Latest / Outspoken the Podcast / Tess Crosley Claims Jules Neale ‘Betrayed’ Her

Transcript

Tess Crosley Claims Jules Neale ‘Betrayed’ Her · Outspoken the Podcast

• 0:03
  Speaker 1: Hello and welcome to Outspoken. It's your dose of the
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: hottest influencer and pop culture news twice a week. I'm
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: Amy Torber and coming up on today's show, Ruby Tuesday
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: Matthews shares the raw reality of her facelift in real
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: time and the story blowing up your husband's group chat.
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: But first, Tess Crosley has shared her side of the
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Lockie Neal affair scandal just two days after Jules Neal's tell-all.
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: In the curiously timed interview, the 30-year-old sat down with
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: Daily Mail journalist Savannah Young for an hour-long debrief. Now, Kate,
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: it was as if she wanted to get the last word.
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: It really felt like that. In reality, though, Tessa's interview
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: would have been filmed well before. So the teaser actually
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: dropped the day before Jules' interview went live. But it
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: is very unprecedented, though, to have two tell-all interviews come
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: out in the same week. I actually can't remember another time. Well,
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: we've heard perspectives of both women involved in a cheating
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: scandal like this back to back. The Daily Mail claim
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: that the timing was pure coincidence and have dismissed claims
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: it was a coordinated rebuttal. I personally find that hard
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: to believe. I don't believe them for a second. They
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: clearly got wind that Jules Nils' interview was coming out
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: and they thought, oh, We're going to get the most
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: bang for our buck if we drop the episode a
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: couple of days after. Yeah. And on Friday's show, we
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: spoke about what a great choice it was for Jules
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: to appear on Adele Petropoulos' podcast because it sounded like
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: two friends chatting. There was that history of Adele also
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: going through a cheating scandal of her own. But I
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: think Tess appearing on the Daily Mail's podcast was possibly
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: the worst decision she could have made because it came
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: across are so clickbaity and so tabloidy. I mean, you
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: lose any sort of credibility when you speak to a
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: tabloid like the Daily Mail and give them your exclusive.
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: To me, I immediately thought, she's been paid a lot
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: of money for this. Well, the sentiment online is she
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: said a lot without saying much. In terms of taking accountability,
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: she admitted that she'd made some bad decisions that she regretted,
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: but believed she wasn't a bad person. She never admitted, though,
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: to any particular actions nor publicly apologised to Jules when
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: given the opportunity to. She claimed that she had already
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: apologised to those she needed to. Yeah, I mean, if
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: you felt so bad about it, why would you appear
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: on the podcast to begin with? Like it was clearly
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: just an attempt to clear her own name and then
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: to play the victim.
• 2:28
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: And the closest thing we got to a confession was
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: her saying that she did things that she regretted and
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: was love bombed by Lockie. Did anyone else feel like
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: she was a bit smug throughout the interview? It sort
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: of was like butter wouldn't melt in her mouth. Like
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: she was very innocent because before they actually got into
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: any of the cheating scandal, they spoke at length about
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: how she grew up as a Mormon and how when
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: she was In her late teens, she went to a
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: missionary and spent a lot of 18 months there helping
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: a lot of people. And you sort of got the
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: vibe that she was excusing her poor behavior because she
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: got married at 21 and hadn't slept with anyone else.
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: Like that's the vibe I got. Yeah, I felt like
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: it was a deliberate strategy to portray her as this
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: innocent Mormon girl who was loved bomb by an AFL player.
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: I mean, she mentioned that she's no longer an active
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: member of the church, but she still loves its teachings.
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: I found it interesting when she spoke about her husband
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: Ben because it sounded like she's keeping the door open
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: for a reunion. She kept referring to him as her
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: biggest supporter and said that they're best friends who continue
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: to hang out like a family. This clearly strengthened her
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: case that she wasn't in the wrong. I think one
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: of the most telling parts of the interview for me
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: was when the journalist asked Tess to set the record
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: straight about the swinging rumours because two days prior Tess
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: Jules had shut down the rumours saying that she and
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: Lockie were never in an open relationship. However, Tess seemingly
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: tried to add more smoke to the fire by refusing
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: to deny them. Let's take a listen to what she said.
• 3:58
  Speaker 3: I think, like I said, there was a lot of
• 4:02
  Speaker 3: context that people don't know. But I think due to
• 4:07
  Speaker 3: respect of the other people involved, I obviously can't talk
• 4:10
  Speaker 3: about their private lives anymore. And most importantly, there's three
• 4:14
  Speaker 3: children involved as well. And that's probably the hardest part
• 4:17
  Speaker 3: is as much as, you know, clearing rumors up really,
• 4:20
  Speaker 3: you know, help myself. I just don't think it's fair
• 4:22
  Speaker 3: to have that stuff out to the public, given it's
• 4:27
  Speaker 3: other people's private lives, my private life and the children's
• 4:30
  Speaker 3: private lives as well.
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: This really angered me because she was trying to sound
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: like she was being the bigger person by saying, I'm
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: not going to talk about other people's private lives because
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: there's children involved, yet literally referring that they are swingers.
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: This was a theme throughout the interview because she spoke
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: a lot about context that was missing from the story.
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: She even claimed that if she was able to provide
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: this missing context, it would essentially absolve her actions. However,
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: she kept being like, oh, out of respect for other
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: people's private lives. It's like, if you were respectful to
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: these people's private lives, you wouldn't be on this podcast
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: talking about it now. That's the thing, babe. You're being
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: paid clearly. to be on this podcast to reveal what happened.
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: So just tell us. I felt like she was also
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: trying to push this idea of there being a power
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: imbalance between her and the Neils. And it's like, look,
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: in the case of her and Lockie Neal, yes, he
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: obviously has the Brisbane Lions behind him and Jules spoke
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: a little bit about that too. But with Jules, once
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: she dropped the details of being portrayed on Instagram, She
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: was standing on her own two feet. She didn't have
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: all of these people behind her. She was in the
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: same position as Tess. Yeah, it was interesting when Tess
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: essentially said that she didn't have the money for a
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: PR team, which makes me think even more so that
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: she has done this interview to make money. Another moment
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: I felt like we got a glimpse of the real
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: Tess was when she spoke about the moment Jules confronted
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: her on social media. So this was in relation to
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: a photo of the two couples together at the Brisbane
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: Lions grand final win. And that photo remained on Tessa's
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: public Instagram profile, despite Jules putting this call out saying
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: that she was betrayed by her best friend. Now, Jules
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: ended up commenting underneath the photo, take these down, you idiot.
