Not a huge “Reader Email” bag today, which might be a good thing. There were quite a few Garrett related emails, some of which I answered back personally, but my thoughts are I’m pretty much done talking about it. I gave my thoughts yesterday on the situation, he apologized, there isn’t really much else we can do at this point, so debating whether he’s allowed to like anything he wants or who cares what political side he’s on – yeah, I’m over it. I’m still trying to wrap my head around that’s what some people have minimized this story into, when that’s never what it’s been about. But it is what it is at this point. Hence the reason there’s really no point in continuing to dissect the story. If he didn’t apologize, then sure. It would’ve continued. But he addressed it, I think he meant it, but only his actions from this point forward will solidify if the apology was sincere. I’ve had people come to his defense, and I’ve had people say he’s full of it. So what else is there to do? I doubt he’ll address it from this point forward again, so I’m sure we’ll just have to wait til the finale before it’s brought up again and we can visually see him talk about it, rather than just a written apology. As far as I’m concerned, there isn’t much to talk about regarding the situation anymore so lets all move forward with all the other ridiculousness surrounding this season.
In case you missed my tweet yesterday, I’m very excited to announce that Lauren Bushnell is my guest on this week’s podcast. No, not Lauren Burnham as some of you seemed to read that as. Lauren Bushnell. Ben Higgins’ ex-fiance. Been a long time coming as I’ve been in talks on and off with Lauren to come on since the end of last year. We finally made it work, and you’ll get to hear that tomorrow before I’m off to Vegas. Which, in an interesting story, Lauren will as she calls it, “be there in spirit.” You’ll hear what she meant by that in the beginning of the podcast. I appreciated her candor regarding the Ben stuff. It’s been two years, she’s been in a new relationship for about a year now, so yeah, I’m sure it’s not something she felt completely comfortable talking about. But she also knew I couldn’t have her on my podcast and NOT ask about Ben and everything that went down. She’s honest about her feelings at the time, and I feel she wasn’t disrespectful to Ben in any way. But she made a few things known and cleared up a couple misconceptions for sure. Can’t wait for you all to hear it tomorrow, so look forward to that.
Ratings are in from Monday night, and the “Bachelorette” again won it’s timeslot for the evening and improved it’s ratings from last week, going from 5.5 million viewers to 5.78 million viewers, and drawing a 1.8 rating versus the 1.6 rating last week. Steady, solid numbers that are pretty consistent with previous “Bachelorette” seasons. I don’t think anyone expected some major drop off in this anyway, but, to see 14 years in they can always count on winning their 2 hour timeslot on Mondays, especially in the Women 18-34 demo, that’s all that really matters to them.
I mentioned last week and in the spoilers about next Monday’s episode falling on Game 5 of the NBA Finals. A few of you alerted me that your DVR is showing a “Bachelorette” episode on Tuesday instead of Monday. If the Warriors sweep the Cavs, then Monday would be available for them to run episode #3 in its regular slot. If they don’t sweep, then Monday is Game 5 and there definitely isn’t a new episode Monday. I looked on my DVR after being informed by emailers, and yes, it’s showing an episode next Tuesday as well of the “Bachelorette.” So my guess is regardless of if there’s a sweep or not, they’re just gonna run a new episode Tuesday and that’ll be that. However they still haven’t made anything official, but Chris Harrison usually stays on top of this on his Twitter, so I’m sure he’ll explain once we know what happens in Games 3 and 4 of the NBA Finals.
“Reader Emails” begins on Page 2…
rob22
June 6, 2018 at 8:47 AM
The Garrett thing is becoming really annoying. RS has commented on this non stop for a week. And it’s about a guy who “liked” inappropriate posts. As Garrett’s apology mentioned, likes are things we brainlessly do with a tap on an icon. We “like” things for a bunch of reasons, but often just to blow through it and perhaps acknowledge a friend’s posting. It’s not some really thought out thing. Hey maybe Garrett’s a card carrying racist/sexist nut bag. IDK. The posts were definitely controversial. But I’m not assuming that he’s a bad guy because of his IM likes. Either we have a really low bar for outrage these days, or RS is just off the reservation on this one. Probably both.
sc07
June 6, 2018 at 1:03 PM
Yeah I’d say people have a low bar for outrage these days. Someone is always offended about something.
I thought RS said he was done talking about the Garret situation but of course it was his first topic today. I don’t understand why he feels the need to continuously post the same thing. Said he was done talking about it yet he felt the need to post the same thing he posted yesterday and he’ll probably continue to post the same things again. Not the first time he’s done this.
So what if Becca kept Colton because he’s hot as RS said. I’m sure plenty of men have done the same on the show and I’ve not heard him be critical of them, actually RS has ranked the women in the past himself. Which I found to be distasteful, disgusting, and misogynistic. Like I’ve said Tia and Becca are new friends only because they where on the show and I don’t consider talking thru social media and hanging out for a weekend a relationship, and we know Tia and Colton never slept together since he’s a virgin. So the “Colton dated Tia first” is more producer manipulation for drama and a story line. Get over it RS, but I’m sure you’re an expert on girl code too. LOL
jlal
June 7, 2018 at 5:05 AM
I don’t get the confusion of Jojo/Jordan and Kaitlyn/Shawn not marrying after only 2-3 years. Sure they’re engaged, but only because of the show. If they had met and were dating, then living together in real life they probably would not be engaged yet. Just because they didn’t continue with the unnaturally accelerated pace of the show after ended isn’t cause for confusion, it is cause for giving them kudos for sanity.
taxionna
June 7, 2018 at 5:15 PM
@jlal: EXACTLY. Leaving aside the fact that a lot of younger couples in relationships are forgoing marriage altogether, they basically have only KNOWN each other for the time they have been engaged. Why people think that the “engagement” (let’s be honest, they’re dating) period is so unreasonably long is totally beyond me.