Community Chat

[LilacTree]

Sandra got a bad rap on that. I didn't see it, but she just does not strike me as anyone who would even think that, let alone say it on national TV. She is sweet and naïve and I don't think was referencing Michelle's hair at all, nor Michelle herself, an extraordinarily beautiful woman. I think I heard that coincidentally (and it better had been) the camera shot on Michelle just as Sandra said the thing about the hair. I'll bet Michelle had no problem with it.

[Johnnyeager]

Whoever wrote that piece on Cosmo is a buffoon. They've never watched QVC or any shopping channel apparently (well, they do work for Cosmo) as they don't "understand the need for extraneous comments about hair when selling a handbag". What a passel of troublemakers.

[Irshgrl31201]

This is a classic case of people making something where there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!! Sandra was simply trying to sell a product and telling consumers even if your hair is a mess, you will still look pulled together when you carry a D&B. HOw is she in control of the camera man panning to the model? People need to get a life.

[terrier3]

On 1/30/2015 Smaug said:

I think the cameras are directed by the producer. I'm not positive though.

If QVC is the same as a newscast (which I am familiar with thru work)...the floor director chooses the various shots (both with live cameramen he/she directs and also with robotic cameras),

The producer is in the control room and has all the shots on the screen at the same time - and decides which one to use as the presentation moves along.

Sandra has no say in what shot is up at any time.

[Irshgrl31201]

On 1/30/2015 Preds said:

The one ""at fault"" should have been the camera person for their timing on going back to the models. No one meant that to hurt anyone. It was a simple comment in regards to all women. Sandra should not have to apologize for anything. She did nothing wrong. The people raising cane are the ones that are wrong. They owe her an apology!!!!!!!

I wish she wouldn't have apologized. By doing so it lets the ridiculous people think she has something to apologize for which she absolutely positively does not.

[foundinlv]

I watched the video and what I find odd is why she had to mention hair at all. Like others, I don't believe she's a mean person or racist but here's the dialogue.

Sandra: "You might look back and think why did I wear my hair like that; you'll like your bag still.

Sue: You won't look at your hair in this picture, you'll look at your handbag.

Sandra: Right.

[Marianne1]

On 1/30/2015 Ilikeshade said:

I watched the video and what I find odd is why she had to mention hair at all. Like others, I don't believe she's a mean person or racist but here's the dialogue.

Sandra: "You might look back and think why did I wear my hair like that; you'll like your bag still.

Sue: You won't look at your hair in this picture, you'll look at your handbag.

Sandra: Right.

first of all, that is a small portion of the entire conversation.

secondly, I would venture to guess that people of all colors, ethnicities, hair types, etc ALL have past pictures where they say "what was I thinking?" about their hairstyle, their clothing etc. What Sandra was saying, if you listen to the whole conversation in context, it that some things go out of style and some things are classics-and she was asserting that the handbag being sold was a classic and would not be regretted.

[Q-Anu]

On 1/30/2015 Irshgrl31201 said:

On 1/30/2015 Preds said:

The one ""at fault"" should have been the camera person for their timing on going back to the models. No one meant that to hurt anyone. It was a simple comment in regards to all women. Sandra should not have to apologize for anything. She did nothing wrong. The people raising cane are the ones that are wrong. They owe her an apology!!!!!!!

I wish she wouldn't have apologized. By doing so it lets the ridiculous people think she has something to apologize for which she absolutely positively does not.

Agreed - some are calling this some kind of 'victory' and congratulating each other on other websites and blogs. It only encourages further such behavior and worse. Many are demanding Sandra be fired and are threatening to promote a boycott of QVC.

[Peaches McPhee]

One thing that has me puzzled about this. Isn't there some sort of delay from the spoken word to what is shown on the screen. Like a second or two? If that is the case, she certainly did not know the model would be on the screen when the words came out of her mouth.

[LilacTree]

On 1/30/2015 Complicated said:

On 1/30/2015 Ilikeshade said:

I watched the video and what I find odd is why she had to mention hair at all. Like others, I don't believe she's a mean person or racist but here's the dialogue.

Sandra: "You might look back and think why did I wear my hair like that; you'll like your bag still.

Sue: You won't look at your hair in this picture, you'll look at your handbag.

Sandra: Right.

first of all, that is a small portion of the entire conversation.

secondly, I would venture to guess that people of all colors, ethnicities, hair types, etc ALL have past pictures where they say "what was I thinking?" about their hairstyle, their clothing etc. What Sandra was saying, if you listen to the whole conversation in context, it that some things go out of style and some things are classics-and she was asserting that the handbag being sold was a classic and would not be regretted.

Exactly what I think she meant. Exactly!!