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: You're embarrassing yourself. Now, I feel like this was a
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: fair enough comment considering at the time so many people,
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: as I said, were speculating that Tess was the best friend. Now,
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: when Tess was directly asked about this exchange on the podcast,
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: she claimed that she'd received several comments from Jules and
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: her friends bullying her and ended up blocking them. So
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: she said she wasn't even aware of the comment in question.
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: to flat out say that Jules Neill was bullying you, God,
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: if it had been me, I would have been way worse.
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: That comment would have had a few expletives in it,
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: let alone just saying you idiot. What about the excuse
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: about like, oh, I know I probably should have taken
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: the photo down, but I just love photography and it
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: helps remind me of things. Oh, what you want to
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: be reminded of the marriage that you broke up? It's
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: like bullshit. Because then she went on to reference how
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: she'd had 70 million views on Instagram. It's like, I
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: think it's quite apparent why you left the photo up.
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: You wanted people to see it. She's clearly spewing that
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: Jules has been signed to this large talent agency and
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: Everyone is obsessed with her calling her the people's princess.
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: Yet Tess has really been given the villain. I don't
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: want to say edit because I don't think that this
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: is just an edit. I think that her and Lockie
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: are the bad guys. They're the ones that cheated on their, sorry,
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: allegedly cheated on their respective partners. So of course you're
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: going to be cast in a bad light. The other
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: part which made me really angry was when Tess dropped, oh,
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: Jules and I were only friends for a year. And
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: it's like, she was almost dismissing. It's like, oh, it's okay.
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: We were only friends for a year. So that's why
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: I cheated on her husband. It's okay to fuck my
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: friend of a year's husband, allegedly, but not, you know,
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: if we've been friends for longer than a year, it
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: wouldn't have been okay. One thing that really grated on
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: me during this interview is when Tess kept referring to
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: Jules and Lockie as the parties, the other parties. And
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: it's like, obviously you've had some legal advice and you
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: have been told don't refer to them by name. Or
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: maybe she thought it was the polite thing to do.
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: But it's like, hang on, we know who you're talking about.
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: It's just another example of what a poor choice the
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: Daily Mail was. Because on Friday's show, we were talking
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: about how funny it was that Jules didn't name Lockie Neal.
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: They just kept saying the ex. Like in that instance, perfect.
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: But when you're saying the parties, it just sounds confusing.
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: It sounds like you're using legal jargon. It just sounds
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: fucking weird. Yeah, well, what's she going to say? My
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: ex-best friend and my ex-best friend's husband, who I slept with.
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: One of the other clear messages that Tess was trying
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: to push during this interview was how much she was
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: impacted by this situation. So she spoke about how she
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: was just a normal girl that was thrust into the
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: spotlight and she admitted that she found it really difficult
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: coping with the media scrutiny. She said she had paparazzi
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: following her, people were trolling her, She went on to
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: say that she had received death threats and was actually stalked.
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: And she described it as the lowest point of her
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: life and said that she suffered from depression and suicidal ideation. Obviously,
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: absolutely awful. And I mean, it's not surprising that you
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: would go through something like this. I think the media
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: were incredibly cruel towards both women involved in this and
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: the commentary online has been awful. Which again, makes her
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: choice of the Daily Mail an even odder one, because
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: you would assume that out of all of the tabloids
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: and mainstream media publications in Australia, they would have gone
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: the hardest at hounding her. The difference is though, The
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: Daily Mail are happy to pay people for interviews and
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: they're also happy to work with celebrities to set up
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: pap shots. And we recently saw Matt Sikowsky give his
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: tell-all to the Daily Mail. And it makes me think
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: that Matt and Tess have both built relationships with the
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: journalists from the Daily Mail. And it's obviously beneficial for
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: them to create their own publicity and to set up
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: paparazzi shots when it suits them. While there would have
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: been so many me outlets desperate to have the exclusive
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: with Jules, I don't think there would have been as
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: many who wanted to give Tess the platform to have
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: her say and have her rebuttal. I disagree. So I
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: think there still would have been a lot of journalists
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: wanting to interview Tess But I don't think many of
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: them would have agreed to have put out such a
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: positive piece on her. I mean, in this instance, you
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: can tell that Savannah has worked her ass off to
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: get Tess to appear on this podcast. And having worked
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: as a journalist, I know exactly what tactics she would
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: have used. The difference is that when you then get
• 10:33
  Speaker 1: a guest on a podcast and they don't really say anything,
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: it's not a good look for the podcast because at
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: the moment, the Daily Mail's podcast is is sort of
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: a lot like their articles, very clickbaity. Like we've seen
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: Matt Sikowsky go on. With little substance. Yeah, they go
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: in and they say nothing. Like there's this huge teaser.
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: What are they going to say? And then nothing. Also,
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: it felt like Savannah was just crawling up Tessa's ass
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: the whole time. It was like. She was even creating
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: excuses for her. Like, you know, she was the one
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: that brought up, and you told me off mic you
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: were only friends with her for a year. It's like, oh,
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: that's an excuse. It was the same in the Matt
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: Sikowsky one. It's sort of like that's her tactic of
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: befriending them, telling them how right they are. And as
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: you said, Amy, I think that– A lot of other
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: large podcasters, for instance, if she was, if Tess was
• 11:16
  Speaker 1: to appear on No Filter, they would have said, you're
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: only appearing on here if we can actually get to
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: the nitty gritty of what happened. Yeah, there would have
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: been a lot more follow up questions. Because that's the
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: funniest thing. Like they literally crapped on for ages about
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: Tess's life and what she was into and all the
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: boring shit that no one cared about. And then Savannah
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: was like, oh, is it okay if I ask you
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: what happened? Yeah, well, fucking duh. That's what she's here
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: to talk about, is it not? Please do because I'm
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: bored shitless hearing about this Mormon stuff. It's a bit
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: like in Adele's podcast with Jules, how they went through
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: all the bits about her favourite restaurants and stuff. And
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: I actually found that quite interesting to listen to. But
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: the thought of some of those big, AFL journos having
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: to sit through that to get the information on the cheating.
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: It cracked me up. It would have been on double speed.
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: Come on, that would have been fast forwarding. Well, to
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: be completely honest, that's what I listened to Tess Crosley's
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: interview on. There was another area of discussion that interests
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: me though during this interview. It was when Tess spoke
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: about initially being silenced. So she said she was told
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: not to comment by other parties. And in the next
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: breath claim that some people involved in the party were
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: sent her death threats. And when I was listening, I
• 12:25
  Speaker 1: was like, what? Did I hear that correctly? Because I
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: did have it in double speed. Fortunately, Savannah followed her
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: up asking what exactly she meant. Let's take a listen.
