What do you think J&K still need to explain and why?" Are we even owed an explanation?
147 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I find it a bit creepy to sell photos of your kids at the speaking engagements. Even if you have no income source. With their other $ opportunities (speaking fee itself and TLC money), is this even still needed? Since this is asked for by them to the public, I believe an explanation would be in order.
Any family situations are between them and their family. We aren't owed explanations.
Some things about which I would like to know the answers:
1. Is money from the show being put away for the kids, either as a trust or college fund, etc.?
2. Why does it appear J&K have no close family and friends? What exactly happend to the ones they used to have (i.e. Beth, Nana Janet, Carla, etc.)?
Now, I also fully believe that neither I nor any one else deserves an explanation for the above. (I am just curious!) Even though J&K chose to put their lives on T.V. for the world to see does not also give the world a right to know every single detail about them.
I think, when you open up yourself to people and ask them to donate or volunteer your time to help you out, you open yourself up to be under more scrutiny. You are inviting people into your lives, and I do think you (not just Jon and Kate, but any family that needs help) have a responsibility to use stranger's generosity wisely. I think you have an obligation to make sure that there are no questions about your need, or that you will be mishandling the money.
I do think Jon and Kate need to explain about the college funds, because they are a matter of public record. And I think because so much has been given (I'm not talking about anything that comes from their show, but things that people have donating out of the kindness of their hearts), they have a moral and spiritual obligation to pay it forward.
In addition, Jon and Kate has invited more public scrunity when they began their television show. This is the way they are choosing to make a living, and Kate has said, this is our life - what you see is what you get. So I do think people have the right to question and criticize (or commend) the things that are on the show.
aap I have an honest question. My father gave my son his truck when my son turned 16. In your opinion, when he goes to sell the vehicle is he then obligated to give the money to charity?
I don't feel I'm owed an explanation for anything.
I thought the Viewer Q & A shows they've done were perfectly nice. It was a way to make the viewers feel more involved. But I didn't feel any burning questions were answered...mostly because I don't have any burning questions.
I think their financial situation now or ever is nobody's business. Maybe I'm old school, but I was taught it is the height of rudeness to discuss someone's income or finances, mine included. I wasn't allowed to see the "parental income" portions of my college applications, so why would I expect the G's to publicize their bank statements or their kids' college fund accounts?
We all know, even if they divulged all this info, that they would be torn apart line item by line item..."U-oh, KON spent too much at the grocery store this week on organic food!"
And, no, I don't feel that being on tv or accepting donations changes their right to privacy on this issue.
I guess it just depends how you watch the show. I find it an entertaining glimpse of people I don't know, so I don't feel the need to be invested in their lives, parenting choices or financial status.
If J&K were Presidents of the USA I would ask questions. If they had any sort of influence on my daily life, I would ask questions. Heck, maybe even if they lived where I live, I would ask questions.
To me its tv. Granted, real people on tv and all, but still tv. In the end they have to deal with the choices they've made. I don't. I deal with my own. But that's just me.
I think the answer is that they have opened them up to "celebrity status", for lack of a better word. It's entertainment.
It's not merely because they are "Jon and Kate". Many other celebrities have gone on talks shows, had interviews with Oprah and Barabra Walters and were asked "tough" questions.
I agree that when you allow yourself to be in the "public" eye, you invite questions about your life.
There is a large difference between a grandfather giving a grandson a gift of a truck, new or used or anything else for that matter, than people giving to a charity, which is what the Gosselins originally were made out to be in the press and within their community, IMO. And, although they would no longer qualify for charity status, I think they do continue to benefit somewhat from that early distinction of need and are just now changing their "brand" message and stepping away from the "need" message, perhaps largely due to public outcry and hiring of a PR firm to establish their brand and do some damage control.
On the other hand, a grandfather gifting something large like a truck, or college funds or whatever would also, IMO, deserve respect and due responsibility from the grandchild to use such gifts in a responsible manner. The Gosselins, while benefitting from a past or present "charity" status are also responsible for being transparent with some information regarding financials and actions, just as Not For Profit charities are responsible to show what is what and the like.
Just my opinion, but if you ask for gov't help (the full time nurse) and request additional gov't giving beyond what is set up because "society has a responsibility to care for HOMs, because society supports fertility treatments" and also put your hand out to churches and businesses and other private sector avenues of giving, whether money or merchandise or hours of volunteer work, there is a responsibility to those that give, all would want to know that the stewardship of such giving is being handled with respect and graciousness. Unfortunately what I have seen and read about the Gosselins, this is their major downfall and perhaps the largest reason that there is public outcry and ridicule about the family. Step in PR, and God Bless them with the clean-up, they are gonna need it!
The negative stories are all untrue, you say? Ok, but I would like to see more of the positive then. At least 50/50, and I don't think it's close to that at all.
I don't think I am owed an explanation for anything. I don't give them any money or services. I watch a tv show. If they were wrapping their kids up with twine and bouncing them down the stairs then I would be asking the producers of the show to be nailed to the wall and it would be done by social services anyway. Period.
To tell you the truth, I don't think they're required to tell us anything. If the want to, it's up to them. They put the show out there and we watch it. We're natually curious and questions come up. If they CHOOSE to address them, fine, but if not, I don't think they owe anyone anything. No one is required to donate goods or money to them. If the explanation they give isn't good enough for you, don't donate
As for the photos of the kids, I actually found it more creepy when Michelle Duggar was handing out family photo postcards to everyone she met on the streets of New York (but just for safety and security reasons). Honey, it's NEW YORK! You aren't in Arkansas anymore! At least with the Gosselin photos, they are earmarked for something, whether it be the cancer charity or the kid's college funds. If you want to buy one, fine, If not, that's also fine. If they are telling you up front where the money from the signed photos is going, that's all the explanation they need to give, as far as I'm concerned. I know the intrusive zealots of GWoP would like a detailed tax statement from J&K, but I don't think they are entitled to half of what they demand over there. More than half, actually. I think they're basically entitled to somewhere between "jack sh*t" and "none of your f*cking business."
Sorry, it just didn't have the same "oomph" if I had used "jack crap" and "none of your freaking business." :-)
I do think they should be obligated to account for the donated money. People are arrested for fraud all the time:people saying they were in Katrina but weren't, people saying they have cancer but don't, etc. IMO if they are still asking for donations, they need to account for why they need them. Even if they are no longer asking, but just still accepting donations, whether or not they are asking for them, they should be held accountable. If they don't need donations anymore, there should be a public statement made to that effect. If there are no laws that apply to this specific situation, there should be.
I also find it odd that they sell pictures. Not for the pictures themselves, because celebrity photos are sold all the time. Easy way to make a college fun, IMO. People are going to get pictures one way or another, so why not have some control over it? But this family claims to want privacy, normalcy. They can't have it both ways. So I guess I don't think they owe an explanation for this, but they do owe it to themselves and their fans to choose a side.
I have no problem with them selling stuff they were given, in general. I sold some stuff I was given for my triplets; other stuff I passed on to others. The only reason I have a problem with it for them is that they said they would give it away, pay it forward. Obviously they are not doing that. So -- just say so. A gift is theirs to do with as they choose. But lying about it, or not changing their statement on it, just looks bad. I don't care about their image, but they say they do, so IMO they should explain this.
Saying one thing but doing another is called lying. If they care about their image, then they do owe explanations. If they care about privacy, they shouldn't be putting themselves out there. An easy way to stop gossip and speculation is to explain some things. One might almost think they thrive on the publicity the gossip gives them, so they won't stop it for that reason.
The difference to me is that one is a gift and the other is a donation.
Would you not expect any charity you donate money to not explain to what services your donation is going to? Or do you blindly donate money to organization in hopes that they will use it for good?
If people heard about their situation and gave them gifts, that would be one thing. However, Jon and Kate have ASKED for things to be provided for them because they could not do it themselves. They made the public plea, they should be shocked that people now want answers.
I don't think they need to explain anything and I don't think they owe us either. The allegations all fall under personal family stuff or financial stuff neither of which is any of our business, TV personality or not.
I think the reason I don't care about any explanations is because it won't change anything. The Gosselins and I are not friends. They don't affect my life and I don't affect theirs. If any of the allegations are true, so what? I would probably just think less of them and that would be the extent of it. I wouldn't hate them. I don't know them. I probably wouldn't even stop watching the show. People who believe the stories still watch.... probably even more than the fans. Plus most people who watch the show aren't even aware that anything needs explaining.
Basically, what would any of their explanations accomplish? Some people would have their curiousity satisfied and some people would just have more questions.
The sad fact is that there are many, many people out there who lie, cheat, steal, manipulate, and otherwise use others for their own gain. Sometimes they grow a conscience and redeem themselves and sometimes they don't.
If you feel you were victimized by someone like that you have to see it as a lesson learned and move on. Obsessing over the person(s) who screwed you isn't going to do anyone any good. Once you are an adult you have to take responsiblility for your own mistakes and accept that there is only so much you can do stop others from making those same mistakes.
We all get burned at some point with regards to love, money, or friendship. That's life. Deal with it!
Midnight Ramblings, Regarding your comment, "The only reason I have a problem with it for them is that they said they would give it away, pay it forward. Obviously they are not doing that."
How is it obvious they are not paying it forward? We are not privy to the Gosselins' charitable donations. They may donate more than the value of the items they were given. Regarding the donated items, if they are taking it to consignment, we do not know what they are doing with funds. It is possible they donate that money to charity.
We do not know whether or not the Gosselins are "paying it forward" as they said they would, so to label them liars is, IMO, a bit premature.
We all get burned at some point with regards to love, money, or friendship. That's life. Deal with it! ---------- Or, we could just be giving our opinion on the question posted in this topic. I don't think we are all as emotionally invested in this topic as the statement seems to imply that you are. Just an observation.
The scholarship question. It's been around forever. Since they publicized it right on their website it seems an explanation is due. It shouldn't be that hard to explain. If they lied about that, that “would say it all for me”.
I don't think they owe the general public an explaination for anything. Maybe they owe one to the people who have donated their money or time. But even then, shoudn't those donations have been given without the expectation of getting anything back?
Now, does the nosey side of me want answers? Yes! I would like to know what happened with Beth. I would like to know their side of Julie's "truth". I would like to know that the kids have money in college funds.
Wanting to know and being entitled to know are two very different things, IMO!
O/T: updated my blog w/ the latest from Microsoft. Thanks to anyone who made comments on the blog. it got some response!
Like I said, if they do care about their image they would explain what they're doing. I guess I can rephrase that to "it SEEMS obvious". It's a known fact they consign the items they said they would give away - at least in the past. If they hadn't said they would pass it on, I wouldn't have a problem with it. They did say they would, and it looks like they are not, therefore "IMO" they should explain themselves (or at the very least, announce their change of mind".
It is my opinion that the Gosselins can do anything they want with their things, regardless of how they got it. They are U.S. citizens with the same freedoms we have and are allowed to change their mind.
Perhaps they used the money they got for the cribs to buy the new beds. That would be the gift that keeps on giving.
I also don't think we are owed an explanation for what they did with the money from the things they sold.
aap, when I said We all get burned at some point with regards to love, money, or friendship. That's life. Deal with it! I was referring to what I observed to be a large part of anger towards Jon and Kate - that there are those who unwittingly gave gifts or money to the Gosselins under what they now feel are false pretenses, and because of this sense of betrayal, they now feel they have a right to know where their money went. My advice to that sort of person was simply to get over it - That's life. Deal with it. That's what the whole gist of my post was and I probably should have prefaced it that way.
So when you say to me "Or, we could just be giving our opinion on the question posted in this topic. I don't think we are all as emotionally invested in this topic as the statement seems to imply that you are. Just an observation" I guess you misunderstood what I meant.
Anonymous said... People are curious, plain and simple.
I think 'nosy' is a better word for it.
October 2, 2008 9:43 AM
Okay, sure. Nosy is a synonym for curious.....
The point was, they opened themselves up to questions. Kate said herself in the first special that aired about her tummy tuck: "I'm always curious to see women's stomachs after pregnancy, so I am showing mine."
They also have mentioned that they wanted to "show" everyone what it was like to raise two sets of multiples.
So, they have invited questions....they have invited people into their home on Monday nights.
So are they that shocked when people do ask questions? This was their choice.
" was referring to what I observed to be a large part of anger towards Jon and Kate - that there are those who unwittingly gave gifts or money to the Gosselins under what they now feel are false pretenses, and because of this sense of betrayal, they now feel they have a right to know where their money went." ----- I guess I'm confused because it doesn't seem like anybody who has donated money to Jon and Kate have posted on this thread. Could you point to the post on this thread that refers to someone feeling betrayed because they donated money to Jon and Kate? Maybe I would understand better then.
I think their show is entertainment. I don't think they really owe an explanation to anyone. If we were all obligated to watch it and send them money, then they might need to explain where the money goes--but we are not. I know this is a poor analogy--don't get mad--but I look at it the same way as when I give money to a person with a "will work for food sign". It is my choice to give them money, what they do with it is their choice.
I don't think anyone is "shocked" that people are curious or that people have questions.
What I find shocking is the jump from being curious and having questions to DEMANDING answers, feeling entitled to an answer, and being enraged when an answer isn't given or isn't answered to said questioner's satisfaction or in accordance with their standards.
That's where I think, especially when you're a public figure, you have to draw a line. The Gosselins will never be able to answer every question to everyone's satisfaction, so if they set limits to what they will answer I'm not shocked.
I don't understand why those who have proclaimed themselves to be the "truth tellers" can set guidelines for what they will speak about and be respected for it, but the Gosselins are not allowed to set their own guidelines about what they are going to speak about. That just screams double-standard to me.
We do not know whether or not the Gosselins are "paying it forward" as they said they would, so to label them liars is, IMO, a bit premature.
----
I just remember what a big deal Kate made out of giving the check to the Ronald McDonald house in the episode "Kate's Labor Day." It seems to me that if they were making chairitable donations on a regular basis they wouldn't feel the need to put this on TV.
With all due respect, anonymous, that makes no sense. If you know about it, then they are showing off. If you don't know about it, then you assume they aren't doing it. So they can't win.
William "Penn" said he did his mother's taxes and she donated 15 grand....whoa, that's a lot of money.
I guess I'm confused because it doesn't seem like anybody who has donated money to Jon and Kate have posted on this thread. Could you point to the post on this thread that refers to someone feeling betrayed because they donated money to Jon and Kate? Maybe I would understand better then.
aap I was making a general observation based on what I've read at GWOP, PM's blog, and here as well. For example, there was a blog entry at GWOP a while back where someone talked about how they had sent the Gosselins gifts and money and were now disillusioned and angry that they were lied to. This was followed by several comments regarding this entry agreeing with the sentiment by anti-Gosselins (for lack of a better term) telling their own tales of giving and feeling betrayed. It's way too much of a pain in the ass to try and find that old GWOP blog entry or I'd link it so you can see what I mean. I wasn't pointing the finger at any certain individual here or anywhere. Like I said, it's just a general observation.
If you felt like I was pointing the finger at you and telling you to "deal with it" that wasn't what I meant. I apologize if I wrote in a way that would cause that kind of misunderstanding.
Last Christmas my husband's workplace adopted a needy family to buy gifts for.
Is this family forever tied to the company for the gifts they sent? Do they need to notify the company when their children have outgrown the gifted clothes and toys?
This is a free country. No one is making anyone contribute a darn thing to the G's. They owe no one an explanation for what they do, how they do it, and when. If you're dumb enough to donate to A FAMILY WITH A TV SHOW, then that's on you.
But how RUDE and RIDICULOUS that it's even assumed that they should disclose their personal finances. Would a blog host or commenter volunteer their detailed information with the rest of the internet? (And before some smarty pants replies "yes" to that question, think about the potential harm or embarrassment you could bring to yourself if you did. You'd have to disclose your real full name along with the info, not just random dollar figures. Do you really want people to know YOU haven't saved a dime, or that you don't tithe 10%, or that you're 25k in debt, and that you drive a car you can't afford, or that you pay child support for a kid your friends don't know you have, etc.? My guess is no. Personal finances are just that: Personal.)
Sorry folks, no one is perfect. The G's are no different.
The argument has been that since the family puts itself on TV, people rightly want all the salacious details about them. That this is the nature of celebrity.
However, "real" celebrities don't have their finances rigorously examined. Not Tom Cruise, who's otherwise had his own share of controversy in recent years. Not Brad and Angelina, whose adopted brood sport designer outfits that, some might argue, should've been eschewed and the money instead given to help the poor countries from whence the children came.
Sure, the Gosselins received donations in some sort of "charitable" act. But they weren't an official, legal charity--they did not create a nonprofit under 501(c). So there is no obligation for the Gosselins to make all their financial dealings known, whether they be purchases for new cribs, sales of clothes to consignment stores, or tooth whitening.
There is also no "public record" issue here, as the term relates to either activity and documentation in the courts (criminal or civil), or activity by government officials.
People may bring up the attempt to gain a Medicaid-paid nurse as somehow being part of public record. But that was back when the younger kids were 1--a whole three years ago. Since they never got that nurse, there is no obligation to reveal anything that falls outside that initial application for the nurse.
Having said that, I think that anything that has come up on the show or on the Gosselins' own site should be fair game. It would be nice to know what happened to all the friends and helpers--they were "characters" on the show like on any other show, and most shows don't just write off a character without an explanation (the oldest Cunningham brother in the first season of "Happy Days" being the exception, haha).
Extending that, anything the Gosselins do in public is also fair game--like celebrities who drunk-drive, go panty-less, or get caught wandering in a drug-induced haze. Though in that respect, avoiding long conversations with "fans" while in an airport doesn't seem to be that big a transgression after all :).
I didn't take offense at the comment because I know that it doesn't apply to me. However, I just find it confusing that you would write a comment here, based on an old message posted on a different message board. Chances are, the people you are directing the "Deal with it" message to aren't going to come here to read it.
Last Christmas my husband's workplace adopted a needy family to buy gifts for.
We do that in our office every year and I love it. It's fun. You get a simple explanation of the family. Ages, genders, ect. No names. I always ask if anyone knows the race of the family, simply because I'd like to buy a doll for a little girl that "fits" her. When I was a kid, I was bummed that most dolls had blond hair and blue eyes and none of them had dark hair and brown eyes like me.
Anyway, we buy clothing and toys and some food (usually a turkey dinner and the trimmings) and wrap them in bright paper (well, not the turkey, obviously). After that, everything is boxed up and taken away. We are told that the family was grateful, but we never hear from them and that's fine. I don't think we're "owed" anything. That's not what the spirit of the gesture is. We buy things and then we ship them off and we assume that the family is grateful. That's what donating is. The gesture is supposed to make you feel good, not something for you to brag about so others will say how wonderful you are because you did it. And the family certainly doesn't owe us a blow by blow description of how long each toy was played with, and who ate all the stuffing.
And you know what? I'm sure when the toys and clothing were outgrown, they either threw them out, passed them on, donated them or sold them at a yard sale. Who cares? Once the gifts are given, it's their property to do with what they want.
If the Gosselins wanted to keep their lives private and don't want people digging into their personal information, they shouldn't be on a TV show and they shouldn't be making public pleas for money. Problem solved. Then no one would be asking these questions except the people who know them personally.
"Is this family forever tied to the company for the gifts they sent? Do they need to notify the company when their children have outgrown the gifted clothes and toys?" ---------------------------- Jen -
Do you really think that once this family gets back on its feet, it wouldn't be appropriate for them to give back similiar to the way that was given to them? Do you believe and/or agree with the pay it forward philosophy?
And the family you helped - do you think they contacted the company directly and said we need help and the comapny just said "sure!" or do you think that they went through a charitable organization that helps people in need?
Do you think that the charitable organization just took their word that they needed help, or do you think the family applying for aid had to give up some "personal" information to show that they had a need then?
