My bet?

A&E are looking to sell. As many have pointed out the upcoming season has already been filmed. My guess is the rating are slipping and the head office, having seen the new material, thinks the season after next wont be as profitable.

So engineer a fake controversy that doesnt effect product already on the shelf but gives you an excuse to sell the stuff in the back before anyone finds out its lost its value

". . . if you hire a backwoods redneck fundamentalist Christian to star in your reality show, you should expect him to say the sort of things a backwoods redneck fundamentalist Christian might say -- about gays, ducks, and other subjects."

Not only should you expect him to say such stuff - he HAS said such stuff before. So, it's nothing new.

The world is burning down (anti-gay laws in Russia that will jail folks, anti-gay laws in parts of Africa that put to death gays, public executions of gays in parts of the Middle East, etc.) around us and folks want to get upset at what this ZZTop lookalike says? BTW, were those on the left this outraged over Baldwin's anti-gay slur that he said to an individual? There's nothing like proportional outrage now then, is there?

And those folks on the right are claiming outrage over assaults on "free speech." Puleeeze. How about getting upset at the IRS going after Tea-party groups? Now, THAT'S an assault on free speech. What's that I hear? crickets.

Quite frankly, I'm glad this "event" didn't happen during election season because it just might be the hill the (fiscally) conservative polticians would choose to die on. Leaving more on the left getting elected to spend even more of our money. (although, it is not like those on the right spend a lot less anyway)

I guess that I'm just outraged over the outrage from BOTH sides when there is so much else of greater value going down.

I think when Popehat does that he is lawyering up the argument. A lot of Social Justice Warriors deflect issues of freedom of expression and censorship with derision of the concept and the cry of FREEZE PEACH, and I think Popehat is basically doing the same here.

Sure there are a lot of people who mistakenly cry first amendment when what they mean is censorship by some entity. But by banging the table and reminding those of us who already know it's not a first amendment issue and not a legal issue, Popehat avoids having to take a stance on the censorship issue, and on the issue of whether this sort of censorship is good for society and should be applauded, or even demanded.

The history behind freedom of expression goes back beyond the first amendment to struggles against the church and "the marketplace of ideas" is not held solely in a government warehouse but among all people and all institutions.

He likes to pound and shout it's not a first amendment issue, and then say he thinks all this social opprobrium is a great thing, and then he always mumbles his bit about proportionality and wanders off.

But the interesting questions in the Duck Dynasty case are not about whether A&E's censorship and demands are first amendment issues or not and Ken never even addresses those questions.

So thank you Popehat for telling us something we already know and never addressing the actual issues. Pound pound pound that table.

I dont think A&E engineered this at all. They aren't that smart.

They reacted impulsively, to control "the perceived damage" of a potential boycott from a very small sub group of the population.
And the backlash was more than their tiny little pc brains could have anticipated.

There are no first amendment issues here, but there are some legal issues.
Phil Roberts has been saying stuff like this for years, in public venues, and when A&E let it slide , they weakened their ability to enforce the morals clause in their own contract. It is called silence is acquiescence.

Not a fan of the show. Reality stuff bores me, unless they are shooting competitions. I don't know how long it has been since I tuned into A&E. There doesn't seem to be much of interest on there anymore.

"I dont think A&E engineered this at all."

Realy? Because I think it's an amazing publicity stunt. (Although the Duck guys could have been the brains behind it. They are apparently very savvy business men.)

His quotes are long enough to cherry pick from no matter whether you agree or disagree with him. The Duck Dynasty guys get to strengthen their existing fanbase. A&E gets to "fire" him and appeal to the less conservative audience. The resulting hullabaloo builds brand awareness and curiosity among people who hadn't seen, much less cared about, the show. The Duck Dynasty fans are whipped into a frenzy of "us vs. them" loyalty just in time to show their support with some last minute Christmas shopping.

Gotta move those Uncle Si chia pets and camo polar fleece blankets.

I think Christians are tired of having their religion insulted and their beliefs criticized by the oh-so-tolerant left. This is the left that says, " Only my beliefs have validity. And if you do not share my belief, then you are a bigot and we will boycott you, have you fired, or in other ways marginalize you."

The left will not insult Islam or criticize Muslim attitude towards gays, gay marriage, or women because the people of the left know they will be killed if they do.

Gotta move those Uncle Si chia pets and camo polar fleece blankets.