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: Can we brush on the death threats? Because that's really serious.
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: To say that it came from like members of the party.
• 12:42
  Speaker 2: Do you mean like your friendship group and things like that?
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Yes.
• 12:46
  Speaker 3: Somebody, I won't use names, but yeah, somebody involved was
• 12:50
  Speaker 3: sending me multiple death threats. And yeah, and it was,
• 12:54
  Speaker 3: it's really tough because obviously I, you know, yeah, it's
• 13:00
  Speaker 3: tough because it was like, I felt like I almost
• 13:03
  Speaker 3: deserved it, but I also look back now, I'm like, no,
• 13:07
  Speaker 3: that's really hectic. I don't think anyone deserves death threats. Yeah.
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: So what was your take on this? Because listening to it,
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: I felt like she was referring to Jules. Oh, a
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: hundred percent. I mean, she had already tried to act
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: as if Jules was bullying her through the Instagram comments.
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: So one would assume that once things are private in
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: DMs or over text, maybe they get a bit more heated. See,
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: I thought she said, oh, it's one of the party's friends.
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: So I took it maybe it was a friend of
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: Jules or a friend of Lockie's.
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: No.
• 13:38
  Speaker 1: No, she said it was someone in the parties. And
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: then Savannah was like, oh, do you mean like in
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: your friendship group? And Jules was her friend. So that's
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: how I read it. Particularly when she went on to
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: say that she was really surprised that Jules went public
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: with the affair because they had all agreed not to
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: make public comments. How did this get past legals? Because
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: there were so many digs. It's like, Oh, you know,
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: basically she was inferring they're swingers. They've sent her death threats.
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: Another one of the claims she made was that one
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: of the parties, aka Jules, was leaking private information to journalists.
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry. My best friend will be listening to this,
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: but if she ever slept with my husband and, you know,
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: it was on this large scale like that, I'd be
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: fucking telling them everything about her, all of her darkest,
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: deepest secrets. Well, you think that I'm going to take
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: the high road and not say anything negative about the
• 14:24
  Speaker 1: person who's just slept with my husband. Yeah, it's like
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: anyone listening to that, the person that they would have
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: resonated with is Jules. Everyone would have done what Jules did.
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: But also everyone from Day Dot has said that Tess Crosley-
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: does not have girl code, but she's essentially acting like
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: Jules should have had her back when talking to journalists. Well,
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: the moment my jaw hit the floor was when the
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: journalist Savannah then tried to paint Tess as the victim,
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: saying it must have felt like a bit of a betrayal.
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: Tess then replied this.
• 14:54
  Speaker 3: You know, it almost did feel like a betrayal hearing
• 14:58
  Speaker 3: that people who, you know, wanted to keep things quiet
• 15:03
  Speaker 3: weren't keeping things quiet, you know, by saying, doing things anonymously,
• 15:07
  Speaker 3: I think that really hurt because, but it explains a
• 15:10
  Speaker 3: lot at the same time because I always was thinking.
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: I was like, why is there so much about me?
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: Like I'm a nobody.
• 15:16
  Speaker 3: And then you have this person who was a high
• 15:18
  Speaker 3: profile person. And at the time I felt like there
• 15:21
  Speaker 3: was no airtime for him.
• 15:22
  Speaker 1: It was all about me. It was all about the
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: girls really.
• 15:24
  Speaker 3: And it was like delving into like my Mormon life
• 15:27
  Speaker 3: and like my mission. And I was like, I have
• 15:29
  Speaker 3: nothing else to hide. Like, so I was like, go
• 15:31
  Speaker 3: for it. But I was so.
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: Confused for ages. I feel so sorry for you that
• 15:35
  Speaker 1: your former best friend who you cheated with her husband
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: on didn't have your back and didn't refrain from talking
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: to journalists, particularly when you consider that Lockie Neal would
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: have access to a lot of sports journalists and would
• 15:48
  Speaker 1: have been pushing his own agenda. Honey, this wasn't just
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: about you. This was also about Jules getting back at
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: her dirtbag ex-husband. But also that's just how things work
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: in the media. You give people information off the record.
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: Do we not think that Tess has potentially given the
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: Daily Mail a lot of information off the record? Where
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: did this swinger rumour come from? And also the fact
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: that she said that she briefed a PR team. She
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: was obviously trying to get her story out there too.
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: The only thing I do agree with, though, is that
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: Lockie Neal should be held more accountable as well. I
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: think it is often easy to paint the other woman
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: as the villain the whole time when he is the
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: huge villain in this story. But he is being... smart
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: in the sense that he hasn't come out and said
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: anything about it and if Tess had come out and
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: not say anything people would have forgotten about her I
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: mean I don't know who advised her to do this
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: interview I get that she wanted to have her say
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: But it really would have been better for her to
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: leave it, especially off the back of Jules giving a
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: masterclass on how to stay classy in the midst of
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: a cheating scandal. There was nothing that Tess Crosley could
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: have said after Jules' interview dropped that would have made
• 16:56
  Speaker 1: this situation any better for her. I just am astounded
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: that she thought it was a good idea to try
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: and paint herself as a victim on this podcast after
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: she is the one that allegedly cheated with her best
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: friend's husband and then try and hide behind this narrative
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: that you're just trying to do the best by everyone's
• 17:13
  Speaker 1: kids that are involved, yet perpetuating the swing of rumour
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: that's out there. I mean, it says a lot about
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: her motives. I just had a lightbulb moment. It's strange
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: how they started the interview off really pushing the agenda
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: that she was a Mormon, you know, this innocent background
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: and how she'd only ever been with her husband. And
• 17:30
  Speaker 1: essentially was loved by this AFL player. But then she
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: seems to be the one really pushing this swinging rumor,
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: which really fits into that narrative that we've got going
• 17:41
  Speaker 1: on in the US at the moment off the back
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: of Mormon wives and how they came to fame because
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: there were rumors that that whole friendship group was swinging.
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: Was that a part of it to be like, hang on,
• 17:51
  Speaker 1: this is pretty common in the Mormon community and this
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: is what was going on without saying it? Potentially, but
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: I also think she was trying to sensationalize it to
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: get more attention for herself. Because at the end of
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: the podcast, I had this strange conversation around her and
• 18:07
  Speaker 1: what it like keeping her name because she's known now
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: as Tess Crosley. And also would she get back into modeling?