Do you think it was RUDE and RIDICULOUS or the charity organization to ask them those questions?
If the Gosselins wanted to keep their lives private and don't want people digging into their personal information, they shouldn't be on a TV show and they shouldn't be making public pleas for money. Problem solved. Then no one would be asking these questions except the people who know them personally.
I think that's blaming the victim. If people behave inappropriately (and I understand that we have a difference of opinion on whether the behavior is inappropriate or not), then it's on them, not on the Gosselins. I can acknowledge that it's a fact that celebrity brings certain intrusions into one's life, but acknowledging it as a fact and approving of it are two different things.
"I didn't take offense at the comment because I know that it doesn't apply to me. However, I just find it confusing that you would write a comment here, based on an old message posted on a different message board. Chances are, the people you are directing the "Deal with it" message to aren't going to come here to read it."
I disagree. There were comments made on this blog by people claiming to be former volunteers or who said they had given charity in one form or another to the Gosselins, and there was a somewhat silly argument hereabouts somewhere over the use of the word 'betrayal.' Again, way too much of a pain in the ass and time consuming to find those comments, but they here on this blog somewhere. Besides that, there are those that read everything and anything Gosselin related. Where they find the time is a mystery. I'm pretty sure I was on topic with my opinion on who is more likely to think they are owed an explanation by the Gosselins and the reasons why.
to mcb, So how would you feel if you discovered that this family that you bought gifts for and gave a turkey dinner to, actually had money in the bank and could afford to buy the gifts you so graciously gave them? This is why I do not like Jon and Kate because they have scammed SO many people into believing they were poor when they had money in the bank from Jon's Dad. Jon and Kate also continued to hide the fact that many many people were giving them money and more money and Jon and Kate just kept saying we need, we need, we need.
Victims do not have a choice over what is happening to them - victim implies that someone or thing has more power over them and is controlling what they do.
Jon and Kate are in complete control of the situation. They are calling the shots. And they choose to add even more shows to their season, inviting people even more into their personal life. Truth is, they can end this at anytime. They have no one to blame but themselves.
Victims do not have a choice over what is happening to them - victim implies that someone or thing has more power over them and is controlling what they do.
Jon and Kate are in complete control of the situation. They are calling the shots. And they choose to add even more shows to their season, inviting people even more into their personal life. Truth is, they can end this at anytime. They have no one to blame but themselves.
October 2, 2008 12:37 PM
----
But what about volunteers/family that did in fact know what was going on and continued with their "help"?
I agree with you in the fact that real celebrities do not have their financial records scrutinized (well, most do not). Let me say that I am not a "die hard" fan either way--this post just interested me today.
I think what makes them different in the celebrity status is that "real" celebrities have done something to get them there--a superb athelete, a great actor, etc. They have made this their "job" and therefore are earning a living.
I think what upsets people most (and I could be wrong) is that they themselves are not working and have received monetary donations, gifts, etc and are apparently no longer suffering financially. In that respect, they can no longer claim that they "need" this income. Perhaps that is why people are so inquisitive--do they really need the money now?
Honestly, I don't really care either way, but hope that they are putting their children's earned money into accounts for them. If I was going to get upset about anything, it would be that these kids should have their money protected.
Who knows if it is. We may (and most likely) will never know.
As far as the other questions about family members and helpers, it would be nice to know what happened to them. I agree a real tv show rarely just writes someone off. But I also think all you'll hear them say is, "We don't need the help anymore."
Am I owed an explanation? Nope. But if I don't get another version, then I guess I have to give a whole lot of weight to the one I've read.
Should I consider the source and the character of the people involved when forming my opinion--- Yes! And I consider the source of the version I've heard (Julie, confirmed by Jodi,) as pretty solid. Why trust them?---Well, Kate said herself that Jodi was loving and that she trusted her with her children with her (when sick, also, every Friday morning.) Kate is Jodi's character witness.
Note to the moderators: I love this thread! And I am less convinced of the pro-Gosselin arguments every day, but I still feel welcome. Well done!
I think that the question of why don't they give back? Is not why they don't give to the people that gave, but why don't they give back to families that need help? They were given all those nice clothes, and she does make them stay very clean. As clean as those kids are most of the time, their clothes have to been in great condition. Why not find a family in the community that needs clothes?? Or simply donate them to Goodwill. No one would even have to know that it was them. And no, I don't think that they OWE us the explanation for it, but I think that if this is what was happening, someone, somewhere would be reporting about it, and I think that that's why it bothers people. If you're going to be on TV and put yourself out there, you can't get mad when people have questions about what happens in your life. You invited us into your home so that we could peaking into your windows, as they put it, and instead of answering a ton of questions the public had, they have posed even more.
2. Why does Kate choose not to have a relationship with her parents?
3. Why sell all donated items?
4. Why didn't J&K donate cribs to the military couple expecting twins if they had said that they would?
5. Do J&K give back to their church in time or talents or money? All of the children use the nursery or Sunday school. Do J&K volunteer their time?
6. What happened to Beth and the older ladies seen on the show? We have heard that Carla is doing yardwork for J&K, but what of the others?
7. Do J&K pay the twins' school fees or the preschool tuition for the six? Were all these items donated to the family?
8. Did J&K buy their van with their own money or with donations?
9. How much money did Jon inherit from his dad's estate?
10. Were the Gs on welfare when the twins were born or the sextuplets?
11. Did the Gs get food stamps while they were accepting food donations from the Wyo-Eliz. area?
12. When will the free clothes stop from the Gap stop? Once the free clothes stop, will they have to buy fewer clothes or consigned clothes or accept hand-me-downs?
13. Will there be a final episode of J&K Plus 8 where the J&K pull the plug on the cameras and mikes and transform their studio back in to a house?
14. Who pays the Gs health insurance....J&K or Figure 8 or TLC?
I really think maybe the root of this is the ideas we each have about charitable donations. From my perspective, when you give - whether it's time, money or goods or services, it should be done with an open heart. Meaning, you have no expectations of return, of "paying it forward" (I tend to see that as more a karmic concept anyway, rather than some tangible contract that is placed on the recipient of the gift), nor do you have a say in how it is used.
I'm thinking about my own history of giving - when I donate to an organization, I try to make sure it's a reputable one. If I found out that the organization was not being responsible with donations, I would not donate to that organization any more. Would I be angry? I don't know. Maybe a bit. Certainly not nearly as angry as people who haven't even ever given the Gosselins anything seem to be about the way they've handled donations.
When I give a dollar to a panhandler, I know damn well that he might not use it to get something to eat, like he claims he will. He may very well use it for alcohol. That's one reason I don't give to panhandlers too often. But when I do give, again, once I've given it's the recipient's chose to use the money as he wishes. If he wants to buy gin with it, that's his business. I gave up the right to know when I gave up the money.
I have rarely been in the situation of giving to someone like the Gosselins. Maybe a couple of times. Last Xmas, a co-worker let a few people know about a friend of hers, a teacher, who was collecting gifts for a needy family. I got a Target gift card - I think it was $10 - so, nothing I couldn't afford.
If I had found out it was all a scam, and the family wasn't really needy, or the teacher was a con artist and pocketed my lousy $10 Target card, would I be mad? Probably a little sad. But I wouldn't waste a bunch of indignation on it. Again, for me it goes back to the idea that charity needs to be done with an open heart and once you've given, you really need to let it go.
"Victims do not have a choice over what is happening to them - victim implies that someone or thing has more power over them and is controlling what they do. Jon and Kate are in complete control of the situation. They are calling the shots. And they choose to add even more shows to their season, inviting people even more into their personal life. Truth is, they can end this at anytime. They have no one to blame but themselves."
You are correct when you say that they chose to to do a show, but I must disagree with your assertion that "they are in complete control of the situation."
J&K cannot control what others think about them and their choices, what relatives of in-laws say about them in blogs, the dangers some of their "fans" or "haters" present to them and theirs. Yes, these are all results of their decision to have a show, but these are all things outside of their control. I also don't think "they can end this at anytime." At this point, I believe even ending the show won't stop some of the people who have become obsessed with this family.
On a related note, IMO, many people who have stated that they have given to the Gosselins and feel "betrayed" or mislead seem to take on a victim persona. The Gosselins did not force them to give. It was a choice these people made of their own free will. For them to feel victimized, because the Gosselins were not as needy as they originally thought or that the Gosselins misrepresented themselves, is a gross overreaction, IMO. If I were in a similar situation, I would feel more like a fool than a victim.
People who are in the public eye still have the right to privacy. The personal finances or relationships of a celebrity really are no business of the public.
And I don't think that the Gosselin's should have to choose between a reality show that helps them pay the bills and support their family and their relatives being harrassed, but the fact that we are here everyday arguing about it makes a pretty clear statement that this is exactly how it is whether we like it or not. It's not unfair for a celebrity to ask for privacy, they just aren't likely to get it.
All I can say is that my mom taught me to try to put myself in another person's situation before passing harsh judgement. If I were in Kate's place, as I percieve it to be, I wouldn't answer one question that I didn't feel comfortable answering. I would say "If you don't like the way I live, don't watch a show about my life" and be done with it. No amount of money or fame would make me answer to a bunch of people who are obviously going to think what they want to anyway. What's the point?
I don't think that anyone who really dislikes them actually wants the answers. Imo, it's more about wanting kate to say it outright so that they can go about proving that she lied. In the world of "I hate Kate Gosselin", nothing is the truth unless it's negative.
Q: Do you really think that once this family gets back on its feet, it wouldn't be appropriate for them to give back similiar to the way that was given to them? Do you believe and/or agree with the pay it forward philosophy?
A: I really don't care what people do with the things we donate to them. Pay it Forward is the title of a movie, for crying out loud. To expect every person who's ever received a handout to do that is a little extreme.
Q: And the family you helped - do you think they contacted the company directly and said we need help and the comapny just said "sure!" or do you think that they went through a charitable organization that helps people in need?
A: If the G's church at any point considered them to be a family in need, that's good enough for me. It happens all the time around here and we take those things at face value. And anyone with 8 tiny children is a family in need, in my opinion. Yes Kate has a bad attitude and Jon is a pushover, but those kids shouldn't be punished for that.
Q: Do you think that the charitable organization just took their word that they needed help, or do you think the family applying for aid had to give up some "personal" information to show that they had a need then?
A: Not all organizations that help people do background checks. More often than not, if someone in a community cries out for help, the community responds. Period. In my experience, rarely does someone stand up and say, "Wait, hold on a sec, I'll need to see your bank statement and a credit report." People generally act on requests for help. And I doubt that anyone would bat an eye at helping a family with 6 new babies. As in the case of the G's, people were practically lined up at the door begging to help.
Q: Do you think it was RUDE and RIDICULOUS or the charity organization to ask them those questions?
A: No. But the general public isn't a charitable organization. It's not the place of strangers on the internet to request this info from them.
If the "teacher" in Guinevere's scenario above pocketed the gift card and I found out about it, I'd be furious. I'd consider it theft, and I'd demand my gift card back. I don't think it's legal to collect for a charity and not give it to where you say it's going. Isn't that fraud? Some scams are illegal.
I am not saying that the Gosselins did that, by the way, since I never gave them anything. I am just giving my reaction. I had an experience with a pastor collecting money for a purpose and then trying to use it for something else. I spoke up, went above his head, and saw the money given to the proper fund. I believe I did the right thing.
There have been several comments from people about the Gosselins claiming to be needy when they are getting freebies and not working jobs outside the show. But one begat the other--the situations didn't exist simultaneously.
First, J&K became pregnant with the 'tups, and the community rallied around them. (By community I mean not just their hometown, but everyone who felt the need to help). This eventually resulted in (1) donations of items, money, etc.; and (2) the call to star in a documentary.
That documentary spawned another, which in turn spawned the TV series.
The TV series, in turn, generated interest from sponsors--whether they be a ski resort, Disney, a train or airline, perhaps even a builder for a new home (you can't plame homebuilders for seizing any opportunity for publicity in these heady economic times, heheh.) It also gave J&K the opportunity to become paid speakers.
Today we have a family that supports itself through the TV show, generating things and income because of it. It does not seem they are soliciting charity any longer; instead they are the platform that these companies use to promote themselves, by "giving" the Gosselins all this stuff. Being a TV personality is now the parents' job, in which they work by (A) being filmed 3 or 4 days a week;(B) becoming spokespersons for various groups, taking the time to be interviewed on the organization's behalf; (C) traveling to speaking engagements. While (A) involves the kids, it's only 3 or 4 days a week, not 24-7. (B) and (C) don't involve the kids--it's the parents working to generate the income through these routes, though I guess they've brought the twins on occasion so they can have a fun trip.
Hmmm... explanations they should provide... There are a lot of questions I'd love to see truthfully answered but I don't think they should HAVE to answer them. Even with putting their family on display they are entitled to some privacy and to keep some issues private.
That said they are two-faced when it comes to give & take. They seem to think they can demand society to care for their family then expect the version they share on TV to be "thanks" enough. All it does though is increase curiosity, not alleviate it. So the burden to meet the needs of their audience is on them. They chose to become reality celebs so they've also chosen to be scrutinized by viewers. And that comes with a lot of questions!
As for the the money issue, for me it's two-fold. The first problem is I feel they haven't "earned" the life they're living. Many of us work our butts off sun-up to sun-down just to barely make ends meet without the benefit of nannies, chefs or camera crews to ensure the our children's needs are met and memories are preserved.
The Gosselins merely popped out two sets of multiples then sat back and expected to be provided for. Jon quit several jobs, Kate quit hers and they stuck out their hands "pleading 8" and demanded society fund their choices. They didn't work for any of the perks they're now benefitting from.
I didn't feel this way when Jon was still working because I felt he was still doing his part to take care of his family. Same with Kate, she was doing her part at home. Just a mere year later they're jetting around the country while nannies raise their children. THAT is my problem.
Do they owe an explanation for this choice? I don't know, what I do know is they began the show claiming hardship and at some point they should address how & why things have changed so dramatically since. Especially since we can still see the early episodes that hammer home the vast changes in their lifestyle.
The other problem ties in with this... imagine if you rallied your community together to raise funds for a disease, and the chapter you donated to decided to spend those funds to whiten the teeth of the spokesperson instead of putting it into research. Do you have the right to be angry that your donation went to something other than research? Or do they have the right to decide where they think donations should be spent?
There's a reason charities are accountable for donations they accept. They have to let the public know where the money goes not just to ensure donations are respected but to ensure that people will continue to give in the future.
Anyone who puts their hand out and ASKS for donations are expected to use it wisely. There's a huge difference between a community rallying to help a family in need such as supplying food & clothing to those who lost their home in a fire, and a family actively seeking donations to help raise the children they feel society should support.
The Gosselins have set themselves up as a charity of sorts by demanding special treatment and requesting funds (not donated items but MONEY). By doing so they should be held accountable just like any other charity to show that the money is going where it's needed, not where it's "wanted" (need = clothing, want = designer clothing).
Quite frankly if they don't want to be held accountable for donations they should stop accepting them. They asked for them and when the need was no longer there they should have redirected those donating to a family or organization who had need.
Personally, I don't give a rat's patootie about "where are the grandparents" because it's really not my business nor is it essential to the show. Likewise, wherever Beth may be is not something Kate needs to tell me. The only thing I think Kate owes her "adoring public" is the truth about the college "accounts" that the PA Gov. set up on their first birthday, and why they reneged on their promise to donate back all the kids' stuff (cribs, etc) that had been donated to them.
I enjoy the show and although I would love to have some questions answered, I do not feel that they owe anyone any explanations at all. Like many have said before, no one makes anyone give anything, there's a little thing called free will. Also, people act like they are still saying how needy they are. Kate has said herself in at least one episode that they used to be in that position, but I don't think they consider themselves to be needy anymore. Remember people, in the beginning they weren't making big money and having everything paid for. Just because they are now making money off of the show, speaking engagements, or whatever doesn't mean they are still getting "handouts" from churches or people in the community. To those of you who don't think they should be making money off of anything, you better not ever pay to get into a concert and turn off your T.V. because everyone there is making money too. Infact you'd better take it up with the world, because that's the way it works!
So how would you feel if you discovered that this family that you bought gifts for and gave a turkey dinner to, actually had money in the bank and could afford to buy the gifts you so graciously gave them?
That's why the gift is anonymous (you know, kind of like your screen name?) and that's the chance you take. It could happen, and I'm sure it does, because there are a lot of welfare and charity cheats in this country. But, I'd rather stick my head in the clouds and not be suspicious and bitter about every stinking thing (you know, like most GWoPpers are every time they watch an episode of J&K?).
Besides, Jon and Kate are not anonymous. Everyone who gave to them knew who and what they were giving to.
This is why I do not like Jon and Kate because they have scammed SO many people into believing they were poor when they had money in the bank from Jon's Dad.
And do we have proof of this, or are we supposed to believe the gospel according to bitter Julie, the pseudo-relative with an axe to grind? I believe Jon and Kate inherited money when Mr. Gosselin passed away (when the 'tups were young), thus giving them the down payment for the larger house, but, sorry, I'm not buying that they had a hidden nest egg when she was pregnant and when the babies were tiny.
The "money stashed away" is yet another story that GWoP pushes ad nauseum, even though they have no proof. Another example of repeating something enough times that it becomes fact.
The other problem ties in with this... imagine if you rallied your community together to raise funds for a disease, and the chapter you donated to decided to spend those funds to whiten the teeth of the spokesperson instead of putting it into research. Do you have the right to be angry that your donation went to something other than research? Or do they have the right to decide where they think donations should be spent?
We don't know where their money is going, and therefore have no right to be angry at all.
There's a reason charities are accountable for donations they accept. They have to let the public know where the money goes not just to ensure donations are respected but to ensure that people will continue to give in the future.
Anytime a person accumulates a certain amount of money through donations they are required to claim it as income on their taxes. They are also required to keep reciepts in case of an audit. That is how they account for it. They are not recognized as a charity and therefore do not owe (at least legally) the public anything. There may be charities that collected on their behalf, but even then I doubt you could hold them responsible for what the family did with that money that was collected.
Quite frankly if they don't want to be held accountable for donations they should stop accepting them. They asked for them and when the need was no longer there they should have redirected those donating to a family or organization who had need.
At this point, I tend to think that most of the donations they are getting now are from companies that want give to them not out of the goodness of their hearts, but for advertising. They give to the Gosselins because they are a famous family who have tons of fans who want to have what they have. It's business. I doubt very seriously that these places would keep sending them stuff if they were just going to donate it to someone else.
Great post kuromi! I've been trying to formulate a similar post. I think they've gone from being needy to seemingly "rich" in a very short time. That doesn't mean they didn't truly need help at one time.
As to whether they have "earned" their current status-well in our society many people are "famous for being famous". Paris Hilton gets paid to be seen at parties. What did she ever "do" to deserve that?
Relevant ONLY if they're still asking for donations. If not, NONE of our business.
2. Why does Kate choose not to have a relationship with her parents?
ABSOLUTELY NONE of our business. That's a private family matter, which MOST people (except Julie, evidently) don't blab about in a public forum.
3. Why sell all donated items?
Because once gifted, it is their property to do with what they want. Plus, we have NO proof that they do sell ALL (key word) donated items. They had a yard sale. Big whoop. I sold some of my baby supplies at a yard sale and GASP.....some of them were given to me as shower gifts.
4. Why didn't J&K donate cribs to the military couple expecting twins if they had said that they would?
Never heard them say that and do you have proof they didn't (besides the flapping jaws of a disgruntled sister of a sister in law?)
5. Do J&K give back to their church in time or talents or money? All of the children use the nursery or Sunday school. Do J&K volunteer their time?
