Reply
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 5,045
Registered: ‎04-28-2015

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time

[ Edited ]

@Mmsfoxxie wrote:

Everything you said makes sense, @NYC Susan.  So she wasn't the one that hand picked him.  It makes perfect sense for Strahan to look out for his own best interest just as she would.  He's no angel, I'm sure but she is really acting out, just like a child.

 

Now that I hear that she did know before the public, I really see no reason for her to be so upset unless it is as you said....she's angry that he was promoted instead of her.  Sad.  Twenty million a year and still not satisfied.  Hopefully, her show is not in jeopardy.


I agree.  Kelly is acting very immature and I thought Michael carried her.  Alot of times, watching the show, Kelly would try to say something funny and the audience barely laughed.  You could see in her face, she was annoyed and/or embarrassed that they didn't laugh.   Then Michael would jump in and say something and the audience would bust out laughing....you could tell she didn't like that!

 

Yep, I think Kelly should worry about her own self on the show.  I would not be surprised at all if GMA extends their program and run from 7-10 am...kicking Live and Kelly to the curb....watching and waiting!

Respected Contributor
Posts: 4,065
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time


@NYC Susan wrote:

I work for a major network in NYC (not saying which one), and I can probably clear up a few misconceptions.  I don't claim to know everything about this situation, but I do know the following:

 

First, Kelly WAS informed ahead of time.  She may have felt blindsided, but the fact is that she was officially informed before the news hit the media.  I'm sure she would have liked to have been in the loop sooner, but she certainly should be aware that it rarely works that way in television.  No matter how friendly they appear on camera, she & Michael are co-workers, not close friends, and he would be foolish not to protect his own interests.

 

Second, it was probably not his call as to whether he would tell Kelly, or when.  He is not to blame here.  All he did was accept another, better job and then give notice to his current job.  Like many of us have done.  He likely just opted not to share the details of behind-closed-door meetings with anyone on his current show, and he also wanted to follow the advice of his attorney, honor his contract, etc.  Which is advisable.  There's nothing at all wrong with that.  

 

Third, Kelly's gripe seems to be not so much that she wasn't informed, but that she feels she's a bigger star than he is, and that she's the one who should be sought after, not him.  

 

Television is a tough business.  It's highly competitive, and everyone - most especially on-air talent - wants to get ahead.  There's a lot of moving around and a lot of moving down and a lot of moving up.  Far better to cry and complain to friends privately rather than act as though someone else's career on the rise is hugely offensive or undeserved.  It's not smart to sulk publicly.  I know that Kelly has a huge ego (I've seen it myself and heard about it for years), but I'm surprised that with all her experience, she can't at least pretend to be happy for him publicly.  If the shoe had been on the other foot, she would have jumped at the chance and probably done things exactly the same way that he did.  This good news for him is not about her, but she's managing to make it that way.  That's not only unkind, but highly unprofessional.

 

Someone here asked if Kelly is the one who chose Michael to be her co-host.  No, she didn't.  She had a say in it, but the decision was not hers.  A lot goes into a decision like that. They run numbers up, down, and sideways to see who the audience likes, and that carries a lot of weight.  Her rapport with the potential co-hosts was a big factor, of course, but the final decision absolutely was not hers.  It's a much more detailed process than that.

 

 


Hi Susan, I heard on my morning radio show out of Boston, that GMA courted Kelly a few years ago, but that Kelly was very loyal to Live and chose to stay with them, so if that's true, I don't see why she'd get her nose out of joint at Michael's new opportunity.  Also, they said that Kelly learned that Regis was leaving only 15 minutes before they went on the air that day.

 

People seem to want to throw Kelly under the bus, but IMO, it doesn't seem like they've treated her fairly, as she seems to be the last to find out about everything.  Losing a co-host is a major change, not only for the show, but for the host that is left behind.  I'm not going to jump on the bash Kelly bandwagon quite yet; I'm sure more information will come out soon. :-)

"Summer afternoon-summer afternoon; to me those have always been the two most beautiful words in the English language." ~Henry James
Honored Contributor
Posts: 39,574
Registered: ‎08-23-2010

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time

@NYC Susan

 

While I'm sure there were others who were part of the decision making process for Michael, I don't doubt that Kelly had "veto power".  If she really couldn't stand him, they wouldn't have forced him on her.