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: And it was just so weird. It's like, nobody actually
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: cares who's listening to this. It was very clearly a
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: profile building exercise. I mean, she spoke about having, you know,
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: these opportunities offered to her. We're clearly going to see
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: her on some reality show like SAS, but I mean,
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: If I was her and, you know, she's as happy
• 18:31
  Speaker 1: as she is in her regular day-to-day life, like she
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: claimed on the podcast, I would just leave it and
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: go back and try and rebuild a relationship with my
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: husband and focus on my child.
• 18:40
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: I quite literally will, you know, head marks on my face.
• 18:46
  Speaker 4: That's what I'm saying.
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: I know.
• 18:47
  Speaker 5: And I've got to go.
• 18:47
  Speaker 4: I will still, because it still doesn't recognize my face.
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: She goes, I think it will recognize your face now.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: I was like, I don't think it will. Ruby Tuesday
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: Matthews is sharing the raw reality of her cosmetic surgery
• 18:59
  Speaker 1: in real time. The 33-year-old Byron Bay influencer has been
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: recovering in Korea from an endoscopic facelift and documenting the
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: process to her 245,000 followers. Now, Kate, before we get
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: into it, can you bring listeners up to speed with
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: the procedure she's had done? Well, it's basically a less
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: invasive version of a traditional facelift. So there's minimal scarring because...
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: They use these tiny cameras and micro tools to lift
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: the tissue and the incisions are in the hairline. So
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: they're very hidden. Now the procedure also just corrects the
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: upper and mid face rather than the lower face and
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: neck that you see in a traditional facelift. Despite it
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: being touted as less invasive though, the recovery looks absolutely brutal.
• 19:45
  Speaker 5: Yeah.
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: I mean, this process is not being glamorized at all
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: by Ruby. She has shown herself immediately. post the surgery
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: with a lot of bandages and tapes and drains all
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: over her. She's also been documenting her face each day,
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: which has been interesting to watch.
• 20:00
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah.
• 20:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah. She ended up having to venture out in her
• 20:21
  Speaker 1: bandages and pyjamas onto the Apple store to get them
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: to unlock her phone. I actually wondered recently, as you
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: get older, like say you have your phone for a
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: good five or six years and if you age, will
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: it start not recognising you? I think if you find
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: lines here and there, it's a little bit different, but
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: maybe they need to do an update to your security
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: every 10 years. Maybe that's built into the phone. My
• 20:43
  Speaker 1: face recognition hasn't been working since I've been postpartum, which
• 20:46
  Speaker 1: is a bit disturbing. Time for a new phone. Well,
• 20:49
  Speaker 1: you know, you can just update it. Yeah, but I
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: don't want to. I want to look the same as before.
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: I got a new phone recently and it now has
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: these features where you can do the face scan, but
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: you can have it wearing your glasses or if you
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: want to wear a face mask or all that kind
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: of stuff. Yeah. I wonder though, do a lot of
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: people who have extreme surgeries, is this a common thing?
• 21:10
  Speaker 1: Like are they all going down to the iPhone store
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: and being like, fuck, can you please help me out here?
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know how prevalent it is, but
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: the Apple store ended up helping Ruby out In addition
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: to all of these daily updates that she's been sharing,
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: she also posted a real witch-featured vision of her at
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: the Korean hospital pre- and post-surgery. No details have been
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: too personal. She even disclosed the price of the surgery.
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: So for anyone wondering, it's around $ 16, 000. I thought it
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: would be more. You almost want the surgery to be
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: more when it has something to do with your face.
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: Like if you heard, okay, $ 50, 000 for this surgery, you'd
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: be like, okay, cool, I'm in safe hands. But when
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: you hear like a less amount, you're like, hmm. Is
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: this about board? The thing that has stood out to
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: me is the only thing that she is yet to
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: disclose is the relationship with the surgeon and international concierge
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: service that she keeps tagging in her posts because, as
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: I've said, she has been so transparent. But a few
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: people have asked, like, what's the goal? Is this a
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: paid ad? And she hasn't responded. And the amount of
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: shout-outs that she's been giving is has got me questioning, well,
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: was this gifted? I mean, Bec Judd even commented under
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: Ruby's post that she can't wait to have it on
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: the podcast to discuss the work. Ruby has drummed up
• 22:20
  Speaker 1: a lot of media attention into her surgery. And it's
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: quite unusual because often people will go and have a
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: surgery like this and just not talk about it. Look,
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: I know it's probably not the PC thing to say,
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: but I'm confused why she's having this surgery. She doesn't
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: need it. She looks incredible as is. I don't think
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: I've seen one group or one sag or one wrinkle
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: on her face. So I'm perplexed by the whole thing. Well,
• 22:44
  Speaker 1: the fact that she's only 33 really scares me. And
• 22:47
  Speaker 1: I know she's come out and said, look, I could
• 22:49
  Speaker 1: have disappeared off social media and come back and had
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: said nothing. You know, I'm trying to be as transparent
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: as possible. So people don't think that that's, you know,
• 22:57
  Speaker 1: it's a natural thing. I've just woken up looking younger
• 22:59
  Speaker 1: and I respect that sentiment. But there's a part that
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: just doesn't sit well with me. The fact that she
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: is so young and feels the need to get this surgery.
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: And a lot of people are going to watch these
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: videos and think, oh, it's only 16 grand. Maybe I
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: should go to Korea and get the same thing. If
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: Ruby's getting it done, why should I not get it done? Well,
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: it just normalizes it. It's like with Botox. I mean,
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: 10 years ago, it was very taboo to get Botox.
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: Now it's sort of like you're unusual if you don't
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: get it. Is that going to be the case with
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: these sorts of facelifts? Well, on the Botox thing, Ruby
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: actually said that she was getting Botox every month because
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: she was really unhappy with the way she looked. And
• 23:35
  Speaker 1: the ultimate aim was to look refreshed. She said she
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: didn't take in a photo of someone else and said,
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: make me look like this. She actually took in a
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: photo of her from five years ago and said, I
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: want to look like this. I want to look refreshed.
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: And like, I haven't had three children. Your face definitely
• 23:49
  Speaker 1: does age after having a child, doesn't it? I mean,
• 23:52
  Speaker 1: I wouldn't like to have another. Your iPhone definitely apparently
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: thinks that.
• 23:58
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: I just don't know where I sit with this whole thing.
