Jump to content

DEADLINE: Days of our Lives Misconduct Investigation Against Co-EP Albert Alarr


Errol

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 408
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Absolutely DISGUSTING. Albert Alarr has never been the producer I feel like was right for Days of Our Lives, however, I also feel like that set has been one of the most negative for many, many years. But that does not excuse Alarr's poor treatment of all. This set is toxic as f**k, and Alarr is producing it to be tha toxic, and it's unacceptable.

The fact Ken Corday allows this to happen is disgusting, and he is as guilty as Alarr. And Comcast/NBCUniversal has plenty of things in-place to ensure these things don't happen, so I'm wondering how/why this went under the radar, and if I were them, I'd step in where Sony Pictures Televison/Steve Kent will not.

Releasing Greg Meng was a mistake. He was an actors' producer, and I know several actors echo the sentiment that if Meng came back they would, too. There is a clear disconnect on that set with its talent, and the ever-revolving door of acting company. I mean, Nadia Bjorlin has been in and out so many times in the past almost ten-years, and that is very telling.

Plus, with certain actors, it was always believed they didn't want a regular status position... yet they take just that on another soap. It's so disheartening knowing what could have been happening... and he gets a slap on the wrist? Nah. FIRE HIM! Disgusting.

Good on both Ari & Martha for speaking out for themselves. That's amazing. Christopher Sean also liked a tweet of mine that stated if Meng were brought back cast would return. That's telling.

My thought was it was Martha Madison. Because, they tried firing her AND Brandon Beemer, but he did say he was sticking around because of his deal, and Madison returned some time later.

Edited by Liberty City
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This blind item from Crazy Days & Nights is obviously about DAYS. I tend to think the vast majority of these blinds are made up, but I imagine there's a lot about this one that is sadly true:

"Want to keep working on this show? Do whatever the executive in charge says and turn a blind eye to what he does. Want to work on a different show, but the same field? Don't ever say anything bad about the executive. This former actress turned reality star got a stark reminder of that when she posted something negative to social media and took it down very quickly. Everyone covers for the executive. Does he have a casting couch? Yes. Does he sexually harass subordinates? Every single day. Does he care? No he does not. Despite what has been recently said about him, he knows his job is not in danger. He produces results and deals with talent and crew and gets it all done way under budget. He is a huge profit earner for the big company and everyone knows if this show goes down, the whole industry goes down. Thousands of people would be out of work. Thousands of high paying jobs gone in a flash. There was already one downturn. They don't want extinction. There are ancillary companies that only survive because of this industry. So, whatever pushback might be normal, is not so in this case. There is no independent third party to put pressure on the executive. There are no harsh words. The survival of so many rely on them being complicit in everything bad that occurs. Things are so complicit that reporting from specific publications choose to not even mention anything about bad things that go on, let alone things that are being reported in the past week. If they did, they would be writing their own pink slips, plus they would never be allowed to interview anyone from the show he controls. It is a fiefdom made for abuse and everyone watches it happen, but are only looking out for themselves."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I did some research and the story wrapped up with a caretaker responsible for Georgina's death who then  tried to do away with Laurie but a vision of Georgina spooked him and he fell to his death. So there was a supernatural element.
    • AI has it wrong. David was working as an aide at PV Hospital due to failing to save his brother's life and refusing to continue as a doctor. His true profession was revealed later. Edna had divorced him while he was in Vietnam and he had no reason to be in contact with her. He had no idea that he had a daughter.  Ruth was Ruth Martin, she was still married to Joe, not Jeff. He was not deceiving Ruth as he believed that Edna was his ex. The poisoning story happened late in his run and probably introduced when they knew Gleason was leaving. AI's interpretation of him as conniving seems to based on that short lived poisoning story and other misinformation. For most of 76 he was involved in the Ruth/Joe triangle to the point where Ruth was ready to divorce Joe and leave town. Joe had to have surgery, David operated and Ruth suddenly realized she wanted to stay with Joe despite all the problems they'd been happening. David then got involved with Christina with Jeff and then Edna as complications. And he arrived late 75 not 76.
    • Interesting that they started going into a supernatural direction with ghosts - I don't think they really did that before? I wonder if it was a response to getting put so late in the afternoon and I guess trying to appeal to that former Dark Shadows audience? 
    • That makes sense then! Is there a place where you can read more Daytime Serial Newsletters? They sound very informative. Thank you

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Yep. Access to the Vault works fine but upon downloading attempts an error message pops up.   Maybe it is just a temporary glitch.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Downloading isn't working at all.
    • I'm pretty sure this ep is  from Dec 73 From the Daytime Serial Newsletter Ian and Valerie Northcote are deeply concerned over Laurie's  life being increasingly dominated by hallucinations and fantasies about Georgina, the former owner of the house the Reddins recently bought and are now living in. Doreen Post (Linda Purl) was involved in that story .Perhaps she was going to be revealed as Georgina's daughter? Wonder how that story evolved and whether it was wrapped up before cancellation? and thanks to @skylark
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Many thanks to @skylark and @DRW50!
    • Thank u so much! I love that show and the more I see of it the more I want to find more of it even if it’s just in script form. But that house and especially the room looked like Victoria Winters room from dark shadows lol  this was great find! Thanks 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy