms of mental health problems. You have to be a bit wrong to even watch it.

 

I think Arakel's point (and mine earlier) was that she was a TV presenter, not a previously unknown competitor that had struggled with the fame thrust onto her by Love Island or other reality program. She was a professional of many years standing.

Many otherwise decent personalities end up taking drugs and/or drink too much and constantly walk a narrow line where their resultant behaviour either becomes public knowledge or stays private. Her knowledge that her behaviour was going to become totally public at this court case with every transgression becoming dissected, must have weighed heavily, with the nastiness of social media would relentlessly follow and it would probably end her career. The CPS apparently believe that is in the public interest, and maybe it is, I don't know.

But, in a sense, these days it doesn't really matter.

I've had many discussions on this forum where I have criticised the belief that, because someone is a public figure, their private lives (and none of us live a 100% perfect and boring private life) automatically become a target for public scrutiny and ridicule. If a public figure has an argument in their own house (with no offences being committed), that can be heard outside the house, then apparently it is now "public" and free game for being recorded through the walls, being filmed through a window from the street and then passed (maybe for payment) to the press media, and quite legitimately can become a victim of a relentless onslaught on social media.

It is a nasty, intolerant and unforgiving world we live in.

 

Not remotely surprising to see Piers Morgan manning the barricades on social media on behalf of the press last night. He says the CPS is to blame for not dropping the charges like Flack wanted them to and the media shouldn't be blamed. Meanwhile the Sun keeps whitewashing in the background, deleting all the nasty articles about her.

 

Could somebody explain the law to me regarding the CPS prosecuting. Clearly she attacked her boyfriend with a lamp in some sort of jealous frenzy, however it did happen in private behind closed doors. Surely the only real evidence is the testimony of her boyfriend. He obviously called the police initially, she was then subsequently banned from seeing him. The odd thing to me was that he then continued to express his love for her on social media etc, he even put an Instagram post up on Valentine’s saying he loved her.

The bit I don’t get is that surely if he decided to drop the charges or change the story surely there is no evidence and no grounds to prosecute? Certainly there surely couldn’t be any grounds to stop her seeing her own boyfriend who continues to support her at least publicly?

I have no idea if this is how the law actually works, but presumably if he was supporting her publicly but privately was insisting on continuing with the prosecution this would have been a very difficult situation for her to deal with when you then pile on all the media interest.

 

It wasn't just the Sun, it was newspapers in general, including the Mirror who headlined "Dead eyed Flack presents herself as a victim in a sobbing court appearance". But the Sun article that was widely reported to have been deleted last night, was about an illustrator, Samuel Hague,who mocked Flack on a Valentines Day card.

 

And this is where the media, specifically rags like the sun take things too far. Sure, they are entitled to report on the actual story, that is news after all. But running a story about a card that is effectively taking the piss out of her isn’t news, news worthy or in the public interest.

 

Agree, even though the Sun was mildly critical of Samuel Hague, they shouldn't give him the publicity. But I note that the BBC also reported on the same Samuel Hague's cards a few times over the past year.

And the Guardian (today) reported on the offending card, quoted the offending words, and even provided a handy link to the Sun article that the Sun had removed. Clearly they think it is newsworthy enough to have a dig at one of their rivals, despite the effect this would have on Caroline Flack's family on the day after she died.

Disgraceful.

 

I like how people in the media circus are pointing the finger of blame at the CPS to deflect from their own role in this senseless tragedy. She has had mental health issues for a while it seems and long before she got involved with Morons Rutting On An Island. Hopefully people will stop reading the utter trash that is the gutter press and all this celebrity ********. #BeKind.

 

I had no idea who this lady was but nisman94 reminds me that I vaguely recollect the Harry Styles affair.
What a waste of a life but I agree with Smudger as to the nature of our society that promotes celebrity over knowledge and learning a craft.

 

Regardless of their politics, most newspapers report on this sort of thing. The fact that some may have an "Art Section" doesn't matter a toss, when someone googles Caroline Flack, and is greeted with online articles by any newspaper, just after she has died, that quotes and links to quite nasty celebrity shaming.

 

The Scum and its ilk know exactly what they're doing. They claim what they print or put online is in the public interest but they create that interest in the first place by appealing to the lowest common denominator. They sell salacious gossip and unsubstantiated opinion as 'news' to people unwilling or unable to discern what is in their interest to know. They know their target audience and how to exploit them perfectly well. They create the bear pit, throw in their chosen victims and stirring up their readership into following their example - vicious commentary that emboldens the trolls. They step back to allow their victims to be torn into pieces with a hands-up 'Who, me? Wasn't me, guv' response when challenged.

It's not just The Scum, they all have their favourite victims; The Daily Heil and their not-so-subtle racism for example. That they're all run by white male multi-millionaires with political power and influence only exacerbates the problem. They know they can print and tweet what they want about who they want because they have their masters in their pockets. Every now and then they'll promote a worthy campaign to fool their readers into thinking 'They can't be that bad, they do good stuff for charity'.

It's not enough to say 'let's just be nice to each other' after every Caroline Flack-type suicide or nervous breakdown by some non-entity brainwashed into craving fame by Love Island-type trash 'entertainment'. The whole country needs to follow Liverpool's example of boycotting The Scum after Hillsborough. I know it'll never happen and some might criticise me advocating the hindering of freedom of speech. But freedom of speech comes with the responsibility of not abusing that privilege and the gutter press / online media overstep that line time and time again. Despicable.

 

I know it likely wasn’t intended but comments like this are an example - labelling people who go on a show unanimously with ‘mental health problems’ and claim anyone who watches it must have issues.
I cant say I’ve seen it myself but I know more than enough people who do, who are fine people.

Not really sure anyone needs to look far beyond social media for this one.
Someone makes a mistake in life and literally ANYONE has a platform to directly air their views on it, and can hide behind a picture and name that is largely and easily untraceable to them.

99% of us read it and use it - but would the world be a lesser place if we just removed Twitter and the like? I’m sure we’d adapt. And it would starve a lot of these disgraceful tabloid rags of vital income and hopefully see some closed down or better yet, actually reflect on their own journalism.

Printing stories of total invention and giving themselves justification by using the words ‘a source said...’ - days and pages of bile spewed at people and then a 2 inch retraction weeks later when the damage is done. These rags will give their eulogies - and then pile onto the next celebrity by the end of the week, if not far sooner.

Everyone will get their 15 minutes of fame - I’d rather f*cking not thanks.

 

I agree with every word - apart from labelling anyone as a non-entity. If going on a TV show like that is what gives someone true value and happiness, then no one should be able to tell them otherwise. Of course we can all see the pitfalls and it would be good to see such shows pulled from air - but we should be careful labelling the people who watch those shows or take part.

 

I think the idea is that in a lot of domestic cases, the victim will say that want to drop charges either under pressure from the perpetrator, they are scared, don't want the fuss or because they don't want their partner to get in trouble.

The crime has still been committed and sometimes someone has to step in to help that person.