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: I understand that she's being transparent and she's showing how
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: hideous and heinous the recovery is. God, heinous, that's a
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: very old word, isn't it? But at the same time,
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: I just can't help but feel like this does influence
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: other women to do it and normalize it. And that
• 24:15
  Speaker 1: doesn't sit well with me. I just want to know
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: if it was a paid promotion or not, because that
• 24:19
  Speaker 1: would change the way I look at it, considering she
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: has been very upfront that she wants to be transparent
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: about it. If she has got this surgery gifted to
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: her or has been paid to promote it, that actually
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: really changes the situation. And And, you know, you're not
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: really being that transparent if it is something that you've
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: been gifted and you haven't disclosed that. A part of
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: the reason why I think potentially this is a paid
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: promotion or a gifted promotion and she hasn't wanted to
• 24:44
  Speaker 1: disclose it is because of the backlash we saw about
• 24:47
  Speaker 1: the rib recontouring brand trip that happened recently. Beck from
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: Maths was involved in it. We covered that a couple
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: of months ago. A lot of those women on the
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: trip got a lot of backlash for being a part
• 24:59
  Speaker 1: of this international brand trip to promote plastic surgery. So
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: I wonder if that has potentially changed Ruby's approach to
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: this because she's been getting a lot of praise for
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: being transparent about it. I mean, Sky Wheatley definitely didn't
• 25:12
  Speaker 1: receive the amount of praise that Ruby has despite the
• 25:15
  Speaker 1: fact that she was incredibly transparent as well about her
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: cat eye. No, fox eye surgery. That's what it's called,
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: isn't it? Cat eye. Yeah, I think the cat eye
• 25:22
  Speaker 1: is what you don't want that a lot of people
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: end up getting.
• 25:24
  Speaker 5: I wanted to come on here real quick and talk
• 25:27
  Speaker 5: about the current situation with Calloway and Good Good. and
• 25:30
  Speaker 5: the ad that was just pushed out there to promote
• 25:33
  Speaker 5: the Good Good Driver.
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: This story is bound to be blowing up your husband
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: or boyfriend's group chat. Popular YouTube channel Good Good Golf
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: is at the centre of a media storm after releasing
• 25:45
  Speaker 1: an ad showing one of its co-founders knocking a woman
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: to the ground as she reached for his driver. The
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: ad was part of the channel's long-standing partnership with golf
• 25:54
  Speaker 1: giant Callaway, prompting many to question how an ad depicting
• 25:57
  Speaker 1: violence against a woman could was approved and posted in
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: the first place. Now, Soph, before we get into the drama,
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: can you get us across the main players? Yeah, so
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: Good Good Golf is one of the first and most
• 26:09
  Speaker 1: successful YouTube golf channels. It has a cult following of
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: predominantly young men with more than 2.1 million subscribers. Now,
• 26:18
  Speaker 1: the channel was first created in 2020 by college friends
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: Garrett Clark, Stephen Casadea, Matt Schaaf and Micah Morris-Ross. who
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: aren't professional golfers but rather very good amateurs. Now, I
• 26:30
  Speaker 1: first heard about them through my husband, and I have
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: to admit that their channel is often in the background
• 26:35
  Speaker 1: at home. See, I have no idea who these people are.
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: Like I am not even across this story at all.
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: It has not hit my algorithm, but I am so
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: intrigued about it. Yeah, I mean, even just aside from
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: the scandal, the whole channel and the popularity in golf
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: YouTube is intriguing. I think the whole appeal is that
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: men watch this channel and feel like they're golfing with
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: their mates. Because as I said, these aren't professional golfers.
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: They're just men who were very good at golf. And
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: it seems like a sort of escape for men because
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: These guys are pretty much living out a lot of
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: men's fantasies, getting paid big dollars to play golf with
• 27:11
  Speaker 1: your friends all day. I think there must be an
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: element of a lot of men who watch it thinking
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: that could be me as well because I think there
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: are so many men out there that are like, oh,
• 27:19
  Speaker 1: I was one football injury away from becoming a professional or,
• 27:23
  Speaker 1: you know, if only my dad had got me into
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: golf when I was a child. I love from the
• 27:27
  Speaker 1: sidelines we're judging this, like why wouldn't people watch other
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: men play golf and we're literally dissecting the lives of
• 27:33
  Speaker 1: these Australian influencers.
• 27:35
  Speaker 3: No, I get it.
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: I mean, after watching it, I do get the appeal.
• 27:39
  Speaker 1: I mean, this channel is obviously on in the Kelsey
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: Swift household as well because Travis Kelsey is apparently a
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: fan of these guys as well as LeBron James. I mean,
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: last year it was estimated that the good, good guys
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: generated more than $ 40 million in revenue. They have a
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: total estimated net worth of $ 250 million. So it's big business.
• 27:58
  Speaker 5: Wow.
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: And this isn't just through sponsorship. So the YouTube channel
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: has expanded into a digital media company with a highly
• 28:07
  Speaker 1: successful apparel line. So the team now has a roster
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: of 15 creators, as well as multiple channels, including Good
• 28:14
  Speaker 1: Good Girls, Good Good Pros, and Good Good Mini Golf.
• 28:18
  Speaker 1: And it's pretty wild because 75% of the company's earnings
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: come from its golfing apparel line. So originally they started
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: out just selling YouTube merch. But it has now evolved
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: into a legitimate golf brand. They even sponsor professional golfers
• 28:33
  Speaker 1: who wear their gear. Most recently, they have expanded into
• 28:37
  Speaker 1: golfing equipment, which is what leads us to this Callaway drama.
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: And this isn't a new partnership. Callaway and Good Good
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: have been working together since 2023. Callaway have actually been
• 28:49
  Speaker 1: creating Good Good branded equipment, and the most recent project
• 28:52
  Speaker 1: was a Good Good version of Callaway's quantum driver. Now,
• 28:56
  Speaker 1: to promote the driver, Good Good released a social media
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: ad on August 21st, and this ad was shared across
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: both Good Good and Callaway's social media accounts. Now, in
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: the clip, Garrett Clark, who is the main face of
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: Good Good, is on the golf course, and he sees
• 29:12
  Speaker 1: professional golfer Alexis Muskowski reaching for his new Callaway driver.
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: Now for context, Alexis is part of Good Good's broader
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: creator crew. So last year, Good Good launched a secondary
• 29:25
  Speaker 1: channel called Good Good Girls. And ironically, this was in
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: a bid to make golf more engaging and inclusive to women.
