Bathing Suit Fiasco on Apprentice

Okay. The less said about this show, the better. Unless something truly outstanding occurs on this season's Apprentice, I'm just going to do little dribs and drabs. My dribs and drabs for today is the creation of a bathing suit line task. Nice little reality show overview here.

Back to the bathing suit. I don't think a team member from either side should have been involved in modeling during their task. This year's Apprentice is showing less strategizing with real leadership initiative than previous years, and I would have preferred that the teams have others do the modeling, while they focused on creating the best presentation. (Am I wrong or are the teams not getting any budget money for tasks, this year?)

I'm still not sure why Donald fired Carey, whether for lack of business acumen or Carey's incredible body displaying the bathing suit to its best advantage. My biggest problem with Carey is his agenda seemed more self-promotion than teamwork participation. Donald spent so much time attacking the colors of the suit, rather than the cut, that I simply became confused as to just why he was firing him. Even replaying the moment hasn't helped. I just missed it and will have to go to the network for a breakdown.

I'm missing a lot from this year's show. I'm missing the professionalism, the decisions made as a result of solid team discussion, and a general lack of a willingness to take charge. I've spoken to the tent issue, and I simply won't go there, anymore. I miss -- well, I just miss the initial premise of The Apprentice before Trump went Hollywood.

Rosie, The Donald, Fussin' and Feudin'

I don't really want to get into the feud between Donald Trump and Rosie O'Donnell but I can't let it simply pass by without some comment. While the immediate fallout is more publicity for both stars' television shows, it's been interesting to watch each member as they conduct themselves whilst it plays out.

If my chronology is correct, it was Rosie who attacked The Donald, first, passing judgment on his decision to allow one of his own employees (Miss USA Tara Connor) to retain her title after some adverse publicity . Using the broadest sense of the term "employee" of Mr. Trump, if he is the owner of the pageant and all public relations activities that take place, that winner is in the employ of Mr. Trump during the year of her reign.

I don't disagree with Rosie's (or, anyone's) right to comment but she is the one that brought it down to peckish childish behavior by attempting to impersonate and demean Mr. Trump's hair style and manner of speaking. (As an aside, I did notice that Ms. O'Donnell has been making her own hair more attractive since the feud started.) This was somehow supposed to validate her remarks; but, it simply made her look foolish and attention-grabbing, to me.

Any employer has the right to decide whether or not an employee remains within their organization after carefully reviewing what detrimental effect, if any, the employee's behavior would have to the company, should they remain employed. Reigning queens, whether beauty pageant or country leader, are expected to behave in an exemplary way, like it or not, as they represent much more than themselves.

After carefully reviewing Ms. Connor's behavior, Mr. Trump decided she could retain her title and continue representing the USA, as long as she received help for her alleged drug and alcohol abuse, which was made readily available to her. Rosie likened her behavior to Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan's public debacles. Excuse me? -- as if the two were the same situation.

Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan are not representing the United States with their public appearances, they are simply two young women who happen to be the daughters of very wealthy people raised without proper guidelines and scruples. (In contrast, Mr. Trump's children exhibit class, intelligence, and a true regard for what their position in life means, setting a wonderful example for our own children.)

In watching The View since Rosie's arrival, it appears as though she thinks this is her show and the others are her windowdressing. Almost every remark made is self-aggrandizing and meant to generate even more personal publicity. Team participation seems foreign to her and is lacking in most of the discussions. In truth, she is so strident, I'm often compelled to find another channel, just to get away from her noise.

I would suggest that she mind her own business, but that is simply not within her character. Since, with the networks, it's all about the money, it would be fruitless to hope she doesn't get her own television program. I prefer my talk show hosts having some semblence of class and that's a hands-down win for Ellen DeGeneres, any day of the week.

Bottom line, I'm sure that for as long as both of them have shows on television, they will find a way to keep the publicity fires burning. But, for this particular feud, I'm with The Donald.

Two People to Get Flyer? - The Apprentice 6

Oops! Forgot to post! Last week's Apprentice showed that, once again, this is going to be an interesting year. I've already decided that The Donald and I disagree about some things -- what else is new? -- and I would really like to know his reasoning behind certain choices.

For instance, what is the point of having the contestants spend the night in tents, if they haven't won? That seriously puts the losing team at a far greater disadvantage than if they had simply lost, regrouped, and applied themselves to the next task.