What they do for and in their house of worship is their call. Besides, would you have time to do very much volunteer work with eight kids under the age of seven? I would assume that they give to their church in the same way most others do, the collection plate. Until their kids are older, I wouldn't expect them to do much more.
6. What happened to Beth and the older ladies seen on the show? We have heard that Carla is doing yardwork for J&K, but what of the others?
Since these these ladies were a part of earlier shows, asking about them now is natural. Congrats! You're one for six in the decency department so far.
But, the "WE have HEARD" part is disturbing. This means you're once again spreading rumors as "fact." Perhaps Carla doesn't WANT that to be advertised (not that it ever stopped a GWoPper from sticking their noses where they don't belong).
7. Do J&K pay the twins' school fees or the preschool tuition for the six? Were all these items donated to the family?
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99) is a Federal law that protects the privacy of student education records.
8. Did J&K buy their van with their own money or with donations?
GOOD GOD! Why is that any of our business? Maybe Dr. Gosselin bought it for them.
9. How much money did Jon inherit from his dad's estate?
SERIOUSLY? Okay, this has to be a joke, right? Ugh. Not even going to address that one.
10. Were the Gs on welfare when the twins were born or the sextuplets?
Head exploding.....
11. Did the Gs get food stamps while they were accepting food donations from the Wyo-Eliz. area?
Most people that need food donations DO get some sort of assistance from other places. Do you stand outside your local food bank and frisk people for welfare cards, WIC coupons and food stamps? I'll bet you'll find plenty. Get real.
12. When will the free clothes stop from the Gap stop? Once the free clothes stop, will they have to buy fewer clothes or consigned clothes or accept hand-me-downs?
That's between the Gosselins and GAP. And who really gives a crap about that? GAP is getting free advertising. I'm sure they're pleased as punch.
13. Will there be a final episode of J&K Plus 8 where the J&K pull the plug on the cameras and mikes and transform their studio back in to a house?
I don't know, can you see into the future to answer that, or are you just being stubborn and obtuse?
14. Who pays the Gs health insurance....J&K or Figure 8 or TLC?
They're under contract to Figure 8, so I'm sure part of that is insurance. As long as the State of Pennsylvania isn't using your tax dollars for that, who gives a rat's butt?
Seriously. NO person would answer most of these extremely intrusive questions. Just the fact that GWoPpers for some reason feel entitled to know the answers to these is proof we've been right all along about them. Creepy. Yikes.
No I dont think they owe us any explanation, not on anything. Its there business, not ours. Do I want to know things sure, but thats just me being nosey..lol :)
Above mcb reposts someone else's question: 4. Why didn't J&K donate cribs to the military couple expecting twins if they had said that they would?
Then mcb responds: Never heard them say that and do you have proof they didn't (besides the flapping jaws of a disgruntled sister of a sister in law?)
I am fairly sure you are incorrect in attributing the story to Julie. I thought the account was written by Penn Mommy. It was her personal experience in response to another poster who asked if she had personal knowledge of K&J's lack of generosity. I thought it was a pretty good example of their lack of generosity, and it was her personal experience. It satisfied me.
I think it is ridiculous for us to think that we are entitled to any kind of explanation from Jon or Kate. I realize that they have chosen to open their lives up for us to watch once a week on TLC but that is that. We are already given a rather large glimpse into their personal life, how many of us open our home to viewers? Yes, they have chosen that (and, it is something that I may have not done for myself or my family) but, I still don't think it entitles us to anything more than they have already given us. I really enjoy watching the show and watching the kids (because they are adorable). I think that Jon and Kate have their flaws and maybe their actions are questionable at times. But, isn't that true of all of us? I can't imagine what people would think of me if they watched me at the moments that a television crew edited together to get the best television ratings. I can't imagine what it is like to be so judged by people who don't even know you, they only know a piece of you.
I'm saying what is going on comes with the territory. I am also saying that if the scrunity truly bothered them, they could end the show with season 3 and not increase the number shows for season 4.
I'm also saying that there are instances when crazed fans have stalked and killed their celebrity idol, and I hope they took that into consideration before they subjected their young kids to this. I'm saying that I am sure Jon and Kate looked at all the pros and cons of the situation, and have decided that the money and perks they receive is worth the harassment they face. It's their choice to exploit their family that way, and they have to face the effects - good and bad - that come with it.
Anonymous 5:09 said: "January 2005 - Jon's Father passes away and Jon mentions their "financial" situation - twice."
Just a note, if Jon's father passed away in January unless he left them money that passed free of probate or it was gifted to them prior to his death, it is highly unlikely that they received money directly after he died. I have a case that has not cleared probate after 4 years (granted that is a contested case). Even in a non-contested case it takes time to get money disbursed from an estate.
I don't remember Jon and Kate portraying themselves as "people in need" in the past two seasons. Yes, they did that at the time the babies were born, when neither of them was employed. That was over four years ago and it was before their TV series started! If anything, during the past several shows, they say how grateful they are for their current situation. Times change and so do circumstances, so why keep beating a dead horse??
Anon. 5:09 said "January 2005 - Jon's Father passes away and Jon mentions their "financial" situation - twice."
Just a minor point but if Jon's father passed away and left them money they would not have gotten it immediately. If the sum of money was really the size that has been alleged the estate must have been fairly sizeable and it would have had to go through probate which can be a lengthy process. Unless the money was gifted prior to his death, or the money passed in some way outside of probate (life insurance, joint tenant accounts)they could still have been in a desperate money situation immediately after he died.
I don't remember Jon and Kate portraying themselves as "people in need" in the past two seasons.
No, but claiming bagels are a "rare treat" and claiming that the one on one days happened because the "save" and explaining they only can happen once a year because that's all they can "afford" is misleading.
Why are we concerned about their financial situation? Have any of the people that are commenting given the Gosselins money or things? I could understand if you had given them something and then come to find that they weren't in need some upset or confusion. But, why does anyone care? In the end, the Gosselins have to live with the decisions they have made and the claims they have made to the public. If they are wrong or not truthful, they have to deal with that. The only thing we can do is not judge them. It isn't our place.
Anon 7:00: I wasn't commenting on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the statements. I was pointing out that money doesn't necessarily go from deceased's bank account to heir. Doesn't mean they weren't mourning, but to be honest when you are horribly worried about money it is hard to think of anything else, for right or wrong.
Anon 6:51, I don't think bagels were a rare treat for financial reasons. I thought it was more rare treat because they don't like the processed, prepackaged foods. (My family didn't buy those things either, even when we could afford it.)
I agree with quiltart who says that in the past two seasons they do not portray themselves as people in need. As a matter of fact, I have heard them say that their situation has changed dramatically.
By the way, I do not view them saying that things like "bagels" are a rare treat because of their cost. I have always looked at this as an example of her quirky food issues. Plain bagels are considered "empty carbohydrates."
As far as the issue of claiming that they can only do the special days once a year, I did not perceive that to be a matter of "saving." I perceived that to be a matter of logistics.
I am the youngest of 8 kids and it was not money that got in the way of "one on one" time. It was schedules and babysitting and figuring out how to pick the first one. I did not view them as saying that it was money. As a matter of fact, I don't think that they mentioned money.
I love the show! And I don't understand all the negativity surrounding it and the obsession.
I feel that there is nothing wrong with what Jon and Kate are doing. They were asked to do the show after the birth of their 2nd set of multiples and everything they have received free or had donated to them is because of the show. They are being paid to do the show and are now able to support their family in a way which they may not have been able to. The people that dislike them so much and spend hours upon hours obsessing about them, need to put that energy into something else. There are far more important issues going on in the world today such as world hunger or the economic issues in the USA then worrying about Jon and Kate.
If you don't like them, then don't watch. Honestly the more haters that tune in the show to take notes and nitpick every single thing said and done puts the ratings up. If you hate Jon and Kate so much then don't watch and stop talking about them.
So someone told me that the new People this week with the Paul Newman tribute has a sick page spread of the Gosselins. Is this true? I'm so excited to pick it up. I'm also scared to see how people are going to bash it regardless. Hopefully we will see some good letters and not those from GWOP trying to get 10 seconds of fame by bashing them in the hopes of the publicity for their hate site.
So they've asked for things they've needed or even just wanted. Big deal. To me, that is a little tacky. No one is obligated to give to them.
Anon 5:09 said:
January 2005 - Jon's Father passes away and Jon mentions their "financial" situation - twice.
I did find that strange. Dishonest? No. But strange. Just as I found PM blogging while her son is ill unusual. Not something *I* would do but maybe it took her mind off things. I don't know.
I also remember seeing Jon and Kate expressing gratitude many, many times to specific donors whenever they received any items. It seems as if some people (not you specifically, anon) missed that part.
Hopefully we will see some good letters and not those from GWOP trying to get 10 seconds of fame by bashing them in the hopes of the publicity for their hate site.
IMO, both "sides" have valid reasoning for their positions. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, for example, the financial aspects. There are a lot of people who dismiss this position, but there are those that don't - not because they are "nosy" I don't think it has to do with intimate details, I think it has to do misrepresentation - now, then, whenever. Regardless of how you feel, everyone is entitled to an opinion.
Do you think that Anne Hathaway should be answering questions about her ex-boyfriends financial dealing? She not implicated in any wrong doing, yet this week she's been on Lettermen and interviewed in People magazine talking about it.
Do people really have a right to know? No. Are people curious? I'm sure some are. Do you think she really wants to be answering these questions? No, I'm sure she doesn't want to talk about her private life. She's an actress and wants to be talking about the movie she's promoting.
So why do you think she is doing this? Because she wants to continue to make movies and can only do that if people will pay to see her in them. If people's opinion of her are negative due to what ever her boyfriend may or may not have done, she'll be out of a job. Hence, having to talk about her private life in public to get it over and done with and everyone can move along.
Jon and Kate are not actors. They are selling themselves as themselves and their family life. They are inviting you to come into their lives to see how they live. Their income is dependent on their tv show. To continue to have a tv show, they need viewers. The more questions and issues that are raised, the more curious people are going to be. As someone pointed out, they don't have to respond but if they don't, then Julie's story is the only one out there. And if public perception of them shifts due to GWoP and Julie, then they are out of a job.
I've heard speculation(via other blog spots) that J/K are considering going, "the brand" route, similar to what M. Stewart has done. Meaning that they would branch out to have a Gosselin line of products. I would like to know if this true. I would enjoy seeing J/K support their family in this manner. Kate would get the fame and attention that she seems to seek, and perhaps Jon could stay at home, run the household and raise the kids free of the cameras and Kate's overbearing puppet strings. A win-win all around, imho.
In a nut shell, I wonder about things. But I don't feel they owe me any explanations. I choose to believe that they are doing what they do with the best of intentions.
"If I had found out it was all a scam, and the family wasn't really needy, or the teacher was a con artist and pocketed my lousy $10 Target card, would I be mad? Probably a little sad. But I wouldn't waste a bunch of indignation on it."
Guinevere, just a question. What if you did find out it was a scam, and that the teacher was now asking other people for donations. Would you sit by and let others donate $ 10? Or would you share your story with them?
I would enjoy seeing J/K support their family in this manner.
Yes - something that doesn't involve the kids.
I don't have a problem with speaking engagements - my caveat is please paint an accurate picture, not one of "need". (Yes, I know NMD attended the latest and THAT time there was no mention - but I also heard at that engagement the Pastor asked all the questions - if you have nothing to "hide" why not open up the questioning to the floor? - sorry tangent)
I changed my mind about what I wanted to say.
I was going to say that I wish Kate would market her "own" ideas. Not penny pinching tactics that obviously she doesn't do in real life or how to make a sandwich with slices of apple.
But you know what - if someone wants to buy a product of Kate's more power to them - just let the kids be kids.
Just last week, I viewed a re-run of a season 3 episode of J&K8. For all of the griping that so many people have said about them playing people regarding their trips and financial situations, I saw and heard them say that we could not take the kids on these trips were it not for the show. I also saw and heard them say that they could not have imagined how their situation would have changed from when the tups were born.
I do not recall what was said exactly about the special days though.
Can you see that perhaps the comment about bagels being a rare treat for their family might not have to do with $ but rather because of Ks food issues?
I do not recall what was said exactly about the special days though.
My comments about the "we save" and "we can only afford to do it once a year" are specifically from what I recall - the "special day" episodes (I don't recall whose special day specifically).
The bagels, it's hard to say, because Kate uses the term so frequently - I always took it as pertaining to the financial aspect of the bagels, the crab, etc.
Guinevere, just a question. What if you did find out it was a scam, and that the teacher was now asking other people for donations. Would you sit by and let others donate $ 10? Or would you share your story with them?
Aap - thank you, that's what I have not been able to articulate.
"I really don't care what people do with the things we donate to them. Pay it Forward is the title of a movie, for crying out loud. To expect every person who's ever received a handout to do that is a little extreme."
First, it actually was a philosphy that someone turned into a movie, but if you want to get all your information from Hollywood, be my guest. However, before you mock something, it might help to do a little bit more research on it. It is repaying kindness given to you so hopefully another person will show kindness to another. It has nothing to do with someone giving you $10 and they you turning around and giving someone else $10. It doesn't even mean that you need to donate money to another person, just that when you are able and know of someone else in need, you will help them as someone once help you in whatever way you can. And it certainly doesn't mean that if you write a check to someone to make a donation, that you will get a check back for the same amount. (Which, according to the story Kate tells, seems an awful lot of the Christian version of paying it forward - however, I did hear the story 2nd hand so I can't vouch for the fact that Kate actually tells this story.)
"Meaning, you have no expectations of return, of "paying it forward" (I tend to see that as more a karmic concept anyway, rather than some tangible contract that is placed on the recipient of the gift), nor do you have a say in how it is used."
Guinevere, that is actually how I look at it as well. Let me clarify something. When I do an act of kindness for someone, for the most part I don't expected it to repaid or that the person will pay it forward. I really hope it will, because I think the world would be a better place if people repaid kindness to them with kindness shown to others. I am truly sorry that some people seem to think otherwise. But once I decide to donate something to someone, I don't hound them and make them tell me how they used it or spent the donation because I've gotten enough information initially to make sure that the money/services/gifts would be used in a responsible manner.
Jon and Kate, however, have stated their "Family Mission Statement" - the importance of giving back because "we were ONCE the recipients of kindness." Therefore, based on their words, I would expect them to do it. First, because as I explained, I think it's the right thing to do, and second, they made a public statement that they intend on doing it. So whether or not you believe that a gift or donation is theirs to do what ever they want with it, it's actually not relevant because they have said themselves that their "mission" is to give back.
Q: Do you think it was RUDE and RIDICULOUS or the charity organization to ask them those questions?
A: No. But the general public isn't a charitable organization.
If the Gosselins are asking - let me repeat ASKING - the public for money, then I think it's fair game to ask them how they intend on using it. Maybe you don't want to make sure that the money you are donating is going to a good cause, but I sure do.
Guinevere, just a question. What if you did find out it was a scam, and that the teacher was now asking other people for donations. Would you sit by and let others donate $ 10? Or would you share your story with them?
I would probably share it if it were practical for me to do so.
Though I'd point out that that is not the case here; I've not seen anyone credible come forward saying that they were defrauded by the Gosselins (and how anyone would even know such a thing without an in-depth look at their finances escapes me; we've only speculated on what their "need" and resources have been at various times).
We are talking about a hypothetical situation, and what you would do if you were faced with it. But I don't know what you mean by practical. Can you elaborate?
Maybe it's a failure of imagination on my part, but can you detail the scenario a bit? In my case, I wouldn't have had any way of finding out. I still have trouble imagining a scenario where I would have so much info about a strangers' finances that I would KNOW I was being scammed.
If I knew it and was in circumstances similar to the one I was in, I would certainly tell my co-worker and probably discuss it with other co-workers that I thought might contribute. I think that's about all I would do. If the circumstances were the same as the case I mentioned, I wouldn't go to a lot of trouble trying to get my $10 back, and I doubt I'd feel it was worthy of contacting the police.
Maybe it's a failure of imagination on my part, but can you detail the scenario a bit?
Or a reluctance to try? This is a hypothetical situation. If you had the ability to save someone some grief - would you do it?
Guinevere, in my opinion, you are a steadfast Gosselin supporter and are unable to fathom that they may be capable of the things that some people have already decided are a given. That is your right. But the stubborness to even try to imagine a hypothetical situation you cannot attempt?
I can't even begin to imagine how that type of thinking could even be described as open minded - it's just not.
No, but claiming bagels are a "rare treat" and claiming that the one on one days happened because the "save" and explaining they only can happen once a year because that's all they can "afford" is misleading.
--
The Gs are constantly obfuscating financial issues on the show. For instance, they stated saving for the Banana republic shopping trip, but BR is a subsidiary of the Gap. So, weren't the clothes free...so why state that they saved.
Jon and Kate talked about creating a family mission statement - they actually wrote it on poster board and read what they wrote on camera - in one of the shows. I'm sorry, I don't know what episode it was - maybe the one when Jon and Kate are assigning chores to the girls?
So, I just realized some of the lengths I (well, not I exactly) would go to make some money.
I'm watching Regis and Kelly because I am wondering if Kelly's going to ask Jon and Kate some of the difficult questions (don't have high hopes, but we'll see. I can't see them going into depth on the show in general, and don't know how much they can get in in the 3 minutes they have on the show), and they have a contest for the funniest dancer - the winner gets $50,000 big ones! My husband, one of the most, shall we say, interesting dancers in the world, could totally take that money. I would be willing to share the embarassment of 2 minutes of dancing in exchange for $50,000.00 (whether or not my husband would go along with it is another story, but he has a good sense of humor so it could be a possibility.) Too bad we missed the deadline.
Sorry, but the pay it forward concept is pretty lame (and, um, yes, I am aware it's not just a movie title, but thanks for the clarification).
Since when is helping someone a tit-for-tat experience? I can't even imagine helping someone only on the condition that they "pay it forward" (gag). If everyone had that expectation hanging over their heads, no one would ever ask for help! It's naive to assume that all people have a giver's heart. Some people are naturally generous, and others hold things close to the vest while demanding more. In the end we all balance each other out. The givers wouldn't have anyone to give to if there were no takers.
Since you didn't get it the first time, I'll repeat it again.
I made it clear in my post to you that I don't expect people to pay it forward - I just hope they do because I think the world would be a better place if they did that. I'm sorry that you find that thought repulsive.
mcb at 3:12 on Oct. 2 answered questions: Questions:
1. Is there a college fund?
Relevant ONLY if they're still asking for donations. If not, NONE of our business.
2. Why does Kate choose not to have a relationship with her parents?
ABSOLUTELY NONE of our business. That's a private family matter, which MOST people (except Julie, evidently) don't blab about in a public forum.
3. Why sell all donated items?
Because once gifted, it is their property to do with what they want. Plus, we have NO proof that they do sell ALL (key word) donated items. They had a yard sale. Big whoop. I sold some of my baby supplies at a yard sale and GASP.....some of them were given to me as shower gifts.
4. Why didn't J&K donate cribs to the military couple expecting twins if they had said that they would?
Never heard them say that and do you have proof they didn't (besides the flapping jaws of a disgruntled sister of a sister in law?)
5. Do J&K give back to their church in time or talents or money? All of the children use the nursery or Sunday school. Do J&K volunteer their time?
What they do for and in their house of worship is their call. Besides, would you have time to do very much volunteer work with eight kids under the age of seven? I would assume that they give to their church in the same way most others do, the collection plate. Until their kids are older, I wouldn't expect them to do much more.
6. What happened to Beth and the older ladies seen on the show? We have heard that Carla is doing yardwork for J&K, but what of the others?
Since these these ladies were a part of earlier shows, asking about them now is natural. Congrats! You're one for six in the decency department so far.