• 29:32
  Speaker 1: Now in the 15 second clip, Garrett sees Alexis reaching
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: for his new driver and he sprints over to her
• 29:39
  Speaker 1: and shoves her to the ground and then says don't
• 29:42
  Speaker 1: touch my new driver let's throw to the clip do
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: not touch my new driver I'm sorry, but what were
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: they thinking? I mean, you can't help but have a
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: visceral reaction when watching this. The music is creepy. It
• 30:08
  Speaker 1: sort of feels like you're watching a horror movie, the
• 30:10
  Speaker 1: way that he's standing over her, yelling at her not
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: to touch his golf stick. It's all very sinister. Like
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: when I originally heard about it and hadn't seen the clip,
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: I was like, oh, is it a bit of like
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: slapstick comedy? But it wasn't. It was done in quite
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: a threatening way. I saw this tweet and someone said,
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: Callaway is literally just saying to female golfers, we don't
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: want you touching our clubs. Yeah, well, the ad essentially
• 30:31
  Speaker 1: says if a woman dares to touch your golf club,
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: you have the right to take matters into your own hands.
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: I mean, this video was so tone deaf. Good Good
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: have a very young audience of impressionable men who literally
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: want to replicate everything they do. As you can imagine,
• 30:44
  Speaker 1: this ad received immense backlash. Critics said that the ad
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: depicted and trivialized violence against women. Let's take a listen
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: to what creator Chloe had to say about it.
• 30:55
  Speaker 4: There is not one part of me that's like, oh,
• 30:56
  Speaker 4: this is a joke because hitting women is still not
• 31:00
  Speaker 4: a joke to me. It's still not a hee hee
• 31:01
  Speaker 4: ha ha thing because it still happens every single day.
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: And making fun.
• 31:05
  Speaker 4: Of it, making light of it to promote a sport
• 31:07
  Speaker 4: and promote golf clubs, which also I just have to
• 31:10
  Speaker 4: say inherently have been used to abuse women is insane.
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: I don't know who came up with the idea.
• 31:15
  Speaker 4: I don't know what the storyline was or who the
• 31:17
  Speaker 4: approval process had to go through. But can I just
• 31:19
  Speaker 4: say every single person used to be fired. Genuinely.
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: She really hit the nail on the head when she
• 31:24
  Speaker 1: pointed out the connection to golf clubs long being used
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: as a weapon against women. And I think that's why
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: a lot of people had such a visceral reaction to
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: the ad. Now, the Good Good team removed the video
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: within hours, but by then the video had already done
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: the damage. It had been saved and screen recorded and
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: was spreading like wildfire, particularly across TikTok. Now, Good Good
• 31:47
  Speaker 1: was first to respond to the criticism. The next day
• 31:50
  Speaker 1: they issued a statement across their socials The tile read,
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: we posted a video to our channels that ultimately depicted
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: actions that are not aligned with our values as a brand.
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: We have since taken that content down and sincerely apologize.
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: Good Good has always stood for making the game of
• 32:06
  Speaker 1: golf more inclusive to all, and we will continue to
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: ensure that that is our mission moving forward. A bit
• 32:13
  Speaker 1: of a cop out to say, oh, but hang on,
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: we've always tried to be inclusive. It's like, well, your
• 32:17
  Speaker 1: true colors have come out. in this ad. Yeah, it's
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: almost as if they were like, fuck, this ad needs
• 32:21
  Speaker 1: a bit of inclusivity. We've got a woman. What can
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: we do to her in the clip? Okay, we'll just
• 32:26
  Speaker 1: shove her out the way. Well, that's the thing. In 2026,
• 32:29
  Speaker 1: a brand needs to be inclusive. And sometimes opportunities like
• 32:33
  Speaker 1: this go to show that it's actually just tokenism and
• 32:37
  Speaker 1: virtue signaling. Because We've really seen how you view women
• 32:41
  Speaker 1: in the golfing space from this video. Look, I can
• 32:45
  Speaker 1: totally see how it comes across that way. But as
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: someone who has watched their channel for quite a long
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: time now, whether it is just in the background. I
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: actually don't think that that's true. I think that these
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: guys have made a grave error. I don't necessarily think
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: that this is how they view women at all, because
• 33:01
  Speaker 1: this ad was cut up quite badly. We will get
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: into that into a second. But as you said, this
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: apology didn't go down well. One follower said, empty corporate
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: style apologies will look really weird in the history books.
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: Whilst another said, We filmed it, edited it, previewed it,
• 33:16
  Speaker 1: and posted it. We didn't realize it was wrong until
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: our paying customers said it was wrong. Now, the same
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: day Callaway issued a small statement to the media saying,
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: we are disappointed by the content that was posted and
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: are appreciative of Good Good for addressing this. Now, I
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: don't think that Good Good or Callaway anticipated how big
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: this story was going to get because to me, it
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: sounded like they hoped a small written apology would silence
• 33:41
  Speaker 1: their critics. I mean, Callaway's statement made it sound like
• 33:44
  Speaker 1: they were trying to distance themselves from the scandal. Yeah,
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: the comment around, oh, we appreciate, good, good for addressing this. Like, oh,
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: we're glad they did because it's their fault. Like, this
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: isn't on us. Well, a couple of days later, Callaway's
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: chief executive, Chip Brewer, was forced to issue a further
• 33:59
  Speaker 1: statement to explain their handling of the situation. Chip Brewer,
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: is that a real name? That sounds like a made-up
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: name in an Adam Sandler golfing movie. Like, Chip. Like,
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: you chip the ball. And Brewer, like, that's got beer
• 34:11
  Speaker 1: references on it. Look, it is a legitimate name, but
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: I can see where you're coming from with that one. Now,
• 34:16
  Speaker 1: in the statement, he pointed out that the ad was
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: produced by Good Good, but he had to admit that
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: Callaway had reviewed the ad and subsequently approved it. He
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: added Callaway are conducting both internal and external investigations into
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: the matter and have already made changes to their approval process.
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: How on earth did this ad get approved in the
• 34:36
  Speaker 1: first place? There would have been so many people who
• 34:39
  Speaker 1: had to review this video and before it was posted.
• 34:43
  Speaker 1: I mean, surely a huge organization like Callaway would have
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: the most stringent policies in place. I mean, someone clearly
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: has dropped the ball badly here. It's really interesting to
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: think about how large organizations are really putting a lot
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: of trust in everyday people to create content around their brands.