I would imagine that most of them have not spent the night with the elements since childhood. Having to physically and emotionally adjust to such conditions, while attempting to apply for an incredibly prestigious job, creates an unnecessary and offensive handicap. The fact that the teams lose by such small margins makes it a punishment beyond what is right. The difference was $118. Granted, they shouldn't have lost but it certainly isn't something requiring such a harsh remedy.

The winning team not only gets a special treat but is also given a complete night's rest with all the comforts they have been accustomed to (plus, the richness of surroundings) in their own personal lives. There is nothing to indicate that working for Donald Trump will require employees to sleep in pitched tents at any job site. This is obviously a ratings ploy and nothing more.

Watching both teams operating their respective car washes, I was struck by Frank's inability to show true leadership. His resume indicates a self-made man, not necessarily a lot of experience with teamwork. I was stunned when he took off to get flyers and then followed that up with running off to get posters made, after Martin pointed out the problem passing vehicles were having trying to read the 8.5 x 11 flyers he bought. I overlooked his obnoxious, loud, arrogant voice, thinking he may have shown some professional judgment. Right.

The most apparent thing to me, in watching both teams, was too much education overwhelming the need of elbow grease to get the job done. Several men refused to remove their business clothing and get involved in the actual hand work needed. Almost immediately, the decision was made to let the "girls" wash the cars, while the "men" did the selling. Neither team had the brains to hire workers to wash and detail the cars, so they could focus on moving customers through completion faster and increase sales.

Although I look forward to seeing Frank go, Martin really showed that he wasn't a team player and, from the beginning, chose not to participate unless forced to by another member of his team. He kept telling the Donald how good he was and, yet, never backed it up with action when it was called for during the task.

My final disagreement with the Donald has to do with letting a team leader continue on in that same position until a team loses, in addition to letting them sit on his right-hand side in the boardroom. This establishes one person as a leader and takes away from anyone else having an opportunity to show their own skills and leadership which, I thought, was the whole point of The Apprentice.

What appears fair, to him, simply means that one particular team works well together but doesn't necessarily mean that that particular leader is that great. The team is working together because they each, now, rather foolishly, thought they would be given a chance to prove themselves as leaders during one of the tasks.

To have that winningleader sit next to him in the board room is ludicrous. Why not simply say that that person is now the new apprentice? How can you be involved in a hiring process and have the applicant sit on your decision-making board prior to being hired? This is wrong, on so many levels, that it boggles the mind.

I simply can't wait for show number two.

Second Ivana to be "Trumped"

I was so appalled by the behavior of Ivana last night on The Apprentice that I hardly know where to begin. Having owned and operated businesses since 1970 and been friends with any number of professional women, it is outrageous to leave the impression that her desperate ploy of "dropping" her skirt for $20.00 was representative. (Unless, of course, that is one's business.)

Listening to the way she trashed the "M&M sisters" (Jennifer M. and Sandy) only increases the outrageousness of her behavior. America is full of professional women who respect themselves and the work that they do, who would never dream of dropping their skirts as a viable alternative for increasing sales. In fact, just the opposite. Today's professional woman goes to great lengths to ensure that her behavior is at all times deserving of respect. That this would have occurred to her, at all, makes one wonder just what is being taught at the business schools today.

There's no question in my mind, that her teammates were as useful as dandruff -- ever-present but serving no recognizable purpose. Kelly knew he was safe from being the previous week's project manager and did little to help Ivana in marketing the candy bars. Kevin was 100% in the wrong to lower the price of their product without consensus from his project manager. Ivana's job was to make sure that he did not lower the price and she could have insisted on it. For that matter, I never understood why she let them all stand together in a little group instead of branching out in different directions to locate a variety of customers.

Towards the end of the show, Ivana explained her behavior as one of desperation but, in retrospect, probably made a wrong choice. However, I did not see any sense of her recognizing her behavior as wrong in either her expression or voice. I really believe she just didn't understand the full impact on her professional life from this choice. And, that is sad.

This year, it seems that The Apprentice has gone out of its way to locate the most immature young women as representatives of the future business women of America. Recognizing that the show is ultimately meant as entertainment, I can make some allowances, but this seemed to be a season of extremely rude and boorish behavior by the women. But, Ivana's behavior topped them all. She lost all professional credibility, in my eyes, yet she will reap thousands from personal appearances because of this outrageous behavior; although, she undoubtedly will be asked to "drop her skirt" in participation. And, years from now, like Monica Lewinsky after her debacle, she will still be wondering why people don't respect her .

So far as Ivana's behavior is concerned, this was a true case of the product not being worth the cost and, as the British are wont to say, "Some things are simply not done."