But, the "WE have HEARD" part is disturbing. This means you're once again spreading rumors as "fact." Perhaps Carla doesn't WANT that to be advertised (not that it ever stopped a GWoPper from sticking their noses where they don't belong).
7. Do J&K pay the twins' school fees or the preschool tuition for the six? Were all these items donated to the family?
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99) is a Federal law that protects the privacy of student education records.
8. Did J&K buy their van with their own money or with donations?
GOOD GOD! Why is that any of our business? Maybe Dr. Gosselin bought it for them.
9. How much money did Jon inherit from his dad's estate?
SERIOUSLY? Okay, this has to be a joke, right? Ugh. Not even going to address that one.
10. Were the Gs on welfare when the twins were born or the sextuplets?
Head exploding.....
11. Did the Gs get food stamps while they were accepting food donations from the Wyo-Eliz. area?
Most people that need food donations DO get some sort of assistance from other places. Do you stand outside your local food bank and frisk people for welfare cards, WIC coupons and food stamps? I'll bet you'll find plenty. Get real.
12. When will the free clothes stop from the Gap stop? Once the free clothes stop, will they have to buy fewer clothes or consigned clothes or accept hand-me-downs?
That's between the Gosselins and GAP. And who really gives a crap about that? GAP is getting free advertising. I'm sure they're pleased as punch.
13. Will there be a final episode of J&K Plus 8 where the J&K pull the plug on the cameras and mikes and transform their studio back in to a house?
I don't know, can you see into the future to answer that, or are you just being stubborn and obtuse?
14. Who pays the Gs health insurance....J&K or Figure 8 or TLC?
They're under contract to Figure 8, so I'm sure part of that is insurance. As long as the State of Pennsylvania isn't using your tax dollars for that, who gives a rat's butt?
Seriously. NO person would answer most of these extremely intrusive questions. Just the fact that GWoPpers for some reason feel entitled to know the answers to these is proof we've been right all along about them. Creepy. Yikes.
October 2, 2008 3:12 PM
---
mcb. I think the purpose of this post was to ask rhetorical questions. Sorry your head exploded, but really why are you getting all worked up about this. Do you know this family personally? You seem mighty steamed about these questions.
mcb. I think the purpose of this post was to ask rhetorical questions. Sorry your head exploded, but really why are you getting all worked up about this. Do you know this family personally? You seem mighty steamed about these questions.
What's the difference about being "mighty steamed" at the utter cluelessness of those questions and the members of GWoP being "mighty steamed" about virtually everything the Gosselins do? The difference? I stop at venting on a message board. They go out and purposely create trouble for the family.
And no, I don't know the family, but I do have experience with the GWoPpers, dating back to the TWoP thread before GWoP was even created.
I stop at venting on a message board. They go out and purposely create trouble for the family.
Would that be any different then the members here who tried to verify Penn Mommy's information at the hospital? I'm not saying that you personally did it, but I think that action brings this blog up (actually down) to the standards of GWOP.
How would the hypothetical sister know that the gift card the teacher used wasn't her own gift card? Or that she wasn't using the donated card to purchase gifts for the needy family? Maybe she jumped to that conclusion because she was mad at the teacher for not tipping her enough at Christmas.
I went through all of the 2 comments we received about the hospital and calling. They were not from anyone that frequents this board and I am confident it was a troll like you trying to cause problems.
Maybe the sister knows it was the gift card because she pulls it out of the enevolpe that comes with the gift card and on the envelope it clearly states "Merry Christmas Needy Family" in her sister's handwriting. Since she's shopping with her and hearing the comments she makes about all the purchases, she can obviously see with her own 2 eyes what the gift card will be used for.
As for the teacher not tipping her for Christmas, Guinevere knows her hypothetical sister is a trustworthy person and trusts her judgement. Once her sister lays out the facts, why would she question her further?
Someone asked if I contributed to the kids' college fund--
No. And I have stated eslewhere that I really do not care what freebies Jon and Kate get, as long as they are not gotten through misrepresentation.
But I do know that the Gov. of PA set up college funds for the kids. I believe in protecting those children's interests, and if moneys have been given to the college fund, they should stay there (legally, the money can be taken out, if a tax penalty is paid. I would hate to see that happen, though.). Education is the best gift you can give a child.
Would that be any different then the members here who tried to verify Penn Mommy's information at the hospital? I'm not saying that you personally did it, but I think that action brings this blog up (actually down) to the standards of GWOP.
One of the differences is that the moderators here squashed the idea almost immediately.
GwoP praises those who call speaking venues. GwoP praises those who email pastors who are hosting J&K. The moderators here squashed that idea.
(BTW, my first post using html tags to bold. Yay me!)
Regarding the Mission Statement: It is highlighted in the "Chores" episode.
In this episode you will hear what the "Gosselin Family Mission Statement" - listen to all the points and think if Jon and Kate really follow their own "rules".
This episode was an eye opener for me because
1 - they talked about the importance of giving back and paying forward (I have never seen evidence of that prior to all the "controversies")
2 - Jon and Kate say they give back because they were "once" the recipient of kindness (as if it was an isolated incident and still not ocurring)
3 - That their family comes before anything with the show - then came the hairplug episode where they left their sick kids.
Personally, sometimes, I think the show highlights all the inconsistencies.
In general, I'm not a "hater" but I did think that the hairplugs episode was in and of itself a very odd choice. The fact that they left (even if it weren't filmed) when so many kids were sick I thought was really questionable.
The fact that according to some people they've not given back sufficiently, I guess that I look at that differently.
First of all, we don't know what they've done or not done before the check to Ronald McDonald House or the yard sale to benefit the pediatric therapy charity.
But, I do remember how nuts my life was until both of my kids were over 4. I do give them a pass on that. Heck, I've only got two kids and our life wasn't really conducive to giving back until they passed 4.
Maybe the teacher wrote the family a check for the value of the gift cards because she knew they needed the cash. She'd have to be pretty stupid to pull the envelope out in front of Guin's hypo sister. Maybe hypo sister is trustworthy, but didn't have all the facts and/or her judgement was clouded by her feelings.
I agree, the Gs should give to others now that they are able, but we'll probably never really know how much, how often, what, they give.
"GwoP praises those who call speaking venues. GwoP praises those who email pastors who are hosting J&K. The moderators here squashed that idea."
I've never done this, but thought about why someone might do it, especially if they do give at church functions. I think that the if pastors or whoever is asking for the love offerings, if that's the case, should know that they are no longer in need of that service, I did read one article, I can't find it now, where they did donate the love offerings to a charity at one speaking engagement. I honestly don't know why they would put out the kind of money, if the rumors are true, to have them come to speak, but I do give them more credit for doing that than making money off of the show.
Maybe the teacher wrote the family a check for the value of the gift cards because she knew they needed the cash.
Do you really think if that was the case, that the teacher would have requested cash in the beginning?
Do you really think it's appropriate for the teacher to make that judgement to take something that some else gave as a gift, and decide she knows better and takes it upon herself to exchange Guinevere's gift for something the teacher thinks is a better fit?
Since this is hypothetical, we can go all day doing this. Do you really want to keep doing that? My original statement was meant more as a joke for Guievere then a serious response.
I think, based on some of our other conversations, she would get that. If not, Guin, I really meant my comment in a joking manner.
I think that the concept of giving a love offering is a common practice in some evangelical churches. I don't think that the practice is reserved just for those in financial need. I think it is a practice to show appreciation ...
For instance, I could see how the Gs would do a speaking engagement at a church for a speaker's fee.
They would collect that speaker's fee (maybe through the ticket prices or whatever.) Maybe that church has a big pro-life push and they might want to give over and above that to show their love and appreciation.
My point is that this practice is not soley for speakers who are in financial need.
About a 15 years ago, I used to give presentations to churches regarding alcoholism and drug dependency. I charged a nominal fee to cover my costs of travel & time. Usually the attendance at the events were around 50 - 75 people. At one of the churches, the pastor whose son was a long term drug addict asked the participants to give an offering to show their appreciation.
They knew I was employed. Heck, I was single and living quite well. It amounted to around $100. I told one of the congregants that I felt a little uncomfortable and she told me that it was a common practice at their church.
My church gives love offerings to ALL special speakers and singers/groups as well as missionaries. Some people charge to come and some dont, no matter what we collect a 2nd offering as we call it and that offering is given to the guest.
We've had some well know artists come to our church and perform, and we still gave that 2nd offering. Its common.
This has turned into a long thread and the question has brought up some good comments.
We deal with giving this way in our family: if we give someone something-whether it's money or goods-we don't ever expect to get it back. We don't tell people what to do with it. If we feel a family member or neighbor is in need, we give what we can and cross it off of our financial record. Done. Closed. No expectations of getting paid back. When we choose not to give, it's also just a quietly done deal. I guess that's the way I see the picture re the Gosselins too. If there is a burden to carry about what is given and what is done with it then it is on the conscience of the receiver.
I guess the issue for me is that generally the people who you donate things to aren't getting the amount of contributions that Jon and Kate are. I think Jon and Kate are on a whole other level from the average people who receive charity, so I think using them isn't a fair comparsion. It's not like people donated a nice Christmas to them. People have donated - at least in the beginning - a nice life to them.
They are accountable and owing of explanation for any laws broken as per their state and our federal laws.
This includes any explanation of any perceived fraud. IOW--if they are still conveying themselves as a charity case, they most assuredly are not now. And if they were, their reported taxable income for 2007 would confirm or deny this. They don't have to tell us what it is..but if the authorities ask, they should.
I would love a validation of claims made by family and former helpers. The Gosselins behave like they are taking the high road and folks are a certain way--but it really makes it difficult for those who were fans of the show or are currently fans of the show to return to or continue being fans of the show.
This isn't an owed explanation--but it would be the right thing to do for all parties involved.
I do doubt the personal chef claim. The only place that has been mentioned is on blogs and not from a reputable source.
It is the norm for major production companies to have catering. But catering doesn't equate to a personal chef.
Re the organic: Of course it isn't all healthy--but often, to not get certain ingredients you believe are not what you want your family consuming (HFCS, MSG, or partially hydrogenated-oils as an example)--the only way to get that is via organic or natural foods means. Reading labels is tedious--but in my experience...organic is the only way to go when I wish to deliberately avoid these things--and it does make an option healthier than it's non-organic counterpart when you must avoid those ingredients.
She doesn't owe that explanation--but it would certainly help those who think that Kate believes a Newman's Own creme cookie is health food compared to an Oreo just b/c it is organic.
My family had a home refurbished on this old house with many items "donated". Items "donated" had to be declared on taxes b/c we are not a charitable organization (i.e. infamous 501c3) and thus not tax-exempt.
Aside from items gifted to them via donation from when they first had the sextuplets (gift is legally different from a donation)...
The alleged: free clothes from Gap personal chef admissions to venues trips
Are all--going to be taxable income?
You may wonder why that is?
B/c in exchange for that free advertising, companies will be declaring these items as expensed on their taxes (or whatever that accounting term is)....
in much the same way the flooring company, a/c company, kitchen company, electricians did when they "donated" their services and/or product to This Old House for our home. To the tune of $40,000 worth of renovation and upgrades (this was a WHILE ago and way in the archives of TOH).
So while it is perceived that all this stuff is "donated"....
Jon and Kate are not a tax-exempted charity case regardless of how much poverity they cry.
For them to not declare love offerings, speaking fees, photo fee collections, gap clothing, juicy juice...etc...
The IRS would have a field day with them and they could find themselves meeting Richard Hatch of Survivor fame in the lunch line of prison.
This is not meant to be snarky, but rather put into context that these "donations" are really taxable gifts...no matter how disguised they are as donations.
So thus--I don't think J&K owe an explanation to anyone except the IRS and you can be sure--the IRS is watching them like a hawk.
On the flip side--J&K can expense any expenses out of pocket they pay for being on the show (for example if she bought a shirt to wear on a particular episode). Those would be legitimate business expenses. (seems odd--but considered as much a business expense by the IRS as file folders to an accountant).
However, they can't expense something they have received as compensation. Rather it would be income.
So thus--I don't think J&K owe an explanation to anyone except the IRS and you can be sure--the IRS is watching them like a hawk.
You are completey correct, IIRC Jon wrote on the triplet connection board that he was aghast that he received a 501c3 from the show that did the nursery makeover. He posted that he believed "free" was "free".
I think the only things that Jon and Kate could really get away with are the gift cards, gifts, etc they receive from fans. Not that I don't think they still receive those, but that is peanuts compared to things they do have to "declare".
This is "mom" here. I realize now we have me and "a mom" LOL.
Ducttape - 501c3 is one type of status of a non profit organization. J&K would have probably received some type of 1099 from the home makeover show.
A mom - It is very possible that if some of the dealins of "gifts" went through TLC, then the Gs wouldn't necessarily deal with the tax issue on their trips, etc. at all. Mainly because a service - "promotion" was received in lieu of "payment". If TLC took care of that, then they (TLC) would be the ones to worry about the gift/tax stuff on their income taxes.
I also don't see why your head would explode. The title of the article says "Sound Off"....so isn't that what people are called to do? I wouldn't want to ask the Gosselins anything, because they are already so transparent in their motives and decisions that I have nothing to say to them.
Now that the People Magazine article is out, can we now agree that AT THIS VERY MOMENT they are not mis-representing themselves? In it, it is printed that the show is very lucrative and they earn thousands on speaking engagements. (They didn't discuss specific numbers).
So they are absolutely no longer mis-representing themselves.
Sorry about "adding" to your name--it's how I float around. Maybe I can be A Mom-ynous. lol!
In any case:
re: A mom - "It is very possible that if some of the dealins of "gifts" went through TLC, then the Gs wouldn't necessarily deal with the tax issue on their trips, etc. at all. Mainly because a service - "promotion" was received in lieu of "payment". If TLC took care of that, then they (TLC) would be the ones to worry about the gift/tax stuff on their income taxes.
Just my two cents."
I am not sure how it works in the world of trips and such.
There is a gift tax for winning the same vacation on The Price is Right and it is all "handled" through the show.
Income doesn't have to be in the form of cash and can include product or services. I.e. the services of our electrician or plumber. We didn't necessarily get anything "tangible"--but without them...we'd be up the creek.
It really depends on how the "donors" expensed the item and declared it on their taxes and to whom and then what figure 8 does with it.
The IRS was even coming down on those backstage gift bags at the award shows requiring those to be declared and those were "gifts"--handsome and pricey gifts and the IRS wanted its cut.
I am not an accountant by any stretch...just reporting my family's experience and the fact they admittedly faux-pas'd on their taxes that year b/c they "didn't know". Which I don't think they fully understood so truly they didn't know and boy did it catch them off guard when that 1099 or whatever showed up prior to tax filing. Oops!
The family is paid and they are receiving an abundance of freebies.
It wouldn't be able to go unnoticed and I do hope the IRS is paying attention b/c if they do owe taxes, they should pay them.
I don't think they ever did misrepresent themselves.
Much like the most annoying phrase "flip flop" in regards to politics--it is insulting (IMHO) to assume that folks will remain stagnant for life and that should circumstances change in their living, views on life, or opinions--they are held to something in a sound bite from another time in their life when things were different.
Circumstances for them have changed and they now no longer refer to "not being able to afford things" but point out things they couldn't have ever dreamed they could do when the babes were born.
Heck, our income is different from when we first had children and though not as lucrative as J&K--things are coming into the scope of possibility that I didn't believe would ever be possible.
The people who claim they still scream poverty will throw a politician under a bus if the views they hold now are the opposite of what they held 20 years ago and call them a flip flopper.
"So they are absolutely no longer mis-representing themselves."
Finally. To bad it took so long.
Reading different blogs I read about people (friends and family and volunteers) who are and were upset and venting about the earlier days when the G's were crying poverty and need. Yes their need was great but they were not poor. Most companies and organizations do checks on people to see if they are truly in need before donating. This is a good thing and makes sure the items and money donated go where it is most needed. A series of check and balances is a always a good thing. I agree if I donated a $10 gift card and found out the person I donated to did not need it I would let it go. But if I donated $1000, or months of my valuable time, or went shopping and spent a big part of my pay check to help out a family who say they are in need and found out later they were not telling the truth about their need I would be upset. Jon & Kate could have come out when the money first poured in and they got back on their feet and said no more! Donate to ..... or .... in our name. But they continued to take. That is a problem.
"There is a gift tax for winning the same vacation on The Price is Right and it is all "handled" through the show.
By that, it means, there are IRS reps backstage. The taxes are paid by the winnner or recipient, not the show, in this case."
And you know that Figure 8 is paying the taxes how?
I am not getting into an argument over this--but I would love to know how to get someone else to pay my taxes on my earned income. That is a pretty interesting feat.
Now I would wager that possibly Figure 8 is accepting the tax liability on the trips..but for the stuff the family gets--I don't see how that could be.
And while Figure 8 may be declaring it as income to them...I am curious as to the tax code that prevents the IRS from obligating the Gosslins to report it as income to them as well.
I am sure my mother would love to have her tax returns amended from those years prior when the items donated to the show for the show for our home...were her income. It wasn't the same as Price as Right.
We didn't have an agent at our house keeping tally.
By that, it means, there are IRS reps backstage. The taxes are paid by the winnner or recipient, not the show, in this case."
And you know that Figure 8 is paying the taxes how?
Let me very specific: If a contestant wins on a game show, as used in the example given above, the contestant pays the tax. The show does not assume the tas liablity. I don't make any assumptions about the Gosselins or Figure 8 Films. Not sure how you got that out of that fairly targeted example.
147 comments:
I find it a bit creepy to sell photos of your kids at the speaking engagements. Even if you have no income source. With their other $ opportunities (speaking fee itself and TLC money), is this even still needed? Since this is asked for by them to the public, I believe an explanation would be in order.
Any family situations are between them and their family. We aren't owed explanations.
Some things about which I would like to know the answers:
1. Is money from the show being put away for the kids, either as a trust or college fund, etc.?
2. Why does it appear J&K have no close family and friends? What exactly happend to the ones they used to have (i.e. Beth, Nana Janet, Carla, etc.)?
Now, I also fully believe that neither I nor any one else deserves an explanation for the above. (I am just curious!) Even though J&K chose to put their lives on T.V. for the world to see does not also give the world a right to know every single detail about them.
I think, when you open up yourself to people and ask them to donate or volunteer your time to help you out, you open yourself up to be under more scrutiny. You are inviting people into your lives, and I do think you (not just Jon and Kate, but any family that needs help) have a responsibility to use stranger's generosity wisely. I think you have an obligation to make sure that there are no questions about your need, or that you will be mishandling the money.
I do think Jon and Kate need to explain about the college funds, because they are a matter of public record. And I think because so much has been given (I'm not talking about anything that comes from their show, but things that people have donating out of the kindness of their hearts), they have a moral and spiritual obligation to pay it forward.
In addition, Jon and Kate has invited more public scrunity when they began their television show. This is the way they are choosing to make a living, and Kate has said, this is our life - what you see is what you get. So I do think people have the right to question and criticize (or commend) the things that are on the show.
aap I have an honest question. My father gave my son his truck when my son turned 16. In your opinion, when he goes to sell the vehicle is he then obligated to give the money to charity?
Is your father a stranger to your son? Did your son received donations from strangers to help buy the truck?
Because to me, that is the difference.
I don't feel I'm owed an explanation for anything.
I thought the Viewer Q & A shows they've done were perfectly nice. It was a way to make the viewers feel more involved. But I didn't feel any burning questions were answered...mostly because I don't have any burning questions.
I think their financial situation now or ever is nobody's business. Maybe I'm old school, but I was taught it is the height of rudeness to discuss someone's income or finances, mine included. I wasn't allowed to see the "parental income" portions of my college applications, so why would I expect the G's to publicize their bank statements or their kids' college fund accounts?
