E! News’ GIULIANA RANCIC Under Fire For Comments Made About ZENDAYA COLEMAN’s Hair While On The OSCARS Red Carpet

Fresh off the Grammys red carpet a couple of weeks ago having set the Internet ablaze with her alarmingly thin frame, E! Fashion Police’s Giuliana Rancic targeted someone at this year’s Oscars Red Carpet: 18 year-old Zendaya Coleman who wore her hair in [what’s called] “Silky dreads”: a twisted, spiral, coiled hairstyle reminiscent of actual dreadlocks.Giuliana Rancic

The irony:

If it weren’t for the tragic and unfortunate incident that took our dear funny lady Joan Rivers away from us, the irony is: she would have been sitting right on the panel of E! Fashion Police critics [as was Rancic along with Kelly Osbourne-as seen on the video].


The eerie:

It was as if the ghost of Joan Rivers came over Giuliana and out popped a comment sure to piss some one (or a lot of people) off. Joan Rivers could pull a stunt like such and come what may: she was a comedian. All was fair in war and laughs. Love her or hate her-she dished it how she took it back.

Giuliana however, is just: Giuliana: an E! News host, so can she take what’s all coming and ranting her way?


Well, ‘what had-happened was…’ her “critique” [about Zendaya Coleman’s hair] got locked and twisted in an all out Twitter war from people of various walks of life (and locks) as a result of Rancic stating:

“Like, I feel like she smells like pachouli oil…Or weed…maybe weed.”

Well, from the looks of Kelly Osbourne’s body language after the comment, one could look right at it and know that even she felt a “way” about the comment [and was most probably glad she had no part in it].



And yes, Zendaya responded:

Zendaya's reply

Without question, the Twitter rant began:


 ELIAS @wtfelias

@GiulianaRancic for someone whos been attacked for her looks in the media id think you would know what its like and wouldnt be so hateful


Professor Oak @itzCharlieBrown

Not that it matters @GiulianaRancic , but in case you were wondering my locs smell like shea butter and college tuition.


Trudy @thetrudz

Your racist and xenophobic statement about Zendaya’s hair wasn’t funny. Try being interesting, for once. Make it a goal. @GiulianaRancic


 trapqueen  @TeeThaGoddess

still waiting for @ENews & @GiulianaRancic to explain, retract and apologize for this. and @Zendaya, where are you?


In addition to these rants, it was also found that Giuliana Rancic spoke out about Kylie Jenner wearing dreads earlier this month and referred to her wearing them as edgy, cool and stylish.

Now obviously, that’s a subject that would require another blog, but it goes without saying that when it comes to things like pink hair (for example): It’s “cool” “stylish” and “fun” on other ethnicities but “ghetto” on others. Which is kind of the same thing going on here with this dreadlocks on Zendaya v. dreadlocks on Kylie (as per Giuliana)—which, according to what I’ve ascertained about all this; is the problem with her statement about Zendaya.

 #JeSuisPaiPai @heyPAIDA

But Kylie Jenner’s hair is cool and edgy though, right? Foh @GiulianaRancic RT @dirtyxluxury: wow.


lil mama @princessg4y

im glad giuliana rancic is catching flack for that comment. she thought kylies dreads were edgy but zendayas are dirty. hmm.



To That,  I Say This:

HN8eCJ_BThe problem with this whole “social media” thing is, while it is a good tool to bring the world and its ideals, ideologies, lifestyles, personalities, opinions, judgments and even prejudices right in the palms of one another’s hands and fingertips.

While people love to fall back on the (rationale?):  “It’s only the Internet.”

No. It’s bigger than that. “The Internet” is your world and the people in it: Up close and personal and in numbers such that in your world at log off, you will NEVER encounter your world offline in as great a mass as you will on the Internet—ever in your life actually. It’s numerically and socially impossible to.

Let’s say, even if you only have 2000 people that YOU follow.

You’re not going to encounter, see, watch, observe, or interact with 2000 (or even 1/3 of 2000 people in any given 24-hour day of your life off line).

So what’s said and done online is MUCH bigger than: “It’s just the Internet.” There are people behind those fonts and the quietness from where you sit.