Posted by: Elle at December 22, 2013 11:06 AM

So you actually think A&E is tight enough with GLAAD to engineer this complaint, react hysterically to it, and then tell GLAAD that they will "somehow" fix the enormous backlash against them later?

That is a 911 truther worthy conspiracy theory. I don't buy it.

http://tv.yahoo.com/news/duck-dynasty-fallout-glaad-reeling-biggest-backlash-years-010050637.html

I think the executives' friends were horrified. ~ Posted by: Amy Alkon at December 22, 2013 10:35 AM

I think there's a kernel of truth in that.

A&E owns several channels: History Channel, H2, History en Español, Military History, Lifetime, LMN Lifetime Real Women, Bio, and Crime and Investigation Network.

You'll notice that most of those channels are heavily reliant on "reality' programming and are slowly drifting away from their namesake programming. When was the last time you saw anything arty (or even entertaining) on the "Arts & Entertainment" network?

Nancy Dubuc is the CEO of A&E Networks. You can see her bio at aenetworks.com or Google her. (link limits prevent me from posting too many links in one post).

The Advocate and TMZ have reported that Dubuc did not feel it would be respectful of A&E's gay employees to keep Phil Robertson on board after his remarks.

She sure didn't mind Phil when he was making her loads of money: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-06-20/a-plus-e-networks-ceo-nancy-dubuc-the-duck-whisperer

=========================

Phil Robertson had a right to speak his mind. And A&E had a right to fire him when the publicly-expressed thoughts of a high-profile employee did not line up with A&E's position on those same matters.

Phil's freedom of speech is intact.

However, we start down a slippery slope when someone's ability to make a living can be compromised by his saying things that more socially and politically powerful folks find disagreeable.

What happens when a low-profile employee joins a protest or aligns himself politically in a way the company does not? Can I be fired for writing a letter to the editor against gun control while working for a company that contributes to Brady Bill groups?

The Constitution only protects us from government restrictions on our freedom of speech. What about private restrictions? Do corporations also have freedom of association?

==============================

Phil should have known better - even though he may not be terribly media-savvy. He should have couched his wording better. All this was in answer to a question about the nature of sin, so GQ didn't exactly play "gotcha" on him.

And what exactly did Phil say? He didn't say gays should be locked up or banned. He basically (and rather crudely) said he didn't get being attracted to a man and that his religion teaches that gay people will not obtain the kingdom of Heaven (along with some other categories of sinners that Paul detailed in his letter to the Corinthians).

Not exactly a call to arms that.

And he may have thought his African-American neighbors were happy while he was growing up ... and they may have been. Maybe he was willfully blind to racial tensions, maybe too young to have understood them, maybe nostalgia has reduced his memories to happy ones. Who knows? He expressed an opinion; maybe not a particularly bright one, but his own.

==============================

Brandon Ambrosino had an interesting opinion piece at time.com on the Phil Robertson imbroglio.

From Abrosino's article:

I’m reminded of something Bill Maher said during the height of the Paula Deen controversy: “Do we always have to make people go away?” I think the question applies in this situation, too. Why is our go-to political strategy for beating our opponents to silence them? Why do we dismiss, rather than engage them? One of the biggest pop culture icons of today just took center stage to “educate” us about sexuality. I see this as an opportunity to further the discussion, to challenge his limited understanding of human desire, to engage with him and his rather sizeable audience — most of whom, by the way, probably share his views — and to rise above the endless sea of tweet-hate to help move our LGBT conversations to where they need to go.

GK Chesterton said that bigotry is “an incapacity to conceive seriously the alternative to a proposition.” If he is right – and he usually is – then I wonder if the Duck Dynasty fiasco says more about our bigotry than Phil’s.

Actually Nick, no, this case isn't about Christians having their religion insulted.

Calling homosexuals the same as rapists, the same as murders, the same as those who engage in beastility is NOT Christianity; unless one belongs to a fundametalist sect such as the Westboro Baptists. (the "God hates Fags" folks)

I agree that the outrage from both sides is blown way out of proportion to the "crime." But, come on, most Americans don't give a rat's ass about who sleeps with who as long as they are consenting adults. Throwing insults at other groups (and the left and the right seem to do it with equal glee) is not welcomed by most Americans.

One thing that I always find interesting, and most frustrating, about such cases is this - try to find the original quote in context!

