topic Re: Jane treacy in Q Talk

Jane treacy

peggy9cats — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 04:48:31 GMT

Jane must have some special connections, I read where her daughter Cara was selected for Disney Dreamers 2014, to my knowledge this is specifically designed for disadvantaged youth to help them with their career aspirations- sponsored by Essence Magazine and Steve Harvey. I would hardly call Jane and her family disadvantaged! Just surprised.

Re: Jane treacy

qvc15049 — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 06:43:57 GMT

Peggy,

That is a pretty harsh allegation.

I need :

Some proof beyond your simple damming words

Some further understanding of this award from an official site

It's not that I don't believe you, but in the internet world, it is far too easy to repeat hurtful rumors -- that may or may not be true -- that leave permanent damage, that never disappears.

You are accountable for your post.

If you were accused of this, you would hope that someone challenge your allegation.

If you have done your homework and your implications are true, it is something to consider.

Re: Jane treacy

Kweenme — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 14:05:12 GMT

Peggy,

I went to the website as well - and income was not mentioned ... because I am no expert on the topic, I won't expound too much except to say that qvc15049 was spot on. You would not want me or others to infer anything about you or your circumstances from this post. "I would hardly call that" fair.

June1

Re: Jane treacy

brandiwine — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 17:14:45 GMT

I went to their site as well. OP, the only part of your post I found to be true is that Jane's daughter was chosen. As is stated above, you are accountable for your post. It just sounds very mean and judgmental. I hope that's not what you intended.

Re: Jane treacy

blackhole99 — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 17:36:20 GMT

People don't be naive, I'm sure Jane's daughter is very talented and all things being equal, it doesn't hurt to have a relative in the business of promoting Disney products.

Re: Jane treacy

beckyb1012 — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 18:51:34 GMT

Went and read the attributes needed for applying and sounds like you should be intelligent, ambitious and hard working. If you have a relative/friend in the loop to give a hand up no shame in that. We all need to use our connections whenever we can.

Did not see anything for poor or disadvantage teenagers need only apply.

Re: Jane treacy

suzyQ3 — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 19:12:26 GMT

On 3/7/2014 beckyb1012 said:
Went and read the attributes needed for applying and sounds like you should be intelligent, ambitious and hard working. If you have a relative/friend in the loop to give a hand up no shame in that. We all need to use our connections whenever we can.

Did not see anything for poor or disadvantage teenagers need only apply.

I agree with you and others as to not seeing anything about the contest having any specific requirement other than living in the U.S. being within a certain age bracket and school grade bracket.

I disagree with you that any of these young people should be shown favoritism, and I have no clue whatsoever that that is what occurred. In fact, I think that any judge who DID vote based on some connection to a family would be going completely against the whole concept of this program:

In 2008, Walt Disney World created Disney Dreamers Academy in partnership with Steve Harvey and ESSENCE Magazine to encourage Dreamers along their paths to success, to provide them with tools to let their potential shine, and to convey that the power of dreaming is the first step to achieving their goals.

Re: Jane treacy

peggy9cats — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 20:28:02 GMT

Re: Jane treacy

suzyQ3 — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 00:28:16 GMT

On 3/7/2014 peggy9cats said:
In regards to my post, I was being sarcastic when I said jane had "connections", of course I realize these programs are monitored very closely and that does not happen- poor choice of words on my part. I do know someone who's son applied to this last year, a wonderful candidate from difficult circumstances that overcame so much, he was not selected as only 100 out of 5000 are chosen. No it does not specifically say the candidate needs to be monetarily disadvantaged, but it does imply overcoming difficult obstacles. In retrospect, I am sure Jane Ts daughter was well deserving of this award as are all the selected participants.

In retrospect, I think that you're correct. I also got that impression from looking at the site. But since that implication didn't find its way into the requirements, it would just be up to the judges, then, to make the determination that a young person had overcome difficult obstacles.

Re: Jane treacy

Daysdee — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 01:37:29 GMT

Could have been stated without reference to ""connections.""