We all know, even if they divulged all this info, that they would be torn apart line item by line item..."U-oh, KON spent too much at the grocery store this week on organic food!"
And, no, I don't feel that being on tv or accepting donations changes their right to privacy on this issue.
I guess it just depends how you watch the show. I find it an entertaining glimpse of people I don't know, so I don't feel the need to be invested in their lives, parenting choices or financial status.
If J&K were Presidents of the USA I would ask questions. If they had any sort of influence on my daily life, I would ask questions. Heck, maybe even if they lived where I live, I would ask questions.
To me its tv. Granted, real people on tv and all, but still tv. In the end they have to deal with the choices they've made. I don't. I deal with my own. But that's just me.
In sum, no questions from me.
I think the answer is that they have opened them up to "celebrity status", for lack of a better word. It's entertainment.
It's not merely because they are "Jon and Kate". Many other celebrities have gone on talks shows, had interviews with Oprah and Barabra Walters and were asked "tough" questions.
I agree that when you allow yourself to be in the "public" eye, you invite questions about your life.
People are curious, plain and simple.
Did your son tell your father when he was finished with it he would donate it to someone who needed it?
There is a large difference between a grandfather giving a grandson a gift of a truck, new or used or anything else for that matter, than people giving to a charity, which is what the Gosselins originally were made out to be in the press and within their community, IMO. And, although they would no longer qualify for charity status, I think they do continue to benefit somewhat from that early distinction of need and are just now changing their "brand" message and stepping away from the "need" message, perhaps largely due to public outcry and hiring of a PR firm to establish their brand and do some damage control.
On the other hand, a grandfather gifting something large like a truck, or college funds or whatever would also, IMO, deserve respect and due responsibility from the grandchild to use such gifts in a responsible manner. The Gosselins, while benefitting from a past or present "charity" status are also responsible for being transparent with some information regarding financials and actions, just as Not For Profit charities are responsible to show what is what and the like.
Just my opinion, but if you ask for gov't help (the full time nurse) and request additional gov't giving beyond what is set up because "society has a responsibility to care for HOMs, because society supports fertility treatments" and also put your hand out to churches and businesses and other private sector avenues of giving, whether money or merchandise or hours of volunteer work, there is a responsibility to those that give, all would want to know that the stewardship of such giving is being handled with respect and graciousness. Unfortunately what I have seen and read about the Gosselins, this is their major downfall and perhaps the largest reason that there is public outcry and ridicule about the family. Step in PR, and God Bless them with the clean-up, they are gonna need it!
The negative stories are all untrue, you say? Ok, but I would like to see more of the positive then. At least 50/50, and I don't think it's close to that at all.
I don't think I am owed an explanation for anything. I don't give them any money or services. I watch a tv show. If they were wrapping their kids up with twine and bouncing them down the stairs then I would be asking the producers of the show to be nailed to the wall and it would be done by social services anyway. Period.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. IMO what's given to someone is theirs. No matter the reason given. A gift is a gift.
To tell you the truth, I don't think they're required to tell us anything. If the want to, it's up to them. They put the show out there and we watch it. We're natually curious and questions come up. If they CHOOSE to address them, fine, but if not, I don't think they owe anyone anything. No one is required to donate goods or money to them. If the explanation they give isn't good enough for you, don't donate
As for the photos of the kids, I actually found it more creepy when Michelle Duggar was handing out family photo postcards to everyone she met on the streets of New York (but just for safety and security reasons). Honey, it's NEW YORK! You aren't in Arkansas anymore! At least with the Gosselin photos, they are earmarked for something, whether it be the cancer charity or the kid's college funds. If you want to buy one, fine, If not, that's also fine. If they are telling you up front where the money from the signed photos is going, that's all the explanation they need to give, as far as I'm concerned. I know the intrusive zealots of GWoP would like a detailed tax statement from J&K, but I don't think they are entitled to half of what they demand over there. More than half, actually. I think they're basically entitled to somewhere between "jack sh*t" and "none of your f*cking business."
Sorry, it just didn't have the same "oomph" if I had used "jack crap" and "none of your freaking business." :-)
I do think they should be obligated to account for the donated money. People are arrested for fraud all the time:people saying they were in Katrina but weren't, people saying they have cancer but don't, etc. IMO if they are still asking for donations, they need to account for why they need them. Even if they are no longer asking, but just still accepting donations, whether or not they are asking for them, they should be held accountable. If they don't need donations anymore, there should be a public statement made to that effect. If there are no laws that apply to this specific situation, there should be.
I also find it odd that they sell pictures. Not for the pictures themselves, because celebrity photos are sold all the time. Easy way to make a college fun, IMO. People are going to get pictures one way or another, so why not have some control over it? But this family claims to want privacy, normalcy. They can't have it both ways. So I guess I don't think they owe an explanation for this, but they do owe it to themselves and their fans to choose a side.
I have no problem with them selling stuff they were given, in general. I sold some stuff I was given for my triplets; other stuff I passed on to others. The only reason I have a problem with it for them is that they said they would give it away, pay it forward. Obviously they are not doing that. So -- just say so. A gift is theirs to do with as they choose. But lying about it, or not changing their statement on it, just looks bad. I don't care about their image, but they say they do, so IMO they should explain this.
Saying one thing but doing another is called lying. If they care about their image, then they do owe explanations. If they care about privacy, they shouldn't be putting themselves out there. An easy way to stop gossip and speculation is to explain some things. One might almost think they thrive on the publicity the gossip gives them, so they won't stop it for that reason.
I just love the kids, Have you ever changed your mind?
Daisy -
The difference to me is that one is a gift and the other is a donation.
Would you not expect any charity you donate money to not explain to what services your donation is going to? Or do you blindly donate money to organization in hopes that they will use it for good?
If people heard about their situation and gave them gifts, that would be one thing. However, Jon and Kate have ASKED for things to be provided for them because they could not do it themselves. They made the public plea, they should be shocked that people now want answers.
Daisy -
I don't know what you mean by this and who you are directing the comment to?
I just love the kids, Have you ever changed your mind?
I don't think they need to explain anything and I don't think they owe us either. The allegations all fall under personal family stuff or financial stuff neither of which is any of our business, TV personality or not.
I think the reason I don't care about any explanations is because it won't change anything. The Gosselins and I are not friends. They don't affect my life and I don't affect theirs. If any of the allegations are true, so what? I would probably just think less of them and that would be the extent of it. I wouldn't hate them. I don't know them. I probably wouldn't even stop watching the show. People who believe the stories still watch.... probably even more than the fans. Plus most people who watch the show aren't even aware that anything needs explaining.
Basically, what would any of their explanations accomplish? Some people would have their curiousity satisfied and some people would just have more questions.
The sad fact is that there are many, many people out there who lie, cheat, steal, manipulate, and otherwise use others for their own gain. Sometimes they grow a conscience and redeem themselves and sometimes they don't.
If you feel you were victimized by someone like that you have to see it as a lesson learned and move on. Obsessing over the person(s) who screwed you isn't going to do anyone any good. Once you are an adult you have to take responsiblility for your own mistakes and accept that there is only so much you can do stop others from making those same mistakes.
We all get burned at some point with regards to love, money, or friendship. That's life. Deal with it!
Midnight Ramblings,
Regarding your comment, "The only reason I have a problem with it for them is that they said they would give it away, pay it forward. Obviously they are not doing that."
How is it obvious they are not paying it forward? We are not privy to the Gosselins' charitable donations. They may donate more than the value of the items they were given. Regarding the donated items, if they are taking it to consignment, we do not know what they are doing with funds. It is possible they donate that money to charity.
We do not know whether or not the Gosselins are "paying it forward" as they said they would, so to label them liars is, IMO, a bit premature.
We all get burned at some point with regards to love, money, or friendship. That's life. Deal with it!
----------
Or, we could just be giving our opinion on the question posted in this topic. I don't think we are all as emotionally invested in this topic as the statement seems to imply that you are. Just an observation.
The scholarship question. It's been around forever. Since they publicized it right on their website it seems an explanation is due. It shouldn't be that hard to explain. If they lied about that, that “would say it all for me”.
I don't think they owe the general public an explaination for anything. Maybe they owe one to the people who have donated their money or time. But even then, shoudn't those donations have been given without the expectation of getting anything back?
Now, does the nosey side of me want answers? Yes! I would like to know what happened with Beth. I would like to know their side of Julie's "truth". I would like to know that the kids have money in college funds.
Wanting to know and being entitled to know are two very different things, IMO!
O/T: updated my blog w/ the latest from Microsoft. Thanks to anyone who made comments on the blog. it got some response!
Like I said, if they do care about their image they would explain what they're doing. I guess I can rephrase that to "it SEEMS obvious". It's a known fact they consign the items they said they would give away - at least in the past. If they hadn't said they would pass it on, I wouldn't have a problem with it. They did say they would, and it looks like they are not, therefore "IMO" they should explain themselves (or at the very least, announce their change of mind".
I'm sorry. I got carried away.
It is my opinion that the Gosselins can do anything they want with their things, regardless of how they got it. They are U.S. citizens with the same freedoms we have and are allowed to change their mind.
Perhaps they used the money they got for the cribs to buy the new beds. That would be the gift that keeps on giving.
I also don't think we are owed an explanation for what they did with the money from the things they sold.
People are curious, plain and simple.
I think 'nosy' is a better word for it.
aap, when I said We all get burned at some point with regards to love, money, or friendship. That's life. Deal with it!
I was referring to what I observed to be a large part of anger towards Jon and Kate - that there are those who unwittingly gave gifts or money to the Gosselins under what they now feel are false pretenses, and because of this sense of betrayal, they now feel they have a right to know where their money went. My advice to that sort of person was simply to get over it - That's life. Deal with it. That's what the whole gist of my post was and I probably should have prefaced it that way.
So when you say to me "Or, we could just be giving our opinion on the question posted in this topic. I don't think we are all as emotionally invested in this topic as the statement seems to imply that you are. Just an observation" I guess you misunderstood what I meant.
In principle, people should mind their own business.
In the Gosselin's case, they have presented themselves in a certain way.
For "proof" - here is the archive of their website.
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://sixgosselins.com
There are many instances where the "ask" and "pray" for things.
People give out of the kindness of their hearts, it's a shame if the Gosselins have presented themselves in a matter that was untrue.
Some may say that there are a lot of schemers in this world, but does that make it right?
In the Gosselin's case, the biggest "hook" is the children.
So I think , the people that have actually given something and that have been burned, have learned their lesson.
There are also some who put their experiences "out there" so others do not have to go through the same thing.
There are others who don't care either way - no amount of "proof" will convince them otherwise.
Anonymous said...
People are curious, plain and simple.
I think 'nosy' is a better word for it.
October 2, 2008 9:43 AM
Okay, sure. Nosy is a synonym for curious.....
The point was, they opened themselves up to questions. Kate said herself in the first special that aired about her tummy tuck: "I'm always curious to see women's stomachs after pregnancy, so I am showing mine."
They also have mentioned that they wanted to "show" everyone what it was like to raise two sets of multiples.
So, they have invited questions....they have invited people into their home on Monday nights.
So are they that shocked when people do ask questions? This was their choice.
Delurkerloo -
" was referring to what I observed to be a large part of anger towards Jon and Kate - that there are those who unwittingly gave gifts or money to the Gosselins under what they now feel are false pretenses, and because of this sense of betrayal, they now feel they have a right to know where their money went."
-----
I guess I'm confused because it doesn't seem like anybody who has donated money to Jon and Kate have posted on this thread. Could you point to the post on this thread that refers to someone feeling betrayed because they donated money to Jon and Kate? Maybe I would understand better then.
I think their show is entertainment. I don't think they really owe an explanation to anyone. If we were all obligated to watch it and send them money, then they might need to explain where the money goes--but we are not. I know this is a poor analogy--don't get mad--but I look at it the same way as when I give money to a person with a "will work for food sign". It is my choice to give them money, what they do with it is their choice.
Ah ... as the great sage Serena said ...
Desire to know should not be confused with the right to now.
Anon 10:10,
I don't think anyone is "shocked" that people are curious or that people have questions.
What I find shocking is the jump from being curious and having questions to DEMANDING answers, feeling entitled to an answer, and being enraged when an answer isn't given or isn't answered to said questioner's satisfaction or in accordance with their standards.
That's where I think, especially when you're a public figure, you have to draw a line. The Gosselins will never be able to answer every question to everyone's satisfaction, so if they set limits to what they will answer I'm not shocked.
I don't understand why those who have proclaimed themselves to be the "truth tellers" can set guidelines for what they will speak about and be respected for it, but the Gosselins are not allowed to set their own guidelines about what they are going to speak about. That just screams double-standard to me.
We do not know whether or not the Gosselins are "paying it forward" as they said they would, so to label them liars is, IMO, a bit premature.
----
I just remember what a big deal Kate made out of giving the check to the Ronald McDonald house in the episode "Kate's Labor Day." It seems to me that if they were making chairitable donations on a regular basis they wouldn't feel the need to put this on TV.
With all due respect, anonymous, that makes no sense. If you know about it, then they are showing off. If you don't know about it, then you assume they aren't doing it. So they can't win.
William "Penn" said he did his mother's taxes and she donated 15 grand....whoa, that's a lot of money.
I guess I'm confused because it doesn't seem like anybody who has donated money to Jon and Kate have posted on this thread. Could you point to the post on this thread that refers to someone feeling betrayed because they donated money to Jon and Kate? Maybe I would understand better then.
October 2, 2008 10:23 AM
Does she feel betrayed?
aap I was making a general observation based on what I've read at GWOP, PM's blog, and here as well. For example, there was a blog entry at GWOP a while back where someone talked about how they had sent the Gosselins gifts and money and were now disillusioned and angry that they were lied to. This was followed by several comments regarding this entry agreeing with the sentiment by anti-Gosselins (for lack of a better term) telling their own tales of giving and feeling betrayed. It's way too much of a pain in the ass to try and find that old GWOP blog entry or I'd link it so you can see what I mean. I wasn't pointing the finger at any certain individual here or anywhere. Like I said, it's just a general observation.
If you felt like I was pointing the finger at you and telling you to "deal with it" that wasn't what I meant. I apologize if I wrote in a way that would cause that kind of misunderstanding.
Last Christmas my husband's workplace adopted a needy family to buy gifts for.
Is this family forever tied to the company for the gifts they sent? Do they need to notify the company when their children have outgrown the gifted clothes and toys?
This is a free country. No one is making anyone contribute a darn thing to the G's. They owe no one an explanation for what they do, how they do it, and when. If you're dumb enough to donate to A FAMILY WITH A TV SHOW, then that's on you.
But how RUDE and RIDICULOUS that it's even assumed that they should disclose their personal finances. Would a blog host or commenter volunteer their detailed information with the rest of the internet? (And before some smarty pants replies "yes" to that question, think about the potential harm or embarrassment you could bring to yourself if you did. You'd have to disclose your real full name along with the info, not just random dollar figures. Do you really want people to know YOU haven't saved a dime, or that you don't tithe 10%, or that you're 25k in debt, and that you drive a car you can't afford, or that you pay child support for a kid your friends don't know you have, etc.? My guess is no. Personal finances are just that: Personal.)
Sorry folks, no one is perfect. The G's are no different.
This is a reply to anon 10:01.
I have seen that archive site and I personally don't consider that evidence of dishonesty.
So they've asked for things they've needed or even just wanted. Big deal. To me, that is a little tacky. No one is obligated to give to them.
The argument has been that since the family puts itself on TV, people rightly want all the salacious details about them. That this is the nature of celebrity.
However, "real" celebrities don't have their finances rigorously examined. Not Tom Cruise, who's otherwise had his own share of controversy in recent years. Not Brad and Angelina, whose adopted brood sport designer outfits that, some might argue, should've been eschewed and the money instead given to help the poor countries from whence the children came.
Sure, the Gosselins received donations in some sort of "charitable" act. But they weren't an official, legal charity--they did not create a nonprofit under 501(c). So there is no obligation for the Gosselins to make all their financial dealings known, whether they be purchases for new cribs, sales of clothes to consignment stores, or tooth whitening.
There is also no "public record" issue here, as the term relates to either activity and documentation in the courts (criminal or civil), or activity by government officials.
People may bring up the attempt to gain a Medicaid-paid nurse as somehow being part of public record. But that was back when the younger kids were 1--a whole three years ago. Since they never got that nurse, there is no obligation to reveal anything that falls outside that initial application for the nurse.
Having said that, I think that anything that has come up on the show or on the Gosselins' own site should be fair game. It would be nice to know what happened to all the friends and helpers--they were "characters" on the show like on any other show, and most shows don't just write off a character without an explanation (the oldest Cunningham brother in the first season of "Happy Days" being the exception, haha).
Extending that, anything the Gosselins do in public is also fair game--like celebrities who drunk-drive, go panty-less, or get caught wandering in a drug-induced haze. Though in that respect, avoiding long conversations with "fans" while in an airport doesn't seem to be that big a transgression after all :).
Deluckerloo -
I didn't take offense at the comment because I know that it doesn't apply to me. However, I just find it confusing that you would write a comment here, based on an old message posted on a different message board. Chances are, the people you are directing the "Deal with it" message to aren't going to come here to read it.
Last Christmas my husband's workplace adopted a needy family to buy gifts for.
We do that in our office every year and I love it. It's fun. You get a simple explanation of the family. Ages, genders, ect. No names. I always ask if anyone knows the race of the family, simply because I'd like to buy a doll for a little girl that "fits" her. When I was a kid, I was bummed that most dolls had blond hair and blue eyes and none of them had dark hair and brown eyes like me.
Anyway, we buy clothing and toys and some food (usually a turkey dinner and the trimmings) and wrap them in bright paper (well, not the turkey, obviously). After that, everything is boxed up and taken away. We are told that the family was grateful, but we never hear from them and that's fine. I don't think we're "owed" anything. That's not what the spirit of the gesture is. We buy things and then we ship them off and we assume that the family is grateful. That's what donating is. The gesture is supposed to make you feel good, not something for you to brag about so others will say how wonderful you are because you did it. And the family certainly doesn't owe us a blow by blow description of how long each toy was played with, and who ate all the stuffing.
And you know what? I'm sure when the toys and clothing were outgrown, they either threw them out, passed them on, donated them or sold them at a yard sale. Who cares? Once the gifts are given, it's their property to do with what they want.
If the Gosselins wanted to keep their lives private and don't want people digging into their personal information, they shouldn't be on a TV show and they shouldn't be making public pleas for money. Problem solved. Then no one would be asking these questions except the people who know them personally.
"Is this family forever tied to the company for the gifts they sent? Do they need to notify the company when their children have outgrown the gifted clothes and toys?"
----------------------------
Jen -
Do you really think that once this family gets back on its feet, it wouldn't be appropriate for them to give back similiar to the way that was given to them? Do you believe and/or agree with the pay it forward philosophy?
And the family you helped - do you think they contacted the company directly and said we need help and the comapny just said "sure!" or do you think that they went through a charitable organization that helps people in need?
Do you think that the charitable organization just took their word that they needed help, or do you think the family applying for aid had to give up some "personal" information to show that they had a need then?
Do you think it was RUDE and RIDICULOUS or the charity organization to ask them those questions?
If the Gosselins wanted to keep their lives private and don't want people digging into their personal information, they shouldn't be on a TV show and they shouldn't be making public pleas for money. Problem solved. Then no one would be asking these questions except the people who know them personally.
I think that's blaming the victim. If people behave inappropriately (and I understand that we have a difference of opinion on whether the behavior is inappropriate or not), then it's on them, not on the Gosselins. I can acknowledge that it's a fact that celebrity brings certain intrusions into one's life, but acknowledging it as a fact and approving of it are two different things.