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: I mean, that's why they have to employ, you know,
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: the right sort of marketing team and PR team to
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: review these videos. I mean, the difference with GoodGood though
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: is they have a team of around 40 employees. So
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: They have three people in their marketing division. It's interesting
• 35:14
  Speaker 1: to note that it appears to be all men who
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: work in the marketing team, but it really feels like
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: these days everyone feels like they have to be so
• 35:20
  Speaker 1: clever and creative with these ads and add shock value
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: or humour in there. See, I don't think they dropped
• 35:26
  Speaker 1: the ball at all. I think that this went through
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: the regular approval processes and the people in these marketing
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: teams thought that this was acceptable. I think this is
• 35:34
  Speaker 1: a reflection on how women are viewed at both of
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: these companies. And what's disturbing is so many people have
• 35:39
  Speaker 1: come out and been like, It's just a joke. I
• 35:42
  Speaker 1: think you guys are, you know, reading too much into it.
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: This is why context is so important. There's currently a
• 35:47
  Speaker 1: Snickers ad from 2010 going viral featuring Betty White. And
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: people are saying, oh, isn't this the same thing? Because
• 35:52
  Speaker 1: she gets absolutely annihilated during a tackle football game. But
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: the whole joke is it's actually not Betty White. Betty
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: White isn't playing herself. The ad centers around a man
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: who turns into Betty White because he's so hungry and
• 36:06
  Speaker 1: he's playing like Betty White. But once he has a
• 36:09
  Speaker 1: bite of a Snickers bar, he's back to himself. So
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: this ad isn't about being violent against a woman. It's
• 36:15
  Speaker 1: a joke about a man playing football like a little
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: old woman. Yeah, someone sums it up really well in
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: the comments. They wrote that the good, good ad is like,
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: I'm going to hit my bitch wife for touching my
• 36:24
  Speaker 1: golf clubs versus the Snickers ad, which is, haha, it's
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: Betty White being tackled whilst playing a game. Yeah, again,
• 36:29
  Speaker 1: I agree. Context is so important. And that's why Garrett
• 36:32
  Speaker 1: Clark decided to jump on his TikTok and provide a
• 36:35
  Speaker 1: bit more context to this situation. So he opened up
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: to his 2 million followers saying that he wanted to
• 36:41
  Speaker 1: personally apologize for his role in the skit. and reiterate
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: that he does not support DV or abuse of any kind.
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: He then provided context to the 15 second clip. So
• 36:53
  Speaker 1: he explained that Good Good's marketing team reached out to
• 36:56
  Speaker 1: him with an idea to do a spinoff of the
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: movie Obsession. Now, the concept was that Garrett was supposed
• 37:02
  Speaker 1: to be obsessed with the driver and anyone who touched
• 37:05
  Speaker 1: it also became obsessed. Now, Garrett made a real point
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: of saying that he and Alexis were told to be
• 37:12
  Speaker 1: part of the ad. I mean, he was clearly trying
• 37:13
  Speaker 1: to point out that it wasn't his decision and he
• 37:16
  Speaker 1: was just told what to do and what to say.
• 37:19
  Speaker 1: He explained that the full social media video actually ran
• 37:22
  Speaker 1: for a minute and it included a second scene where
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: another member of the Good Good team called Johnny grabbed
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: the driver and became possessed by it. However, the clip
• 37:32
  Speaker 1: was cut down to 15 seconds by the marketing team
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: so they could release different versions in different formats. So
• 37:39
  Speaker 1: that's why this clip got such a strange edit. Let's
• 37:43
  Speaker 1: take a listen to more of what Garrett said.
• 37:46
  Speaker 5: Looking back at it, terrible concept, terrible ad. Once I
• 37:50
  Speaker 5: watched it back and it got posted, my skin was crawling.
• 37:54
  Speaker 5: I was cringing. I mean, just even minutes after I
• 37:57
  Speaker 5: saw it get posted, before this surfaced everywhere online, I
• 38:00
  Speaker 5: thought it was the worst ad known to man. The
• 38:03
  Speaker 5: beginning of the ad was very intense with the way
• 38:07
  Speaker 5: that that was pushed out there, and it just... Not good.
• 38:10
  Speaker 4: All around, not good.
• 38:12
  Speaker 5: I'm going to first say the hate that this ad
• 38:15
  Speaker 5: and this skit received and the reaction it got was,
• 38:21
  Speaker 5: in a lot of the comments that I read, very justified.
• 38:24
  Speaker 5: I don't want anybody to look at that and think
• 38:28
  Speaker 5: they support DV, abuse me personally. I don't support that
• 38:32
  Speaker 5: in any way. I don't want anyone looking at that
• 38:35
  Speaker 5: and believing that. I know that based off what was
• 38:39
  Speaker 5: promoted in the ad and the way it was pushed
• 38:41
  Speaker 5: out there, the way it was edited, it definitely.
• 38:43
  Speaker 1: Looked, it looked rough. This is a much better apology,
• 38:49
  Speaker 1: but I do find it a little bit of a
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: cop out to say, oh, the marketing team edited it
• 38:53
  Speaker 1: down to 15 seconds. It's like, isn't it the marketing
• 38:55
  Speaker 1: team that worked for you? Like your marketing team, surely
• 38:57
  Speaker 1: you would have been across that edit. The thing is,
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: what was actually good about this apology compared to the
• 39:02
  Speaker 1: tile that they originally put out was there seemed to
• 39:04
  Speaker 1: be some actual emotional reflection and an explanation as to
• 39:09
  Speaker 1: what the fuck they were thinking, because it actually gave
• 39:12
  Speaker 1: context to the clip. I mean, usually people don't like
• 39:16
  Speaker 1: when people try to justify their mistakes, but in this case,
• 39:19
  Speaker 1: because the video was so unusual and clearly missed the
• 39:23
  Speaker 1: mark so much, I think a lot of us wanted
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: to know what they were actually thinking. He also used
• 39:29
  Speaker 1: his apology to shine a light on the hate that Alexis,
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: who appeared in the video alongside him, had been receiving.
• 39:35
  Speaker 1: So he shared some screenshots from her DMs. One said,
• 39:39
  Speaker 1: hope someone beats you after your round. Another said, you
• 39:43
  Speaker 1: don't deserve to be a woman, little miss Alexis. Get
• 39:45
  Speaker 1: the fuck off the planet now, you fucking loser bitch.
• 39:48
  Speaker 1: Consider yourself a man. You are not welcome with any woman.
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: I won't continue because it actually just gets so disgusting.