 

Everyone in front of the camera has an ego ....  this is no surprise.   Kelly would be odd if she didn't have one!

 

If I were Kelly, one thing that would really annoy me is the whole process of auditioning new co-hosts.    I used to recruit and interview candidates and, even under the best of circumstances,  it is a real PITA!

 

All I can say is I hope that they find a new co-host that makes the show's ratings skyrocket and people end up asking ... Michael who?

Trusted Contributor
Posts: 1,536
Registered: ‎05-27-2014

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time

Well of course we know none of the inner workings but Disney/ABC has handled this horrifically. Even The Reege has spoken out on it. MS is free to work wherever he wishes. He may have been advised not to mention his good fortune to KR. Whatever the case she seems to be in a snit over it. Whether its because she was left in the dark or sour grapes remains to be seen.

 

dee

Respected Contributor
Posts: 3,120
Registered: ‎04-17-2015

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time


@Mmsfoxxie wrote:

Everything you said makes sense, @NYC Susan.  So she wasn't the one that hand picked him.  It makes perfect sense for Strahan to look out for his own best interest just as she would.  He's no angel, I'm sure but she is really acting out, just like a child.

 

Now that I hear that she did know before the public, I really see no reason for her to be so upset unless it is as you said....she's angry that he was promoted instead of her.  Sad.  Twenty million a year and still not satisfied.  Hopefully, her show is not in jeopardy.


Hopefully, the network will find two new hosts.  

 

Her behavior in this situation, whether she was wronged or not, is exactly why I dislike her and stopped watching.  Her self-centeredness and immaturity always shine through. 

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,889
Registered: ‎03-13-2010

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time


@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

@NYC Susan

 

While I'm sure there were others who were part of the decision making process for Michael, I don't doubt that Kelly had "veto power".  If she really couldn't stand him, they wouldn't have forced him on her.

 

Everyone in front of the camera has an ego ....  this is no surprise.   Kelly would be odd if she didn't have one!

 

If I were Kelly, one thing that would really annoy me is the whole process of auditioning new co-hosts.    I used to recruit and interview candidates and, even under the best of circumstances,  it is a real PITA!

 

All I can say is I hope that they find a new co-host that makes the show's ratings skyrocket and people end up asking ... Michael who?


 

I don't know if she had the right to veto, and neither do you.  They absolutely, 100% did not just choose who she wanted.  There is quite a lot involved in a decision like that - They never ever would give her so much power.  I do know that Michael was not her first choice.  She wanted someone else.  Either way, though, it doesn't mean that he now has to be indebted to her forever.  He has every right to pursue his own career.

 

Yes, of course everyone has an ego.  Kelly's, however, stands out, even in an industry where egos fly high all the time.  She's not the worst I've ever known or worked with, but she's up there.  She's not happy unless it's all about her.  I know some very successful, very famous celebrities who are extremely generous in letting others shine.  Kelly is not good at that.

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,889
Registered: ‎03-13-2010

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time


@Topaz Gem wrote:

@NYC Susan wrote:

I work for a major network in NYC (not saying which one), and I can probably clear up a few misconceptions.  I don't claim to know everything about this situation, but I do know the following:

 

First, Kelly WAS informed ahead of time.  She may have felt blindsided, but the fact is that she was officially informed before the news hit the media.  I'm sure she would have liked to have been in the loop sooner, but she certainly should be aware that it rarely works that way in television.  No matter how friendly they appear on camera, she & Michael are co-workers, not close friends, and he would be foolish not to protect his own interests.

 

Second, it was probably not his call as to whether he would tell Kelly, or when.  He is not to blame here.  All he did was accept another, better job and then give notice to his current job.  Like many of us have done.  He likely just opted not to share the details of behind-closed-door meetings with anyone on his current show, and he also wanted to follow the advice of his attorney, honor his contract, etc.  Which is advisable.  There's nothing at all wrong with that.  

 

Third, Kelly's gripe seems to be not so much that she wasn't informed, but that she feels she's a bigger star than he is, and that she's the one who should be sought after, not him.  