Deluckerloo -
"I didn't take offense at the comment because I know that it doesn't apply to me. However, I just find it confusing that you would write a comment here, based on an old message posted on a different message board. Chances are, the people you are directing the "Deal with it" message to aren't going to come here to read it."
I disagree. There were comments made on this blog by people claiming to be former volunteers or who said they had given charity in one form or another to the Gosselins, and there was a somewhat silly argument hereabouts somewhere over the use of the word 'betrayal.' Again, way too much of a pain in the ass and time consuming to find those comments, but they here on this blog somewhere. Besides that, there are those that read everything and anything Gosselin related. Where they find the time is a mystery. I'm pretty sure I was on topic with my opinion on who is more likely to think they are owed an explanation by the Gosselins and the reasons why.
to mcb,
So how would you feel if you discovered that this family that you bought gifts for and gave a turkey dinner to, actually had money in the bank and could afford to buy the gifts you so graciously gave them? This is why I do not like Jon and Kate because they have scammed SO many people into believing they were poor when they had money in the bank from Jon's Dad. Jon and Kate also continued to hide the fact that many many people were giving them money and more money and Jon and Kate just kept saying we need, we need, we need.
Victims do not have a choice over what is happening to them - victim implies that someone or thing has more power over them and is controlling what they do.
Jon and Kate are in complete control of the situation. They are calling the shots. And they choose to add even more shows to their season, inviting people even more into their personal life. Truth is, they can end this at anytime. They have no one to blame but themselves.
Victims do not have a choice over what is happening to them - victim implies that someone or thing has more power over them and is controlling what they do.
Jon and Kate are in complete control of the situation. They are calling the shots. And they choose to add even more shows to their season, inviting people even more into their personal life. Truth is, they can end this at anytime. They have no one to blame but themselves.
October 2, 2008 12:37 PM
----
But what about volunteers/family that did in fact know what was going on and continued with their "help"?
I would not call them victims...no, not at all.
Kuromi,
I agree with you in the fact that real celebrities do not have their financial records scrutinized (well, most do not). Let me say that I am not a "die hard" fan either way--this post just interested me today.
I think what makes them different in the celebrity status is that "real" celebrities have done something to get them there--a superb athelete, a great actor, etc. They have made this their "job" and therefore are earning a living.
I think what upsets people most (and I could be wrong) is that they themselves are not working and have received monetary donations, gifts, etc and are apparently no longer suffering financially. In that respect, they can no longer claim that they "need" this income. Perhaps that is why people are so inquisitive--do they really need the money now?
Honestly, I don't really care either way, but hope that they are putting their children's earned money into accounts for them. If I was going to get upset about anything, it would be that these kids should have their money protected.
Who knows if it is. We may (and most likely) will never know.
As far as the other questions about family members and helpers, it would be nice to know what happened to them. I agree a real tv show rarely just writes someone off. But I also think all you'll hear them say is, "We don't need the help anymore."
Just my opinion.
So anonymous 12:37 --
You're saying that they've asked for it?
I want know:
Where's Aunt Jodi?
Am I owed an explanation? Nope. But if I don't get another version, then I guess I have to give a whole lot of weight to the one I've read.
Should I consider the source and the character of the people involved when forming my opinion---
Yes! And I consider the source of the version I've heard (Julie, confirmed by Jodi,) as pretty solid.
Why trust them?---Well, Kate said herself that Jodi was loving and that she trusted her with her children with her (when sick, also, every Friday morning.) Kate is Jodi's character witness.
Note to the moderators: I love this thread! And I am less convinced of the pro-Gosselin arguments every day, but I still feel welcome. Well done!
I think that the question of why don't they give back? Is not why they don't give to the people that gave, but why don't they give back to families that need help? They were given all those nice clothes, and she does make them stay very clean. As clean as those kids are most of the time, their clothes have to been in great condition. Why not find a family in the community that needs clothes?? Or simply donate them to Goodwill. No one would even have to know that it was them. And no, I don't think that they OWE us the explanation for it, but I think that if this is what was happening, someone, somewhere would be reporting about it, and I think that that's why it bothers people. If you're going to be on TV and put yourself out there, you can't get mad when people have questions about what happens in your life. You invited us into your home so that we could peaking into your windows, as they put it, and instead of answering a ton of questions the public had, they have posed even more.
Questions:
1. Is there a college fund?
2. Why does Kate choose not to have a relationship with her parents?
3. Why sell all donated items?
4. Why didn't J&K donate cribs to the military couple expecting twins if they had said that they would?
5. Do J&K give back to their church in time or talents or money? All of the children use the nursery or Sunday school. Do J&K volunteer their time?
6. What happened to Beth and the older ladies seen on the show? We have heard that Carla is doing yardwork for J&K, but what of the others?
7. Do J&K pay the twins' school fees or the preschool tuition for the six? Were all these items donated to the family?
8. Did J&K buy their van with their own money or with donations?
9. How much money did Jon inherit from his dad's estate?
10. Were the Gs on welfare when the twins were born or the sextuplets?
11. Did the Gs get food stamps while they were accepting food donations from the Wyo-Eliz. area?
12. When will the free clothes stop from the Gap stop? Once the free clothes stop, will they have to buy fewer clothes or consigned clothes or accept hand-me-downs?
13. Will there be a final episode of J&K Plus 8 where the J&K pull the plug on the cameras and mikes and transform their studio back in to a house?
14. Who pays the Gs health insurance....J&K or Figure 8 or TLC?
I really think maybe the root of this is the ideas we each have about charitable donations. From my perspective, when you give - whether it's time, money or goods or services, it should be done with an open heart. Meaning, you have no expectations of return, of "paying it forward" (I tend to see that as more a karmic concept anyway, rather than some tangible contract that is placed on the recipient of the gift), nor do you have a say in how it is used.
I'm thinking about my own history of giving - when I donate to an organization, I try to make sure it's a reputable one. If I found out that the organization was not being responsible with donations, I would not donate to that organization any more. Would I be angry? I don't know. Maybe a bit. Certainly not nearly as angry as people who haven't even ever given the Gosselins anything seem to be about the way they've handled donations.
When I give a dollar to a panhandler, I know damn well that he might not use it to get something to eat, like he claims he will. He may very well use it for alcohol. That's one reason I don't give to panhandlers too often. But when I do give, again, once I've given it's the recipient's chose to use the money as he wishes. If he wants to buy gin with it, that's his business. I gave up the right to know when I gave up the money.
I have rarely been in the situation of giving to someone like the Gosselins. Maybe a couple of times. Last Xmas, a co-worker let a few people know about a friend of hers, a teacher, who was collecting gifts for a needy family. I got a Target gift card - I think it was $10 - so, nothing I couldn't afford.
If I had found out it was all a scam, and the family wasn't really needy, or the teacher was a con artist and pocketed my lousy $10 Target card, would I be mad? Probably a little sad. But I wouldn't waste a bunch of indignation on it. Again, for me it goes back to the idea that charity needs to be done with an open heart and once you've given, you really need to let it go.
Anonymous @ 12:37 p.m.
"Victims do not have a choice over what is happening to them - victim implies that someone or thing has more power over them and is controlling what they do.
Jon and Kate are in complete control of the situation. They are calling the shots. And they choose to add even more shows to their season, inviting people even more into their personal life. Truth is, they can end this at anytime. They have no one to blame but themselves."
You are correct when you say that they chose to to do a show, but I must disagree with your assertion that "they are in complete control of the situation."
J&K cannot control what others think about them and their choices, what relatives of in-laws say about them in blogs, the dangers some of their "fans" or "haters" present to them and theirs. Yes, these are all results of their decision to have a show, but these are all things outside of their control. I also don't think "they can end this at anytime." At this point, I believe even ending the show won't stop some of the people who have become obsessed with this family.
On a related note, IMO, many people who have stated that they have given to the Gosselins and feel "betrayed" or mislead seem to take on a victim persona. The Gosselins did not force them to give. It was a choice these people made of their own free will. For them to feel victimized, because the Gosselins were not as needy as they originally thought or that the Gosselins misrepresented themselves, is a gross overreaction, IMO. If I were in a similar situation, I would feel more like a fool than a victim.
People who are in the public eye still have the right to privacy. The personal finances or relationships of a celebrity really are no business of the public.
And I don't think that the Gosselin's should have to choose between a reality show that helps them pay the bills and support their family and their relatives being harrassed, but the fact that we are here everyday arguing about it makes a pretty clear statement that this is exactly how it is whether we like it or not. It's not unfair for a celebrity to ask for privacy, they just aren't likely to get it.
All I can say is that my mom taught me to try to put myself in another person's situation before passing harsh judgement. If I were in Kate's place, as I percieve it to be, I wouldn't answer one question that I didn't feel comfortable answering. I would say "If you don't like the way I live, don't watch a show about my life" and be done with it. No amount of money or fame would make me answer to a bunch of people who are obviously going to think what they want to anyway. What's the point?
I don't think that anyone who really dislikes them actually wants the answers. Imo, it's more about wanting kate to say it outright so that they can go about proving that she lied. In the world of "I hate Kate Gosselin", nothing is the truth unless it's negative.
App-
Q: Do you really think that once this family gets back on its feet, it wouldn't be appropriate for them to give back similiar to the way that was given to them? Do you believe and/or agree with the pay it forward philosophy?
A: I really don't care what people do with the things we donate to them. Pay it Forward is the title of a movie, for crying out loud. To expect every person who's ever received a handout to do that is a little extreme.
Q: And the family you helped - do you think they contacted the company directly and said we need help and the comapny just said "sure!" or do you think that they went through a charitable organization that helps people in need?
A: If the G's church at any point considered them to be a family in need, that's good enough for me. It happens all the time around here and we take those things at face value. And anyone with 8 tiny children is a family in need, in my opinion. Yes Kate has a bad attitude and Jon is a pushover, but those kids shouldn't be punished for that.
Q: Do you think that the charitable organization just took their word that they needed help, or do you think the family applying for aid had to give up some "personal" information to show that they had a need then?
A: Not all organizations that help people do background checks. More often than not, if someone in a community cries out for help, the community responds. Period. In my experience, rarely does someone stand up and say, "Wait, hold on a sec, I'll need to see your bank statement and a credit report." People generally act on requests for help. And I doubt that anyone would bat an eye at helping a family with 6 new babies. As in the case of the G's, people were practically lined up at the door begging to help.
Q: Do you think it was RUDE and RIDICULOUS or the charity organization to ask them those questions?
A: No. But the general public isn't a charitable organization. It's not the place of strangers on the internet to request this info from them.
If the "teacher" in Guinevere's scenario above pocketed the gift card and I found out about it, I'd be furious. I'd consider it theft, and I'd demand my gift card back. I don't think it's legal to collect for a charity and not give it to where you say it's going. Isn't that fraud? Some scams are illegal.
I am not saying that the Gosselins did that, by the way, since I never gave them anything. I am just giving my reaction. I had an experience with a pastor collecting money for a purpose and then trying to use it for something else. I spoke up, went above his head, and saw the money given to the proper fund. I believe I did the right thing.
Thanks Anon 12:46 for your thoughtful response.
There have been several comments from people about the Gosselins claiming to be needy when they are getting freebies and not working jobs outside the show. But one begat the other--the situations didn't exist simultaneously.
First, J&K became pregnant with the 'tups, and the community rallied around them. (By community I mean not just their hometown, but everyone who felt the need to help). This eventually resulted in (1) donations of items, money, etc.; and (2) the call to star in a documentary.
That documentary spawned another, which in turn spawned the TV series.
The TV series, in turn, generated interest from sponsors--whether they be a ski resort, Disney, a train or airline, perhaps even a builder for a new home (you can't plame homebuilders for seizing any opportunity for publicity in these heady economic times, heheh.) It also gave J&K the opportunity to become paid speakers.
Today we have a family that supports itself through the TV show, generating things and income because of it. It does not seem they are soliciting charity any longer; instead they are the platform that these companies use to promote themselves, by "giving" the Gosselins all this stuff. Being a TV personality is now the parents' job, in which they work by (A) being filmed 3 or 4 days a week;(B) becoming spokespersons for various groups, taking the time to be interviewed on the organization's behalf; (C) traveling to speaking engagements. While (A) involves the kids, it's only 3 or 4 days a week, not 24-7.
(B) and (C) don't involve the kids--it's the parents working to generate the income through these routes, though I guess they've brought the twins on occasion so they can have a fun trip.
Hmmm... explanations they should provide... There are a lot of questions I'd love to see truthfully answered but I don't think they should HAVE to answer them. Even with putting their family on display they are entitled to some privacy and to keep some issues private.
That said they are two-faced when it comes to give & take. They seem to think they can demand society to care for their family then expect the version they share on TV to be "thanks" enough. All it does though is increase curiosity, not alleviate it. So the burden to meet the needs of their audience is on them. They chose to become reality celebs so they've also chosen to be scrutinized by viewers. And that comes with a lot of questions!
As for the the money issue, for me it's two-fold. The first problem is I feel they haven't "earned" the life they're living. Many of us work our butts off sun-up to sun-down just to barely make ends meet without the benefit of nannies, chefs or camera crews to ensure the our children's needs are met and memories are preserved.
The Gosselins merely popped out two sets of multiples then sat back and expected to be provided for. Jon quit several jobs, Kate quit hers and they stuck out their hands "pleading 8" and demanded society fund their choices. They didn't work for any of the perks they're now benefitting from.
I didn't feel this way when Jon was still working because I felt he was still doing his part to take care of his family. Same with Kate, she was doing her part at home. Just a mere year later they're jetting around the country while nannies raise their children. THAT is my problem.
Do they owe an explanation for this choice? I don't know, what I do know is they began the show claiming hardship and at some point they should address how & why things have changed so dramatically since. Especially since we can still see the early episodes that hammer home the vast changes in their lifestyle.
The other problem ties in with this... imagine if you rallied your community together to raise funds for a disease, and the chapter you donated to decided to spend those funds to whiten the teeth of the spokesperson instead of putting it into research. Do you have the right to be angry that your donation went to something other than research? Or do they have the right to decide where they think donations should be spent?
There's a reason charities are accountable for donations they accept. They have to let the public know where the money goes not just to ensure donations are respected but to ensure that people will continue to give in the future.
Anyone who puts their hand out and ASKS for donations are expected to use it wisely. There's a huge difference between a community rallying to help a family in need such as supplying food & clothing to those who lost their home in a fire, and a family actively seeking donations to help raise the children they feel society should support.
The Gosselins have set themselves up as a charity of sorts by demanding special treatment and requesting funds (not donated items but MONEY). By doing so they should be held accountable just like any other charity to show that the money is going where it's needed, not where it's "wanted" (need = clothing, want = designer clothing).
Quite frankly if they don't want to be held accountable for donations they should stop accepting them. They asked for them and when the need was no longer there they should have redirected those donating to a family or organization who had need.
Personally, I don't give a rat's patootie about "where are the grandparents" because it's really not my business nor is it essential to the show. Likewise, wherever Beth may be is not something Kate needs to tell me. The only thing I think Kate owes her "adoring public" is the truth about the college "accounts" that the PA Gov. set up on their first birthday, and why they reneged on their promise to donate back all the kids' stuff (cribs, etc) that had been donated to them.
I enjoy the show and although I would love to have some questions answered, I do not feel that they owe anyone any explanations at all. Like many have said before, no one makes anyone give anything, there's a little thing called free will. Also, people act like they are still saying how needy they are. Kate has said herself in at least one episode that they used to be in that position, but I don't think they consider themselves to be needy anymore. Remember people, in the beginning they weren't making big money and having everything paid for. Just because they are now making money off of the show, speaking engagements, or whatever doesn't mean they are still getting "handouts" from churches or people in the community. To those of you who don't think they should be making money off of anything, you better not ever pay to get into a concert and turn off your T.V. because everyone there is making money too. Infact you'd better take it up with the world, because that's the way it works!
So how would you feel if you discovered that this family that you bought gifts for and gave a turkey dinner to, actually had money in the bank and could afford to buy the gifts you so graciously gave them?
That's why the gift is anonymous (you know, kind of like your screen name?) and that's the chance you take. It could happen, and I'm sure it does, because there are a lot of welfare and charity cheats in this country. But, I'd rather stick my head in the clouds and not be suspicious and bitter about every stinking thing (you know, like most GWoPpers are every time they watch an episode of J&K?).
Besides, Jon and Kate are not anonymous. Everyone who gave to them knew who and what they were giving to.
This is why I do not like Jon and Kate because they have scammed SO many people into believing they were poor when they had money in the bank from Jon's Dad.
And do we have proof of this, or are we supposed to believe the gospel according to bitter Julie, the pseudo-relative with an axe to grind? I believe Jon and Kate inherited money when Mr. Gosselin passed away (when the 'tups were young), thus giving them the down payment for the larger house, but, sorry, I'm not buying that they had a hidden nest egg when she was pregnant and when the babies were tiny.
The "money stashed away" is yet another story that GWoP pushes ad nauseum, even though they have no proof. Another example of repeating something enough times that it becomes fact.
The other problem ties in with this... imagine if you rallied your community together to raise funds for a disease, and the chapter you donated to decided to spend those funds to whiten the teeth of the spokesperson instead of putting it into research. Do you have the right to be angry that your donation went to something other than research? Or do they have the right to decide where they think donations should be spent?
We don't know where their money is going, and therefore have no right to be angry at all.
There's a reason charities are accountable for donations they accept. They have to let the public know where the money goes not just to ensure donations are respected but to ensure that people will continue to give in the future.
Anytime a person accumulates a certain amount of money through donations they are required to claim it as income on their taxes. They are also required to keep reciepts in case of an audit. That is how they account for it. They are not recognized as a charity and therefore do not owe (at least legally) the public anything. There may be charities that collected on their behalf, but even then I doubt you could hold them responsible for what the family did with that money that was collected.
Quite frankly if they don't want to be held accountable for donations they should stop accepting them. They asked for them and when the need was no longer there they should have redirected those donating to a family or organization who had need.
At this point, I tend to think that most of the donations they are getting now are from companies that want give to them not out of the goodness of their hearts, but for advertising. They give to the Gosselins because they are a famous family who have tons of fans who want to have what they have. It's business. I doubt very seriously that these places would keep sending them stuff if they were just going to donate it to someone else.
Great post kuromi! I've been trying to formulate a similar post. I think they've gone from being needy to seemingly "rich" in a very short time. That doesn't mean they didn't truly need help at one time.
As to whether they have "earned" their current status-well in our society many people are "famous for being famous". Paris Hilton gets paid to be seen at parties.
What did she ever "do" to deserve that?
Questions:
1. Is there a college fund?
Relevant ONLY if they're still asking for donations. If not, NONE of our business.
2. Why does Kate choose not to have a relationship with her parents?
ABSOLUTELY NONE of our business. That's a private family matter, which MOST people (except Julie, evidently) don't blab about in a public forum.
3. Why sell all donated items?
Because once gifted, it is their property to do with what they want. Plus, we have NO proof that they do sell ALL (key word) donated items. They had a yard sale. Big whoop. I sold some of my baby supplies at a yard sale and GASP.....some of them were given to me as shower gifts.
4. Why didn't J&K donate cribs to the military couple expecting twins if they had said that they would?
Never heard them say that and do you have proof they didn't (besides the flapping jaws of a disgruntled sister of a sister in law?)
5. Do J&K give back to their church in time or talents or money? All of the children use the nursery or Sunday school. Do J&K volunteer their time?
What they do for and in their house of worship is their call. Besides, would you have time to do very much volunteer work with eight kids under the age of seven? I would assume that they give to their church in the same way most others do, the collection plate. Until their kids are older, I wouldn't expect them to do much more.
6. What happened to Beth and the older ladies seen on the show? We have heard that Carla is doing yardwork for J&K, but what of the others?