• 39:54
  Speaker 1: But he pointed out that he feels that the hate
• 39:58
  Speaker 1: is very backwards for people who are supposedly advocating for
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: no violence and it just doesn't sit right with him. Well,
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: that's obviously a very extreme version of it. And I mean,
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: that's absolutely appalling that she's receiving messages like that. Now,
• 40:11
  Speaker 1: Garrett finished the video by saying off the back of
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: the Callaway video, some very valid conversations had been made.
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: about how golf has historically been a male-dominated sport. And
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: he reiterated that it is Good Good's mission to grow
• 40:25
  Speaker 1: the female side of golf. Look, as I said, this
• 40:27
  Speaker 1: statement is far superior to the one they originally put out.
• 40:31
  Speaker 1: But when you say something like, you know, it's our
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: mission to grow the female side of sport, they better
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: actually go ahead and do that. Like they better actually
• 40:39
  Speaker 1: invest some time and effort into it. That's the only
• 40:41
  Speaker 1: way that they're going to turn people's opinions around. Because
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: as much as I appreciate hearing the ins and outs
• 40:47
  Speaker 1: of what happened behind the scenes. It still doesn't really
• 40:50
  Speaker 1: sit that well for me. It's like, isn't your job
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: to come up with these really good social media videos,
• 40:56
  Speaker 1: hook people in and provide enough context so it doesn't offend?
• 41:00
  Speaker 1: It's not like that's not your speciality. So to then
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: blame it on your own marketing team and say the
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: edit was bad. It's like, The idea that you came
• 41:07
  Speaker 1: up with and executed was bad. Don't blame it on
• 41:10
  Speaker 1: other people in your team. And even if it was
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: a minute video, I still feel like that scene would
• 41:14
  Speaker 1: have been picked out and people still would have had
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: an issue with it. Well, that's just the nature of TikTok.
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: We see it with YouTube. People clip up 10 seconds
• 41:21
  Speaker 1: of someone's hour-long YouTube video and it goes viral. So
• 41:25
  Speaker 1: obviously the same thing was going to happen to this
• 41:27
  Speaker 1: clip if it wasn't a minute-long video. It's clear that
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: Callaway has been receiving a lot of PR advice because
• 41:35
  Speaker 1: Off the back of this controversy, they have dropped the
• 41:37
  Speaker 1: Good Good Guys. They are no longer working with them.
• 41:40
  Speaker 1: They are really trying to distance themselves from them. They
• 41:44
  Speaker 1: have also donated $ 1 million to help the survivors of
• 41:47
  Speaker 1: domestic violence, so a very good move there. It's quite interesting, though,
• 41:51
  Speaker 1: because the CEO of Good Good, Matt Kendrick, went ham
• 41:54
  Speaker 1: on social media. He uploaded this post at 3 a.m.
• 41:57
  Speaker 1: He essentially accused Callaway of asking the Good Good Guys
• 42:00
  Speaker 1: to take the fall of for the controversial ad before
• 42:04
  Speaker 1: they cut ties with them in what he called a
• 42:06
  Speaker 1: coordinated media blitz. He wrote, interesting that Callaway Golf asks
• 42:11
  Speaker 1: us to make an ad and then approves it, then
• 42:13
  Speaker 1: asks us to take the fall, then drops us in
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: a coordinated media blitz and covers it up by giving
• 42:19
  Speaker 1: a million dollars away, thinking everyone will be okay with it.
• 42:22
  Speaker 1: 30 for 39 will be legendary, Kendrick wrote. I mean,
• 42:27
  Speaker 1: the fallout from this video has been enormous for the
• 42:30
  Speaker 1: Good Good guys. Following Garrett's apology, Good Good also announced
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: that it would be stepping away from its sponsorship of
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: a PGA Tour in November. This is a massive loss
• 42:40
  Speaker 1: for Good Good because this just wasn't another marketing partnership
• 42:44
  Speaker 1: for them. In October last year, they announced the event
• 42:47
  Speaker 1: as their own PGA tournament. So it was going to
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: be called the Good Good Championship. And This really marked
• 42:54
  Speaker 1: a major step in them being recognized as a major
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: golf brand rather than just a creative brand. So when
• 43:00
  Speaker 1: they made this announcement, they said that they recognize they
• 43:03
  Speaker 1: have a lot of work to do as an organization
• 43:06
  Speaker 1: and their focus right now has to be on their
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: team culture and ensuring they learn from the situation. They
• 43:12
  Speaker 1: finished by saying they remain committed to earning back trust
• 43:15
  Speaker 1: and they hope to work with the PGA in the future.
• 43:18
  Speaker 1: I think it's really interesting that they position themselves as
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: stepping away from the deal because it allowed them to
• 43:24
  Speaker 1: frame the decision as theirs. When in reality, I'm sure
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: the PGA gave them two options, either step away quietly
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: or we'll have to terminate this partnership. And I think
• 43:33
  Speaker 1: it's a good move from a PR perspective because it
• 43:36
  Speaker 1: allows them to voluntarily surrender the sponsorship as a way
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: of demonstrating accountability and rather than completely severing ties with
• 43:46
  Speaker 1: the PGA. Because I assume in a few years' time,
• 43:49
  Speaker 1: when this scandal has quietened down, they can then work
• 43:53
  Speaker 1: to having another branded PGA event like this in the future. Ultimately,
• 43:57
  Speaker 1: I don't think this is going to affect Good Good
• 44:01
  Speaker 1: in the long term because their core demographic of fans
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: are men who are more likely to forgive them for
• 44:07
  Speaker 1: this misstep. It was interesting because they made their return
• 44:10
  Speaker 1: to YouTube yesterday saying, and literally just uploaded a golf
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: video with no reference to the scandal whatsoever. A lot
• 44:18
  Speaker 1: of Good Good fans are coming up with these wild
• 44:20
  Speaker 1: theories that they think that this is some sort of
• 44:24
  Speaker 1: orchestrated move by Callaway to try and ruin Good Good's
• 44:27
  Speaker 1: golf brand. Again, that's obviously just rumors and speculation. I
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: think that another large brand will pick Good Good up
• 44:35
  Speaker 1: in a couple of months' time and be raring to
• 44:37
  Speaker 1: work with them just because they are that popular. And
• 44:41
  Speaker 1: I think that this controversy is just going to quiet down. Well,
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: that is where we are going to leave things today.
• 44:46
  Speaker 1: If you want to hear more from us, we drop
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: a bonus episode of Outspoken. Every Thursday for Outspoken Plus subscribers,
• 44:53
  Speaker 1: all the details to sign up are in our show notes.
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: This podcast was recorded on the traditional land of the
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: Kaurna people of the Adelaide Plains. We pay respect to
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: elders past and present.