Re: Jane treacy

MrsLorraine — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 22:36:03 GMT

Why not? People who deliberately live their lives in public are fair game--they know what they're getting into (and if they don't, the should) and they know how Americans will tolerate almost anything but hypocrisy.

Re: Jane treacy

Sabear — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:03:49 GMT

I have a somewhat different take on situations like this. Often, it IS who you know that determines whether you get something. Connections are so important these days that merit alone is often not enough. It's not fair but it is what it is. I'm not saying Janes daughter was not worthy but I guarantee you Jane's connections helped put her in the top 100.

Re: Jane treacy

MrsLorraine — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:24:33 GMT

Sabear, very well said.

Re: Jane treacy

mosky — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 20:14:41 GMT

Frankly,I have no interest in Janes' daughter,or for that matter,no interest in what her family does.These are things you share with other family members and friends.To me Jane is a salesperson,and should keep her attention to presenting products,in an informative way,without all the nonsense that occurs.I resent it when I am trying to get information on a product and the time is running out and she is telling one of her family stories.If anyone is reading this connected with Q.V.C. I'm sure I am not lone,in feeling this way!!!

Re: Jane treacy

Kweenme — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:25:24 GMT

On 3/8/2014 MrsLorraine said:
Why not? People who deliberately live their lives in public are fair game--they know what they're getting into (and if they don't, the should) and they know how Americans will tolerate almost anything but hypocrisy.

Just because we CAN, should we? "Before you speak, think -Is it necessary? Is it true? Is it kind? Will it hurt anyone? Will it improve on the silence?”

Re: Jane treacy

MrsLorraine — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:40:47 GMT

Either you didn't understand my meaning or you're deliberately trying to twist my words. Try again to read and comprehend what I said. And you should understand that on the internet, people will say what they think, whether it's polite or not. Being the object of criticism can hurt but that's how life in the public sphere IS; and if it bothers you a lot, you may want to re-think your career goals.

Jane comes in for a lot of criticism on these boards and it doesn't seem to bother her a bit; she just yammers on and cashes her paycheck.

Re: Jane treacy

KathyPet — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:34:33 GMT

Perhaps the judge's watch QVC and considered having Jane as your mother met the requirement for ""overcoming difficult circumstances"". I am surprised to hear that her daughter had any difficulties to overcome. To hear jane you would think her family was perfect in every way!

Re: Jane treacy

Pickwickpapers — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 04:20:28 GMT

Since when is it nice or civil to cast doubt on someone's child? This entire thread should be deleted as mean spirited. I am sorry that I ever began on this forum.

Re: Jane treacy

Kweenme — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:30:39 GMT

On 3/10/2014 MOM of Sophie said: Since when is it nice or civil to cast doubt on someone's child? This entire thread should be deleted as mean spirited. I am sorry that I ever began on this forum.

MOM of Sophie - nice post, for sure. Seeing a child and/or their activities disparaged in such a way would cut a parent to the quick. Jane's daughter is obviously talented, works hard and is making her way to adulthood the best way she knows how. Jane is obviously proud ... and whethr anyone agrees with her approach to sales or not ... deliberately lashing out at her daughter is not fair game. One more thing and then I'm done ... I still do not understand OP justifying this post because of "sarcasm."

Re: Jane treacy

Daysdee — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:36:59 GMT

On 3/11/2014 june1 said:
On 3/10/2014 MOM of Sophie said: Since when is it nice or civil to cast doubt on someone's child? This entire thread should be deleted as mean spirited. I am sorry that I ever began on this forum.

MOM of Sophie - nice post, for sure. Seeing a child and/or their activities disparaged in such a way would cut a parent to the quick. Jane's daughter is obviously talented, works hard and is making her way to adulthood the best way she knows how. Jane is obviously proud ... and whethr anyone agrees with her approach to sales or not ... deliberately lashing out at her daughter is not fair game. One more thing and then I'm done ... I still do not understand OP justifying this post because of "sarcasm."

I also think this thread should be removed. It is about Jane's daughter not directly about Jane. That is a different thing. I think the hosts are "fair game" since they choose to be in the public eye. Their children should not be part of comments here.