Since these these ladies were a part of earlier shows, asking about them now is natural. Congrats! You're one for six in the decency department so far.
But, the "WE have HEARD" part is disturbing. This means you're once again spreading rumors as "fact." Perhaps Carla doesn't WANT that to be advertised (not that it ever stopped a GWoPper from sticking their noses where they don't belong).
7. Do J&K pay the twins' school fees or the preschool tuition for the six? Were all these items donated to the family?
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99) is a Federal law that protects the privacy of student education records.
8. Did J&K buy their van with their own money or with donations?
GOOD GOD! Why is that any of our business? Maybe Dr. Gosselin bought it for them.
9. How much money did Jon inherit from his dad's estate?
SERIOUSLY? Okay, this has to be a joke, right? Ugh. Not even going to address that one.
10. Were the Gs on welfare when the twins were born or the sextuplets?
Head exploding.....
11. Did the Gs get food stamps while they were accepting food donations from the Wyo-Eliz. area?
Most people that need food donations DO get some sort of assistance from other places. Do you stand outside your local food bank and frisk people for welfare cards, WIC coupons and food stamps? I'll bet you'll find plenty. Get real.
12. When will the free clothes stop from the Gap stop? Once the free clothes stop, will they have to buy fewer clothes or consigned clothes or accept hand-me-downs?
That's between the Gosselins and GAP. And who really gives a crap about that? GAP is getting free advertising. I'm sure they're pleased as punch.
13. Will there be a final episode of J&K Plus 8 where the J&K pull the plug on the cameras and mikes and transform their studio back in to a house?
I don't know, can you see into the future to answer that, or are you just being stubborn and obtuse?
14. Who pays the Gs health insurance....J&K or Figure 8 or TLC?
They're under contract to Figure 8, so I'm sure part of that is insurance. As long as the State of Pennsylvania isn't using your tax dollars for that, who gives a rat's butt?
Seriously. NO person would answer most of these extremely intrusive questions. Just the fact that GWoPpers for some reason feel entitled to know the answers to these is proof we've been right all along about them. Creepy. Yikes.
No I dont think they owe us any explanation, not on anything. Its there business, not ours. Do I want to know things sure, but thats just me being nosey..lol :)
Above mcb reposts someone else's question:
4. Why didn't J&K donate cribs to the military couple expecting twins if they had said that they would?
Then mcb responds:
Never heard them say that and do you have proof they didn't (besides the flapping jaws of a disgruntled sister of a sister in law?)
I am fairly sure you are incorrect in attributing the story to Julie. I thought the account was written by Penn Mommy. It was her personal experience in response to another poster who asked if she had personal knowledge of K&J's lack of generosity. I thought it was a pretty good example of their lack of generosity, and it was her personal experience. It satisfied me.
As far as I am concerned, no explanations are necessary. (About anything!)
I think it is ridiculous for us to think that we are entitled to any kind of explanation from Jon or Kate. I realize that they have chosen to open their lives up for us to watch once a week on TLC but that is that. We are already given a rather large glimpse into their personal life, how many of us open our home to viewers? Yes, they have chosen that (and, it is something that I may have not done for myself or my family) but, I still don't think it entitles us to anything more than they have already given us. I really enjoy watching the show and watching the kids (because they are adorable). I think that Jon and Kate have their flaws and maybe their actions are questionable at times. But, isn't that true of all of us? I can't imagine what people would think of me if they watched me at the moments that a television crew edited together to get the best television ratings. I can't imagine what it is like to be so judged by people who don't even know you, they only know a piece of you.
MCB,
I have to agree with everything you said.
Some of the questions were so personal that I'd feel offended if someone asked me those!
However, "real" celebrities don't have their finances rigorously examined.
IMO because they don't solicit their "fans" for anything either (for themselves) - they clearly do not misrepresent themselves as people in need.
So they've asked for things they've needed or even just wanted. Big deal. To me, that is a little tacky. No one is obligated to give to them.
January 2005 - Jon's Father passes away and Jon mentions their "financial" situation - twice.
You're saying that they've asked for it?
I'm saying what is going on comes with the territory. I am also saying that if the scrunity truly bothered them, they could end the show with season 3 and not increase the number shows for season 4.
I'm also saying that there are instances when crazed fans have stalked and killed their celebrity idol, and I hope they took that into consideration before they subjected their young kids to this. I'm saying that I am sure Jon and Kate looked at all the pros and cons of the situation, and have decided that the money and perks they receive is worth the harassment they face. It's their choice to exploit their family that way, and they have to face the effects - good and bad - that come with it.
Anonymous 5:09 said: "January 2005 - Jon's Father passes away and Jon mentions their "financial" situation - twice."
Just a note, if Jon's father passed away in January unless he left them money that passed free of probate or it was gifted to them prior to his death, it is highly unlikely that they received money directly after he died. I have a case that has not cleared probate after 4 years (granted that is a contested case). Even in a non-contested case it takes time to get money disbursed from an estate.
I really don't care what people do with the things we donate to them.
Uhmm, can I have your address? Because I have a bunch of kids I need to feed and my husband can't hold a job.
I don't remember Jon and Kate portraying themselves as "people in need" in the past two seasons. Yes, they did that at the time the babies were born, when neither of them was employed. That was over four years ago and it was before their TV series started! If anything, during the past several shows, they say how grateful they are for their current situation. Times change and so do circumstances, so why keep beating a dead horse??
Anon. 5:09 said "January 2005 - Jon's Father passes away and Jon mentions their "financial" situation - twice."
Just a minor point but if Jon's father passed away and left them money they would not have gotten it immediately. If the sum of money was really the size that has been alleged the estate must have been fairly sizeable and it would have had to go through probate which can be a lengthy process. Unless the money was gifted prior to his death, or the money passed in some way outside of probate (life insurance, joint tenant accounts)they could still have been in a desperate money situation immediately after he died.
I want to know if they like Sarah Palin!
I don't remember Jon and Kate portraying themselves as "people in need" in the past two seasons.
No, but claiming bagels are a "rare treat" and claiming that the one on one days happened because the "save" and explaining they only can happen once a year because that's all they can "afford" is misleading.
"they could still have been in a desperate money situation immediately after he died."
IMO. I would think "after he died" Jon would be in mourning rather than worrying about his financial situation.
Why are we concerned about their financial situation? Have any of the people that are commenting given the Gosselins money or things? I could understand if you had given them something and then come to find that they weren't in need some upset or confusion. But, why does anyone care? In the end, the Gosselins have to live with the decisions they have made and the claims they have made to the public. If they are wrong or not truthful, they have to deal with that. The only thing we can do is not judge them. It isn't our place.
Anon 7:00: I wasn't commenting on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the statements. I was pointing out that money doesn't necessarily go from deceased's bank account to heir. Doesn't mean they weren't mourning, but to be honest when you are horribly worried about money it is hard to think of anything else, for right or wrong.
Anon 6:51, I don't think bagels were a rare treat for financial reasons. I thought it was more rare treat because they don't like the processed, prepackaged foods. (My family didn't buy those things either, even when we could afford it.)
I agree with quiltart who says that in the past two seasons they do not portray themselves as people in need. As a matter of fact, I have heard them say that their situation has changed dramatically.
By the way, I do not view them saying that things like "bagels" are a rare treat because of their cost. I have always looked at this as an example of her quirky food issues. Plain bagels are considered "empty carbohydrates."
As far as the issue of claiming that they can only do the special days once a year, I did not perceive that to be a matter of "saving." I perceived that to be a matter of logistics.
I am the youngest of 8 kids and it was not money that got in the way of "one on one" time. It was schedules and babysitting and figuring out how to pick the first one. I did not view them as saying that it was money. As a matter of fact, I don't think that they mentioned money.
I did not perceive that to be a matter of "saving."
This is not a matter of perception, Kate explains the reason for this as cost.
I love the show! And I don't understand all the negativity surrounding it and the obsession.
I feel that there is nothing wrong with what Jon and Kate are doing. They were asked to do the show after the birth of their 2nd set of multiples and everything they have received free or had donated to them is because of the show. They are being paid to do the show and are now able to support their family in a way which they may not have been able to.
The people that dislike them so much and spend hours upon hours obsessing about them, need to put that energy into something else. There are far more important issues going on in the world today such as world hunger or the economic issues in the USA then worrying about Jon and Kate.
If you don't like them, then don't watch. Honestly the more haters that tune in the show to take notes and nitpick every single thing said and done puts the ratings up. If you hate Jon and Kate so much then don't watch and stop talking about them.
Just let it go!!
So someone told me that the new People this week with the Paul Newman tribute has a sick page spread of the Gosselins. Is this true? I'm so excited to pick it up. I'm also scared to see how people are going to bash it regardless. Hopefully we will see some good letters and not those from GWOP trying to get 10 seconds of fame by bashing them in the hopes of the publicity for their hate site.
So they've asked for things they've needed or even just wanted. Big deal. To me, that is a little tacky. No one is obligated to give to them.
Anon 5:09 said:
January 2005 - Jon's Father passes away and Jon mentions their "financial" situation - twice.
I did find that strange. Dishonest? No. But strange. Just as I found PM blogging while her son is ill unusual. Not something *I* would do but maybe it took her mind off things. I don't know.
I also remember seeing Jon and Kate expressing gratitude many, many times to specific donors whenever they received any items. It seems as if some people (not you specifically, anon) missed that part.
I'll be sure to pick it up!!
Hopefully we will see some good letters and not those from GWOP trying to get 10 seconds of fame by bashing them in the hopes of the publicity for their hate site.
IMO, both "sides" have valid reasoning for their positions. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, for example, the financial aspects. There are a lot of people who dismiss this position, but there are those that don't - not because they are "nosy" I don't think it has to do with intimate details, I think it has to do misrepresentation - now, then, whenever. Regardless of how you feel, everyone is entitled to an opinion.
Do you think that Anne Hathaway should be answering questions about her ex-boyfriends financial dealing? She not implicated in any wrong doing, yet this week she's been on Lettermen and interviewed in People magazine talking about it.
Do people really have a right to know? No. Are people curious? I'm sure some are. Do you think she really wants to be answering these questions? No, I'm sure she doesn't want to talk about her private life. She's an actress and wants to be talking about the movie she's promoting.
So why do you think she is doing this? Because she wants to continue to make movies and can only do that if people will pay to see her in them. If people's opinion of her are negative due to what ever her boyfriend may or may not have done, she'll be out of a job. Hence, having to talk about her private life in public to get it over and done with and everyone can move along.
Jon and Kate are not actors. They are selling themselves as themselves and their family life. They are inviting you to come into their lives to see how they live. Their income is dependent on their tv show. To continue to have a tv show, they need viewers. The more questions and issues that are raised, the more curious people are going to be. As someone pointed out, they don't have to respond but if they don't, then Julie's story is the only one out there. And if public perception of them shifts due to GWoP and Julie, then they are out of a job.
Anonymous 7:34 -
Tell me what K said. I am open to re-examining this.
I've heard speculation(via other blog spots) that J/K are considering going, "the brand" route, similar to what M. Stewart has done. Meaning that they would branch out to have a Gosselin line of products. I would like to know if this true. I would enjoy seeing J/K support their family in this manner. Kate would get the fame and attention that she seems to seek, and perhaps Jon could stay at home, run the household and raise the kids free of the cameras and Kate's overbearing puppet strings. A win-win all around, imho.
In a nut shell, I wonder about things. But I don't feel they owe me any explanations. I choose to believe that they are doing what they do with the best of intentions.
"If I had found out it was all a scam, and the family wasn't really needy, or the teacher was a con artist and pocketed my lousy $10 Target card, would I be mad? Probably a little sad. But I wouldn't waste a bunch of indignation on it."
Guinevere, just a question. What if you did find out it was a scam, and that the teacher was now asking other people for donations. Would you sit by and let others donate $ 10? Or would you share your story with them?
Linda,
The only thing I can say is rewatch all of the "day" episodes.
I would enjoy seeing J/K support their family in this manner.
Yes - something that doesn't involve the kids.
I don't have a problem with speaking engagements - my caveat is please paint an accurate picture, not one of "need". (Yes, I know NMD attended the latest and THAT time there was no mention - but I also heard at that engagement the Pastor asked all the questions - if you have nothing to "hide" why not open up the questioning to the floor? - sorry tangent)
I changed my mind about what I wanted to say.
I was going to say that I wish Kate would market her "own" ideas. Not penny pinching tactics that obviously she doesn't do in real life or how to make a sandwich with slices of apple.
But you know what - if someone wants to buy a product of Kate's more power to them - just let the kids be kids.
Believe me, I have.
Just last week, I viewed a re-run of a season 3 episode of J&K8. For all of the griping that so many people have said about them playing people regarding their trips and financial situations, I saw and heard them say that we could not take the kids on these trips were it not for the show. I also saw and heard them say that they could not have imagined how their situation would have changed from when the tups were born.
I do not recall what was said exactly about the special days though.
Can you see that perhaps the comment about bagels being a rare treat for their family might not have to do with $ but rather because of Ks food issues?
I do not recall what was said exactly about the special days though.
My comments about the "we save" and "we can only afford to do it once a year" are specifically from what I recall - the "special day" episodes (I don't recall whose special day specifically).
The bagels, it's hard to say, because Kate uses the term so frequently - I always took it as pertaining to the financial aspect of the bagels, the crab, etc.
Guinevere, just a question. What if you did find out it was a scam, and that the teacher was now asking other people for donations. Would you sit by and let others donate $ 10? Or would you share your story with them?
Aap - thank you, that's what I have not been able to articulate.
I'd ask Kate if she can hook me up with a free Gap hoodie.
Jenn -
"I really don't care what people do with the things we donate to them. Pay it Forward is the title of a movie, for crying out loud. To expect every person who's ever received a handout to do that is a little extreme."
First, it actually was a philosphy that someone turned into a movie, but if you want to get all your information from Hollywood, be my guest. However, before you mock something, it might help to do a little bit more research on it. It is repaying kindness given to you so hopefully another person will show kindness to another. It has nothing to do with someone giving you $10 and they you turning around and giving someone else $10. It doesn't even mean that you need to donate money to another person, just that when you are able and know of someone else in need, you will help them as someone once help you in whatever way you can. And it certainly doesn't mean that if you write a check to someone to make a donation, that you will get a check back for the same amount. (Which, according to the story Kate tells, seems an awful lot of the Christian version of paying it forward - however, I did hear the story 2nd hand so I can't vouch for the fact that Kate actually tells this story.)
"Meaning, you have no expectations of return, of "paying it forward" (I tend to see that as more a karmic concept anyway, rather than some tangible contract that is placed on the recipient of the gift), nor do you have a say in how it is used."
Guinevere, that is actually how I look at it as well. Let me clarify something. When I do an act of kindness for someone, for the most part I don't expected it to repaid or that the person will pay it forward. I really hope it will, because I think the world would be a better place if people repaid kindness to them with kindness shown to others. I am truly sorry that some people seem to think otherwise. But once I decide to donate something to someone, I don't hound them and make them tell me how they used it or spent the donation because I've gotten enough information initially to make sure that the money/services/gifts would be used in a responsible manner.
Jon and Kate, however, have stated their "Family Mission Statement" - the importance of giving back because "we were ONCE the recipients of kindness." Therefore, based on their words, I would expect them to do it. First, because as I explained, I think it's the right thing to do, and second, they made a public statement that they intend on doing it. So whether or not you believe that a gift or donation is theirs to do what ever they want with it, it's actually not relevant because they have said themselves that their "mission" is to give back.
Q: Do you think it was RUDE and RIDICULOUS or the charity organization to ask them those questions?
A: No. But the general public isn't a charitable organization.
If the Gosselins are asking - let me repeat ASKING - the public for money, then I think it's fair game to ask them how they intend on using it. Maybe you don't want to make sure that the money you are donating is going to a good cause, but I sure do.
Guinevere, just a question. What if you did find out it was a scam, and that the teacher was now asking other people for donations. Would you sit by and let others donate $ 10? Or would you share your story with them?
I would probably share it if it were practical for me to do so.
Though I'd point out that that is not the case here; I've not seen anyone credible come forward saying that they were defrauded by the Gosselins (and how anyone would even know such a thing without an in-depth look at their finances escapes me; we've only speculated on what their "need" and resources have been at various times).
Guinevere,
We are talking about a hypothetical situation, and what you would do if you were faced with it. But I don't know what you mean by practical. Can you elaborate?
Maybe it's a failure of imagination on my part, but can you detail the scenario a bit? In my case, I wouldn't have had any way of finding out. I still have trouble imagining a scenario where I would have so much info about a strangers' finances that I would KNOW I was being scammed.
If I knew it and was in circumstances similar to the one I was in, I would certainly tell my co-worker and probably discuss it with other co-workers that I thought might contribute. I think that's about all I would do. If the circumstances were the same as the case I mentioned, I wouldn't go to a lot of trouble trying to get my $10 back, and I doubt I'd feel it was worthy of contacting the police.
Does that answer your question?
Maybe it's a failure of imagination on my part, but can you detail the scenario a bit?
Or a reluctance to try? This is a hypothetical situation. If you had the ability to save someone some grief - would you do it?
Guinevere, in my opinion, you are a steadfast Gosselin supporter and are unable to fathom that they may be capable of the things that some people have already decided are a given. That is your right. But the stubborness to even try to imagine a hypothetical situation you cannot attempt?
I can't even begin to imagine how that type of thinking could even be described as open minded - it's just not.
No, but claiming bagels are a "rare treat" and claiming that the one on one days happened because the "save" and explaining they only can happen once a year because that's all they can "afford" is misleading.
--
The Gs are constantly obfuscating financial issues on the show. For instance, they stated saving for the Banana republic shopping trip, but BR is a subsidiary of the Gap. So, weren't the clothes free...so why state that they saved.
I've got a couple of questions:
1) What is this family mission statement that is discussed so frequently?
2) Upon what or whom are we basing the idea that J&K were actually being "funded" by Js dad? How long did this happen?
===================
Anon -
I'll really have to pay closer attention to the couch scenes for the special days. Your memory and my memory of what they said are very different.
Linda -
Jon and Kate talked about creating a family mission statement - they actually wrote it on poster board and read what they wrote on camera - in one of the shows. I'm sorry, I don't know what episode it was - maybe the one when Jon and Kate are assigning chores to the girls?
Guinevere -
It really was a hypothetical question, and you did answer it.
But since you asked about how you would know that the person is dishonest, here is a way you could have found out.
Maybe your sister babysits for the teacher and saw first hand what she was doing, and told you that the teacher misused the gift card.
So, I just realized some of the lengths I (well, not I exactly) would go to make some money.
I'm watching Regis and Kelly because I am wondering if Kelly's going to ask Jon and Kate some of the difficult questions (don't have high hopes, but we'll see. I can't see them going into depth on the show in general, and don't know how much they can get in in the 3 minutes they have on the show), and they have a contest for the funniest dancer - the winner gets $50,000 big ones! My husband, one of the most, shall we say, interesting dancers in the world, could totally take that money. I would be willing to share the embarassment of 2 minutes of dancing in exchange for $50,000.00 (whether or not my husband would go along with it is another story, but he has a good sense of humor so it could be a possibility.) Too bad we missed the deadline.
Sorry, but the pay it forward concept is pretty lame (and, um, yes, I am aware it's not just a movie title, but thanks for the clarification).
Since when is helping someone a tit-for-tat experience? I can't even imagine helping someone only on the condition that they "pay it forward" (gag). If everyone had that expectation hanging over their heads, no one would ever ask for help! It's naive to assume that all people have a giver's heart. Some people are naturally generous, and others hold things close to the vest while demanding more. In the end we all balance each other out. The givers wouldn't have anyone to give to if there were no takers.