What a google search or a YouTube search shows is far more other folks talking about it than the actual quote itself. I do wish the news media would simply report what someone said instead of saying "so and so made a such and such statement which landed him/her in hot water."

How about reporting the quote in context and let me decide for myself if it is a "bad" remark. But our "betters" cannot/won't do that as we might actually disagree with them. Both sides have this need to create outrage, and it is, in my opinion, usually over nothing.

Lastly, I have to say that in my opinion Christians who hold Christ in their hearts, not on their sleeves, when asked about sin would talk about their own sins rather than pointing the finger at others. Mr. Duck Dynasty didn't do this - he pointed the finger and called others names. Certainly, this wasn't "Christian" behaviour as most would call it.

I'm aware that DD vs. LGBT is not a First Amendment issue, but getting people like Martin Bashir and Phil Robertson suspended or fired is nearly as effective a way of silencing them as is having them thrown in jail. Therefore, there is still a chilling effect on free speech.

In the meantime . . .

"So you actually think A&E is tight enough with GLAAD to engineer this complaint, react hysterically to it, and then tell GLAAD that they will "somehow" fix the enormous backlash against them later?"

Of course not, don't be ridiculous.

A&E knew that the statements would make the current fans of the show pump their fists and go "hell yeah!" The people who think that Phil is the worst human this side of Hitler for making those statements are not watching the show to begin with, so you aren't losing any audience. However A&E can still be the "good guy" with these folks by "firing"* the guy. No need to involve anyone except the people in the show and a few internal executives. I don't think anyone gave GLAAD or the letters GLAAD might get a single thought.

*He's an integral part of their biggest cash cow right now, I would bet you dollars to donuts that the terms of his leaving the show were worked out before this happened.

@ Charles I definitely agree with your statement: " I do wish the news media would simply report what someone said instead of saying "so and so made a such and such statement which landed him/her in hot water."

How about reporting the quote in context and let me decide for myself if it is a "bad" remark. But our "betters" cannot/won't do that as we might actually disagree with them."

But unless you were trying to ironically point it out, in which case irony doesn't always come across.
"
Calling homosexuals the same as rapists, the same as murders, the same as those who engage in beastility is NOT Christianity; unless one belongs to a fundametalist sect such as the Westboro Baptists. (the "God hates Fags" folks)"

Is exactly what you were claiming was so bad with news today.

"I think Christians are tired of having their religion insulted"

Then they can just bring Jesus back and prove their beliefs are true.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs, ya know.

Reality stuff bores me,

The only "reality" shows I watch is Face Off on Syfy, and reasonably attractive celebrity sex tapes.

I'm hoping that in order to keep the viewship for the Kardashians up that Kris has whichever the next one to turn 18 is to "lose" a sex tape

You'll notice that most of those channels are heavily reliant on "reality' programming and are slowly drifting away from their namesake programming. When was the last time you saw anything arty (or even entertaining) on the "Arts & Entertainment" network?

This is why I canceled most of my cable channels the day the "Discovery" channel air the "documentary" on how sonar technology is a lie to cover up the fact the US Navy has captured and weaponized mermaids

Wake me up when GLAAD demands Alec Baldwin be terminated...remember him and his homophobic potty mouth?

"I think Christians are tired of having their religion insulted"
Then they can just bring Jesus back and prove their beliefs are true.

Or they can just start chopping heads off...seems to stop the insults...

My problem is more with how the media handles the "bigot" controversies.

I can't prove it and don't cable. Yes I listen to the Sirius Patriot channel, so I have to give my perception the benefit of the doubt.

But the self-defense ad that Daniel Defense wanted to air during the Super Bowl died quickly even after a continued denial by the NFL.

Basically the left causes get celebrated my the major media sources but the right is denigrated and it is acceptable.

Someone above mentioned Martin Bashir being taken off the air was unfair. He suggestested that someone should shit in Sarah Palin's moth and piss in her eyes because she used the word "slavery" in rference to our debt. That is not extreme in any way?

How many times has Piers Morgan called a pro-gun person an idiot on air, and lost the debate, but still has a TV show? Meanwhile the anti-gun media does it's best to demonize the NRA.

That is the frustration of the conservative side. The restriction of free speech when it doesn;t agree with your opinion.

By the way, the Duck guys have a wine brand, too.

http://tfewines.com/our-wines/duck-commander.php

But do they leave their glasses?

It's not about freedom of speech.

