I see that Rachel Agnew is back on Thursday's show!

What's the point of Rachel Agnew on Loose Women? OK so she won a silly competition to be on it for 5 days or something - I could never see the point in that, but do we still have to endure seeing someone who means nothing to us? It's supposed to be a celebrity show, that's  what we enjoy about it, seeing celebrity's we know & love chatting & amusing us & sometimes making very valid points about things. .

flosserama:

What's the point of Rachel Agnew on Loose Women? OK so she won a silly competition to be on it for 5 days or something - I could never see the point in that, but do we still have to endure seeing someone who means nothing to us? It's supposed to be a celebrity show, that's  what we enjoy about it, seeing celebrity's we know & love chatting & amusing us & sometimes making very valid points about things. .

 

I totally agree with you in this one flosserama. I thought she was pretty ok for the week when she won the competition but as a long term LW I don't think she has anything to offer.

Well I suppose she is a "celebrity" now, she is in the public domain after winning the competition. Lots of other LW have never done anything really, Danielle Bux - WAG; Jodi from Oliver - she won a reality show, as wit many others.

Jodi from Oliver was in the public eye for a while & although I never watched that show, I found her a terrific personality on Loose Women. I think she was only on it once.

Glad to see that it's not just me who felt that way about Rachel Agnew.  She really has nothing interesting to add and we really don't know anything more about her than we did when she won the competition.  She seems a nice person but I have to agree with you flosserama...the show does need 'celebrity' panelists.

But I think you are missing the concept of Rachel being on the panel - it was a competition for a normal, everyday person to become a "Loose Woman". They refer to Rachel as, "your Loose Woman", because the viewers (or some of them) voted for her to be there. It would be pointless if they had a celebrity instead of her because it was not a competition for celebrities and it wouldn't be anything different.

Personally, I couldn't care less if it was 4 z-list celebrities (which is what they are) or 4 normal housewives having a brew around the kitchen table, so long as the talk is interesting. I don't tune in for the panel, I tune in for the talk.

Rachel is a better than a lot of the so called celebs, Mel B and Sinitta for instance.

I thought she was better this time round than when she was on for the 5 days, perhaps it's because they know what she can offer, and she doesn't feel that she has to get all her points over within a specific time period.