I think anyone who has contributed to the kids' college funds have a right to know whether or not the money is still there, and if not, why not.
qc -
Just curious, did you contribute to the kids college funds?
Jen -
Since you didn't get it the first time, I'll repeat it again.
I made it clear in my post to you that I don't expect people to pay it forward - I just hope they do because I think the world would be a better place if they did that. I'm sorry that you find that thought repulsive.
mcb at 3:12 on Oct. 2 answered questions:
Questions:
1. Is there a college fund?
Relevant ONLY if they're still asking for donations. If not, NONE of our business.
2. Why does Kate choose not to have a relationship with her parents?
ABSOLUTELY NONE of our business. That's a private family matter, which MOST people (except Julie, evidently) don't blab about in a public forum.
3. Why sell all donated items?
Because once gifted, it is their property to do with what they want. Plus, we have NO proof that they do sell ALL (key word) donated items. They had a yard sale. Big whoop. I sold some of my baby supplies at a yard sale and GASP.....some of them were given to me as shower gifts.
4. Why didn't J&K donate cribs to the military couple expecting twins if they had said that they would?
Never heard them say that and do you have proof they didn't (besides the flapping jaws of a disgruntled sister of a sister in law?)
5. Do J&K give back to their church in time or talents or money? All of the children use the nursery or Sunday school. Do J&K volunteer their time?
What they do for and in their house of worship is their call. Besides, would you have time to do very much volunteer work with eight kids under the age of seven? I would assume that they give to their church in the same way most others do, the collection plate. Until their kids are older, I wouldn't expect them to do much more.
6. What happened to Beth and the older ladies seen on the show? We have heard that Carla is doing yardwork for J&K, but what of the others?
Since these these ladies were a part of earlier shows, asking about them now is natural. Congrats! You're one for six in the decency department so far.
But, the "WE have HEARD" part is disturbing. This means you're once again spreading rumors as "fact." Perhaps Carla doesn't WANT that to be advertised (not that it ever stopped a GWoPper from sticking their noses where they don't belong).
7. Do J&K pay the twins' school fees or the preschool tuition for the six? Were all these items donated to the family?
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99) is a Federal law that protects the privacy of student education records.
8. Did J&K buy their van with their own money or with donations?
GOOD GOD! Why is that any of our business? Maybe Dr. Gosselin bought it for them.
9. How much money did Jon inherit from his dad's estate?
SERIOUSLY? Okay, this has to be a joke, right? Ugh. Not even going to address that one.
10. Were the Gs on welfare when the twins were born or the sextuplets?
Head exploding.....
11. Did the Gs get food stamps while they were accepting food donations from the Wyo-Eliz. area?
Most people that need food donations DO get some sort of assistance from other places. Do you stand outside your local food bank and frisk people for welfare cards, WIC coupons and food stamps? I'll bet you'll find plenty. Get real.
12. When will the free clothes stop from the Gap stop? Once the free clothes stop, will they have to buy fewer clothes or consigned clothes or accept hand-me-downs?
That's between the Gosselins and GAP. And who really gives a crap about that? GAP is getting free advertising. I'm sure they're pleased as punch.
13. Will there be a final episode of J&K Plus 8 where the J&K pull the plug on the cameras and mikes and transform their studio back in to a house?
I don't know, can you see into the future to answer that, or are you just being stubborn and obtuse?
14. Who pays the Gs health insurance....J&K or Figure 8 or TLC?
They're under contract to Figure 8, so I'm sure part of that is insurance. As long as the State of Pennsylvania isn't using your tax dollars for that, who gives a rat's butt?
Seriously. NO person would answer most of these extremely intrusive questions. Just the fact that GWoPpers for some reason feel entitled to know the answers to these is proof we've been right all along about them. Creepy. Yikes.
October 2, 2008 3:12 PM
---
mcb. I think the purpose of this post was to ask rhetorical questions. Sorry your head exploded, but really why are you getting all worked up about this. Do you know this family personally? You seem mighty steamed about these questions.
mcb. I think the purpose of this post was to ask rhetorical questions. Sorry your head exploded, but really why are you getting all worked up about this. Do you know this family personally? You seem mighty steamed about these questions.
What's the difference about being "mighty steamed" at the utter cluelessness of those questions and the members of GWoP being "mighty steamed" about virtually everything the Gosselins do? The difference? I stop at venting on a message board. They go out and purposely create trouble for the family.
And no, I don't know the family, but I do have experience with the GWoPpers, dating back to the TWoP thread before GWoP was even created.
I stop at venting on a message board. They go out and purposely create trouble for the family.
Would that be any different then the members here who tried to verify Penn Mommy's information at the hospital? I'm not saying that you personally did it, but I think that action brings this blog up (actually down) to the standards of GWOP.
aap-
How would the hypothetical sister know that the gift card the teacher used wasn't her own gift card? Or that she wasn't using the donated card to purchase gifts for the needy family? Maybe she jumped to that conclusion because she was mad at the teacher for not tipping her enough at Christmas.
Anon 9:21am
I went through all of the 2 comments we received about the hospital and calling. They were not from anyone that frequents this board and I am confident it was a troll like you trying to cause problems.
Maybe the sister knows it was the gift card because she pulls it out of the enevolpe that comes with the gift card and on the envelope it clearly states "Merry Christmas Needy Family" in her sister's handwriting. Since she's shopping with her and hearing the comments she makes about all the purchases, she can obviously see with her own 2 eyes what the gift card will be used for.
As for the teacher not tipping her for Christmas, Guinevere knows her hypothetical sister is a trustworthy person and trusts her judgement. Once her sister lays out the facts, why would she question her further?
Someone asked if I contributed to the kids' college fund--
No. And I have stated eslewhere that I really do not care what freebies Jon and Kate get, as long as they are not gotten through misrepresentation.
But I do know that the Gov. of PA set up college funds for the kids. I believe in protecting those children's interests, and if moneys have been given to the college fund, they should stay there (legally, the money can be taken out, if a tax penalty is paid. I would hate to see that happen, though.). Education is the best gift you can give a child.
anonymous 9:21 said:
Would that be any different then the members here who tried to verify Penn Mommy's information at the hospital? I'm not saying that you personally did it, but I think that action brings this blog up (actually down) to the standards of GWOP.
One of the differences is that the moderators here squashed the idea almost immediately.
GwoP praises those who call speaking venues. GwoP praises those who email pastors who are hosting J&K. The moderators here squashed that idea.
(BTW, my first post using html tags to bold. Yay me!)
Regarding the Mission Statement:
It is highlighted in the "Chores" episode.
In this episode you will hear what the "Gosselin Family Mission Statement" - listen to all the points and think if Jon and Kate really follow their own "rules".
This episode was an eye opener for me because
1 - they talked about the importance of giving back and paying forward (I have never seen evidence of that prior to all the "controversies")
2 - Jon and Kate say they give back because they were "once" the recipient of kindness (as if it was an isolated incident and still not ocurring)
3 - That their family comes before anything with the show - then came the hairplug episode where they left their sick kids.
Personally, sometimes, I think the show highlights all the inconsistencies.
Hi anon 11:14 -
In general, I'm not a "hater" but I did think that the hairplugs episode was in and of itself a very odd choice. The fact that they left (even if it weren't filmed) when so many kids were sick I thought was really questionable.
The fact that according to some people they've not given back sufficiently, I guess that I look at that differently.
First of all, we don't know what they've done or not done before the check to Ronald McDonald House or the yard sale to benefit the pediatric therapy charity.
But, I do remember how nuts my life was until both of my kids were over 4. I do give them a pass on that. Heck, I've only got two kids and our life wasn't really conducive to giving back until they passed 4.
Maybe the teacher wrote the family a check for the value of the gift cards because she knew they needed the cash. She'd have to be pretty stupid to pull the envelope out in front of Guin's hypo sister. Maybe hypo sister is trustworthy, but didn't have all the facts and/or her judgement was clouded by her feelings.
I agree, the Gs should give to others now that they are able, but we'll probably never really know how much, how often, what, they give.
"GwoP praises those who call speaking venues. GwoP praises those who email pastors who are hosting J&K. The moderators here squashed that idea."
I've never done this, but thought about why someone might do it, especially if they do give at church functions. I think that the if pastors or whoever is asking for the love offerings, if that's the case, should know that they are no longer in need of that service, I did read one article, I can't find it now, where they did donate the love offerings to a charity at one speaking engagement.
I honestly don't know why they would put out the kind of money, if the rumors are true, to have them come to speak, but I do give them more credit for doing that than making money off of the show.
Lurky -
Maybe the teacher wrote the family a check for the value of the gift cards because she knew they needed the cash.
Do you really think if that was the case, that the teacher would have requested cash in the beginning?
Do you really think it's appropriate for the teacher to make that judgement to take something that some else gave as a gift, and decide she knows better and takes it upon herself to exchange Guinevere's gift for something the teacher thinks is a better fit?
Since this is hypothetical, we can go all day doing this. Do you really want to keep doing that? My original statement was meant more as a joke for Guievere then a serious response.
I think, based on some of our other conversations, she would get that. If not, Guin, I really meant my comment in a joking manner.
Anon 12:22 -
I think that the concept of giving a love offering is a common practice in some evangelical churches. I don't think that the practice is reserved just for those in financial need. I think it is a practice to show appreciation ...
For instance, I could see how the Gs would do a speaking engagement at a church for a speaker's fee.
They would collect that speaker's fee (maybe through the ticket prices or whatever.) Maybe that church has a big pro-life push and they might want to give over and above that to show their love and appreciation.
My point is that this practice is not soley for speakers who are in financial need.
About a 15 years ago, I used to give presentations to churches regarding alcoholism and drug dependency. I charged a nominal fee to cover my costs of travel & time. Usually the attendance at the events were around 50 - 75 people. At one of the churches, the pastor whose son was a long term drug addict asked the participants to give an offering to show their appreciation.
They knew I was employed. Heck, I was single and living quite well. It amounted to around $100. I told one of the congregants that I felt a little uncomfortable and she told me that it was a common practice at their church.
My church gives love offerings to ALL special speakers and singers/groups as well as missionaries. Some people charge to come and some dont, no matter what we collect a 2nd offering as we call it and that offering is given to the guest.
We've had some well know artists come to our church and perform, and we still gave that 2nd offering. Its common.
This has turned into a long thread and the question has brought up some good comments.
We deal with giving this way in our family: if we give someone something-whether it's money or goods-we don't ever expect to get it back. We don't tell people what to do with it. If we feel a family member or neighbor is in need, we give what we can and cross it off of our financial record. Done. Closed. No expectations of getting paid back. When we choose not to give, it's also just a quietly done deal. I guess that's the way I see the picture re the Gosselins too. If there is a burden to carry about what is given and what is done with it then it is on the conscience of the receiver.
Twin mom -
I guess the issue for me is that generally the people who you donate things to aren't getting the amount of contributions that Jon and Kate are. I think Jon and Kate are on a whole other level from the average people who receive charity, so I think using them isn't a fair comparsion. It's not like people donated a nice Christmas to them. People have donated - at least in the beginning - a nice life to them.
Thanks for explaining that to me linda =0)
They are accountable and owing of explanation for any laws broken as per their state and our federal laws.
This includes any explanation of any perceived fraud. IOW--if they are still conveying themselves as a charity case, they most assuredly are not now. And if they were, their reported taxable income for 2007 would confirm or deny this. They don't have to tell us what it is..but if the authorities ask, they should.
I would love a validation of claims made by family and former helpers. The Gosselins behave like they are taking the high road and folks are a certain way--but it really makes it difficult for those who were fans of the show or are currently fans of the show to return to or continue being fans of the show.
This isn't an owed explanation--but it would be the right thing to do for all parties involved.
I do doubt the personal chef claim. The only place that has been mentioned is on blogs and not from a reputable source.
It is the norm for major production companies to have catering. But catering doesn't equate to a personal chef.
Re the organic: Of course it isn't all healthy--but often, to not get certain ingredients you believe are not what you want your family consuming (HFCS, MSG, or partially hydrogenated-oils as an example)--the only way to get that is via organic or natural foods means. Reading labels is tedious--but in my experience...organic is the only way to go when I wish to deliberately avoid these things--and it does make an option healthier than it's non-organic counterpart when you must avoid those ingredients.
She doesn't owe that explanation--but it would certainly help those who think that Kate believes a Newman's Own creme cookie is health food compared to an Oreo just b/c it is organic.
A word on donations:
My family had a home refurbished on this old house with many items "donated". Items "donated" had to be declared on taxes b/c we are not a charitable organization (i.e. infamous 501c3) and thus not tax-exempt.
Aside from items gifted to them via donation from when they first had the sextuplets (gift is legally different from a donation)...
The alleged:
free clothes from Gap
personal chef
admissions to venues
trips
Are all--going to be taxable income?
You may wonder why that is?
B/c in exchange for that free advertising, companies will be declaring these items as expensed on their taxes (or whatever that accounting term is)....
in much the same way the flooring company, a/c company, kitchen company, electricians did when they "donated" their services and/or product to This Old House for our home. To the tune of $40,000 worth of renovation and upgrades (this was a WHILE ago and way in the archives of TOH).
So while it is perceived that all this stuff is "donated"....
Jon and Kate are not a tax-exempted charity case regardless of how much poverity they cry.
For them to not declare love offerings, speaking fees, photo fee collections, gap clothing, juicy juice...etc...
The IRS would have a field day with them and they could find themselves meeting Richard Hatch of Survivor fame in the lunch line of prison.
This is not meant to be snarky, but rather put into context that these "donations" are really taxable gifts...no matter how disguised they are as donations.
So thus--I don't think J&K owe an explanation to anyone except the IRS and you can be sure--the IRS is watching them like a hawk.
On the flip side--J&K can expense any expenses out of pocket they pay for being on the show (for example if she bought a shirt to wear on a particular episode). Those would be legitimate business expenses. (seems odd--but considered as much a business expense by the IRS as file folders to an accountant).
However, they can't expense something they have received as compensation. Rather it would be income.
So thus--I don't think J&K owe an explanation to anyone except the IRS and you can be sure--the IRS is watching them like a hawk.
You are completey correct, IIRC Jon wrote on the triplet connection board that he was aghast that he received a 501c3 from the show that did the nursery makeover. He posted that he believed "free" was "free".
I think the only things that Jon and Kate could really get away with are the gift cards, gifts, etc they receive from fans. Not that I don't think they still receive those, but that is peanuts compared to things they do have to "declare".
This is "mom" here. I realize now we have me and "a mom" LOL.
Ducttape -
501c3 is one type of status of a non profit organization. J&K would have probably received some type of 1099 from the home makeover show.
A mom -
It is very possible that if some of the dealins of "gifts" went through TLC, then the Gs wouldn't necessarily deal with the tax issue on their trips, etc. at all. Mainly because a service - "promotion" was received in lieu of "payment". If TLC took care of that, then they (TLC) would be the ones to worry about the gift/tax stuff on their income taxes.
Just my two cents.
I also don't see why your head would explode. The title of the article says "Sound Off"....so isn't that what people are called to do?
I wouldn't want to ask the Gosselins anything, because they are already so transparent in their motives and decisions that I have nothing to say to them.
Now that the People Magazine article is out, can we now agree that AT THIS VERY MOMENT they are not mis-representing themselves? In it, it is printed that the show is very lucrative and they earn thousands on speaking engagements. (They didn't discuss specific numbers).
So they are absolutely no longer mis-representing themselves.
Sorry about "adding" to your name--it's how I float around. Maybe I can be A Mom-ynous. lol!
In any case:
re: A mom -
"It is very possible that if some of the dealins of "gifts" went through TLC, then the Gs wouldn't necessarily deal with the tax issue on their trips, etc. at all. Mainly because a service - "promotion" was received in lieu of "payment". If TLC took care of that, then they (TLC) would be the ones to worry about the gift/tax stuff on their income taxes.
Just my two cents."
I am not sure how it works in the world of trips and such.
There is a gift tax for winning the same vacation on The Price is Right and it is all "handled" through the show.
Income doesn't have to be in the form of cash and can include product or services. I.e. the services of our electrician or plumber. We didn't necessarily get anything "tangible"--but without them...we'd be up the creek.
It really depends on how the "donors" expensed the item and declared it on their taxes and to whom and then what figure 8 does with it.
The IRS was even coming down on those backstage gift bags at the award shows requiring those to be declared and those were "gifts"--handsome and pricey gifts and the IRS wanted its cut.
I am not an accountant by any stretch...just reporting my family's experience and the fact they admittedly faux-pas'd on their taxes that year b/c they "didn't know". Which I don't think they fully understood so truly they didn't know and boy did it catch them off guard when that 1099 or whatever showed up prior to tax filing. Oops!
The family is paid and they are receiving an abundance of freebies.
It wouldn't be able to go unnoticed and I do hope the IRS is paying attention b/c if they do owe taxes, they should pay them.
Well that should have said "now A Mom-ynous." oops. lol!
I don't think they ever did misrepresent themselves.
Much like the most annoying phrase "flip flop" in regards to politics--it is insulting (IMHO) to assume that folks will remain stagnant for life and that should circumstances change in their living, views on life, or opinions--they are held to something in a sound bite from another time in their life when things were different.
Circumstances for them have changed and they now no longer refer to "not being able to afford things" but point out things they couldn't have ever dreamed they could do when the babes were born.
Heck, our income is different from when we first had children and though not as lucrative as J&K--things are coming into the scope of possibility that I didn't believe would ever be possible.
The people who claim they still scream poverty will throw a politician under a bus if the views they hold now are the opposite of what they held 20 years ago and call them a flip flopper.
"So they are absolutely no longer mis-representing themselves."
Finally. To bad it took so long.
Reading different blogs I read about people (friends and family and volunteers) who are and were upset and venting about the earlier days when the G's were crying poverty and need. Yes their need was great but they were not poor.
Most companies and organizations do checks on people to see if they are truly in need before donating. This is a good thing and makes sure the items and money donated go where it is most needed. A series of check and balances is a always a good thing.
I agree if I donated a $10 gift card and found out the person I donated to did not need it I would let it go.
But if I donated $1000, or months of my valuable time, or went shopping and spent a big part of my pay check to help out a family who say they are in need and found out later they were not telling the truth about their need I would be upset.
Jon & Kate could have come out when the money first poured in and they got back on their feet and said no more! Donate to ..... or .... in our name.
But they continued to take. That is a problem.
There is a gift tax for winning the same vacation on The Price is Right and it is all "handled" through the show.
By that, it means, there are IRS reps backstage. The taxes are paid by the winnner or recipient, not the show, in this case.
"There is a gift tax for winning the same vacation on The Price is Right and it is all "handled" through the show.
By that, it means, there are IRS reps backstage. The taxes are paid by the winnner or recipient, not the show, in this case."
And you know that Figure 8 is paying the taxes how?
I am not getting into an argument over this--but I would love to know how to get someone else to pay my taxes on my earned income. That is a pretty interesting feat.
Now I would wager that possibly Figure 8 is accepting the tax liability on the trips..but for the stuff the family gets--I don't see how that could be.
And while Figure 8 may be declaring it as income to them...I am curious as to the tax code that prevents the IRS from obligating the Gosslins to report it as income to them as well.
I am sure my mother would love to have her tax returns amended from those years prior when the items donated to the show for the show for our home...were her income. It wasn't the same as Price as Right.
We didn't have an agent at our house keeping tally.
By that, it means, there are IRS reps backstage. The taxes are paid by the winnner or recipient, not the show, in this case."
And you know that Figure 8 is paying the taxes how?
Let me very specific: If a contestant wins on a game show, as used in the example given above, the contestant pays the tax. The show does not assume the tas liablity.
I don't make any assumptions about the Gosselins or Figure 8 Films. Not sure how you got that out of that fairly targeted example.
Post a Comment