It's about freedom of religion and the ability to be fired over it. A&E knew that he was a religious man from the very first aired episode. Let's say a woman was hired by a local company with the acknowledgement that she would not wear pants as it violated her Christian beliefs...not any less valid than the point Robertson made about his Christian beliefs...the Bible is written in a way that can be interpreted to mean that homosexuality is a sin as is a woman wearing pants. If she began, in a public place, to pass out flyers saying that pants for women were a sin, and when asked, she directed people to the company she worked for, acknowledging she wasn't a representative of the company merely an employee. Now, if that company was to fire her, I think she would have a valid lawsuit. I know, personally, of a medium-sized company that was sued and lost simply based on a woman's turban in the workplace, and it interfered with her ability to perform the job even.
If, Robertson can prove it has not adversely effected ratings, I do not see why he would not have a valid suit in a court. I don't know the terms to his contract, nor does most people that are claiming his first amendment rights were violated.

Most of the problem I have with his firing stems from the fact that there is freedom of association for A&E, but not for a baker or photographer who wish to express their own bigotry by not serving gay weddings. As a country, we should have true freedom of association, or we should not have it. Half measures only confuse the issue, and make it appear that only one side gets the benefit of the doubt.

Am I the only one that thought the chick's flight to Africa tweet very funny? And, I don't feel guilty at all.

I like Phil Robertson. He and I have a lot in common.

Bottom line. The left has way too many "sacred cows".
Most of us who graduated college in the late seventies could see where these politically correct speech restrictions were going.

Phil Robertson did not insult anyone personally, as in "Joe Smith is a godless sodomite who is going to hell."

On the other hand, I guess it is perfectly fine to call all Republicans terrorists, and hostage takers for opposing Obamacare.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_13162973

But do they leave their glasses?

Let's hope this doesn't catch on here. Otherwise, McDonalds is in big trouble.

==============================

Interestingly enough, the Duck Dynasty wine has angered some fundamentalist groups. Seems the Robertsons just can't win.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/11/13/christian-organization-cancels-duck-dynasty-event-because-have-wine-deal/

Wake me up when GLAAD demands Alec Baldwin be terminated...remember him and his homophobic potty mouth?

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at December 22, 2013 2:19 PM

Alec Baldwin was terminated:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/27/business/media/baldwins-show-on-msnbc-is-canceled.html?_r=0

"It's about freedom of religion and the ability to be fired over it."

California is an "at-will" state. Assuming A&E wrote this employment agreement under California law, duck dude could be fired at any time for any reason. He can have his religion, and practice it freely, but that doesn't mean he can run his mouth about the shittier parts of and keep his job.

California is an "at-will" state. Assuming A&E wrote this employment agreement under California law, duck dude could be fired at any time for any reason. He can have his religion, and practice it freely, but that doesn't mean he can run his mouth about the shittier parts of and keep his job. -- makerzmarks at December 23, 2013 4:25 PM

But even in at-will states you can have contracts at the same time. The contract law issues are between A&E and the Robertsons' family. But somehow I just can't see a court finding quoting or citing the Bible™ registering as moral turpitude issue, especially as he did it in the past.

So then we get down to his opinion that homosexuality is a sin. He says it several times in GQ interview. He doesn't advocate hate. He doesn't advocate harmful discrimination. He just states he doesn't think it is right and lack of understanding of the gay viewpoint. But all of a sudden he is a horrible person?

Meanwhile you have Ellen DeGeneres, Bruce Springsteen, and Elton John all being gay or in favor of LGBT rights, let alone the other numerous examples. But the rest of their socialist agendas usually offend me.

Take a guess who I'd rather have dinner with? Who do I think has a better grasp of humanity's attributes and faults?

Just throwing in my 2¢

Well, I just saw this posted on someone's FB page:

"America -

You need to be more focused on why our veterans are losing their benefits than me being fired from a television show. The only reason I have the freedom to voice my own opinion is because of them. Stop 'Stand with Phil' and stand by the true heroes.

- Phil Robertson"

Sounds good to me.

Oh that is just a scream! Quoted!

http://www.samizdata.net/2013/12/samizdata-quote-of-the-day-383/

And have a great holiday Amy.

Many card tables believe it will let them have many cover whenever they tip and this
could be true when in a little while but, often, not.

Most fresh people make a frequent oversight by spoiling
in this game right in a brick and mortar casino.