What people have to understand is: You can’t Twitter rant somebody out of being “racist” or “prejudice.” When people do stuff like this (what Giuliana did or what-although not online-what Paula Deen did, or what just happened yesterday at the Oscars regarding Alejandro Gonzales Iñarritu where Sean Penn quipped onstage: “Who gave this son of a bitch a green card?”)–while you don’t have to accept it, you DO have to accept it as apart of who THEY are without accepting it as a part of who you know yourself to be or believe YOU are.

Social media and a world of people with a keyboard, mouse, cell phone or iPad etc. have a hard time understanding that you can’t go around on these domino effect crusades Twitter-ranting people into a form of “political correctness” because that’s what YOU feel they should turn around and apologize, and do (then-as a result of your scorn and outcry) miraculously BE (by end-rant).

No. It doesn’t work that way.



Everybody who has a half-cocked opinion or statements (no matter how prejudiced or racist it may be or seem) doesn’t owe it to you or to me online to retract what they say or feel anymore than our cute, positive, non-offensive quotes and memes.

While you don’t have to ACCEPT their half-cocked statements, you DO have to accept their half-cocked statements as THEIR “meme”—that to you; might be offensive.

But welcome to your world online: a world bigger than the one at log-off and outside your door actually. Hello.

Everybody that has an opinion that doesn’t fit the sun-yellow background of what you deem “positive” a meme isn’t a bad or negative person. They’re just being who they are less the tip-toeing around you or simply being who they really are impulsively (without having thought about what they said or did having an effect on one or a group of people). And to that I say this:

I’m a “truth seeker” (in people).

I’m an individual who strongly believes that “THE Truth” is relative [to the beholder of it-centered around his/her beliefs, experiences and how it personally suits them].

Facts are the only “truth” in life.

Such is life.

Fact: deal with it. Accept it. It is what it is.

Don’t believe me? Go major in philosophy. And then from there (or while doing), I invite you to go sit in a downtown courtroom and watch a couple of court cases and then come back and debate me on that. Both factors will give you a much better understanding about “truth,” “fact,” life, the world and how it works.

But there is such a thing as a Truth-and that is what I seek in people (in life).

Truth is: Let’s say…….black people/African Americans (or whichever “politically correct word of choice you-reading this-wish to use).

HN8eCJ_BIf you hate black people/African American people…and at home around your friends and family, you often refer to them as “n%%ers,” I would MUCH rather know your truth upfront. I don’t want you to “black people” or “African American people” me to my face, but do “n%%er” things behind my back-especially if you have the power, authority, or control to affect how I eat, sleep, and pay my bills-or if you’re in any kind of personal position in my life with the ability to affect how you make my heart feel. I want to know what I’m dealing with-so yeah: spit that shish out. I wanna know what’s up with you.

I said that (used that analogy) to say this:

Learn to be okay with who people show themselves to be impulsively (whether on or offline). Everything, every opinion doesn’t require a fight or crusade to force someone to do or feel something YOU feel is politically correct to get your acceptance or okay. You have to sometimes accept or deal with some truths (that you DON’T agree) in people about as equally as the truths about them that you DO agree with.

Be okay with people’s personal selves and truths about as much as you getting into an argument and learning from the person you argued with—all things said to you that while friends or lovers; they never said to you.

Just as you would take a step back and say, “Oh. That’s how you felt? That’s what you felt about me all this time?”

That’s the same way you have to learn to handle people that you don’t know online, in this big world (bigger than the one at log off and outside your door).

Suspend your energies in the RIGHT way-with the full understanding that this is your world-right at your fingertips-without mounting up in posses finger pointing to make a point that you can’t win.

Yeah, you just might get an apology. That’s how this “social media” world goes. Everybody (famous or not) is in a public image tight–where every single day at log on, they are working HARD at trying to be liked, loved, adored, revered, or famous and (because of) this world of social media has given way to insincerity in ways that personalities are CORRUPTED: Talking talks that they know they aren’t walking, because people are being forced to be who they personally aren’t in order to be liked, loved, adored, revered, famous (or to keep their job on E! News channel)…

You-sitting around waiting on somebody to retract a part of who they aren’t (as a temporary fix to meet your demands) is no different a fix than the fact that they said it (and obliged meeting your demands) is going to fix THEIR problem or your problem with it. It’s just social “formality” rather than a true resolve.

But…here is Giuiliana’s apology and explanation:


Author: OSFMagWriter

Spitfire . Media Maestro . Writing Rhinoceros .