 

Television is a tough business.  It's highly competitive, and everyone - most especially on-air talent - wants to get ahead.  There's a lot of moving around and a lot of moving down and a lot of moving up.  Far better to cry and complain to friends privately rather than act as though someone else's career on the rise is hugely offensive or undeserved.  It's not smart to sulk publicly.  I know that Kelly has a huge ego (I've seen it myself and heard about it for years), but I'm surprised that with all her experience, she can't at least pretend to be happy for him publicly.  If the shoe had been on the other foot, she would have jumped at the chance and probably done things exactly the same way that he did.  This good news for him is not about her, but she's managing to make it that way.  That's not only unkind, but highly unprofessional.

 

Someone here asked if Kelly is the one who chose Michael to be her co-host.  No, she didn't.  She had a say in it, but the decision was not hers.  A lot goes into a decision like that. They run numbers up, down, and sideways to see who the audience likes, and that carries a lot of weight.  Her rapport with the potential co-hosts was a big factor, of course, but the final decision absolutely was not hers.  It's a much more detailed process than that.

 

 


Hi Susan, I heard on my morning radio show out of Boston, that GMA courted Kelly a few years ago, but that Kelly was very loyal to Live and chose to stay with them, so if that's true, I don't see why she'd get her nose out of joint at Michael's new opportunity.  Also, they said that Kelly learned that Regis was leaving only 15 minutes before they went on the air that day.

 

People seem to want to throw Kelly under the bus, but IMO, it doesn't seem like they've treated her fairly, as she seems to be the last to find out about everything.  Losing a co-host is a major change, not only for the show, but for the host that is left behind.  I'm not going to jump on the bash Kelly bandwagon quite yet; I'm sure more information will come out soon. :-)


 

Just because you heard it on the radio doesn't mean it's true.  People come to me all the time with things they've heard and read, and most of the time they're completely false.  I do know that Kelly has been trying to leave Live for a long time.   She has threatened to leave over and over again.  I do think, though, that even if she wanted to stay she still would be bothered by Michael getting a great gig.  Because that's her personality.  She likes to be top dog.  Not only likes it, but thrives on it.  In any case, no one who works on that show would doubt for a minute that she would leave in a flash if something better came along.  And I wouldn't blame her for that at all  if she did.  Everyone wants to get ahead, and everyone is entitled to pursue a better/more interesting opportunity.  Kelly, Michael, you, me, everyone.

 

I'm not trying to throw Kelly under the bus.  I just thought that I would share what I know because there was so much incorrect info and confusion here.  I honestly was trying to be helpful.  You can believe me or not believe me - That's totally your choice.

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,889
Registered: ‎03-13-2010

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time


@ladyroxanne wrote:

@NYC Susan

 

thank you for clearing up a lot of misconceptions!


 

@ladyroxanne, You're welcome!  And thank you for understanding that my motive was simply to be helpful!  :-)

Frequent Contributor
Posts: 130
Registered: ‎03-15-2010

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time


@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

@NYC Susan

 

While I'm sure there were others who were part of the decision making process for Michael, I don't doubt that Kelly had "veto power".  If she really couldn't stand him, they wouldn't have forced him on her.

 

Everyone in front of the camera has an ego ....  this is no surprise.   Kelly would be odd if she didn't have one!

 

If I were Kelly, one thing that would really annoy me is the whole process of auditioning new co-hosts.    I used to recruit and interview candidates and, even under the best of circumstances,  it is a real PITA!

 

All I can say is I hope that they find a new co-host that makes the show's ratings skyrocket and people end up asking ... Michael who?


 

 

Well it's not like she has to sit behind a desk and interview people all day long.  The higher ups will look for a replacement.  All she has to do is sit and chat with whomever is sitting in the co-host's chair and the one she has the best rapport with will likely get the job.  I don't think that's asking too much of someone who makes twenty million a year.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 17,655
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

Re: Michael Strahan to leave LIVE and move to GMA full time

Thank you @NYC Susan

She is making it all about her instead of being happy for her co worker.

☼The best place to seek God is in a garden. You can dig for him there. GBShaw☼