A&E Taking Heat For Suspending 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson

[Brent]

Seriously, do something that might make your employer look bad and see how long you keep your job.

Who determines if it makes the employer look bad?

In the case of A&E it is the people that watch the channel, and the sponsors/ad providers. Currently, the people that watch the channel and this show are in support of the duck dude speaking his mind, so it isn't hurting the viewers. I'm not sure about the sponsors and ad providers. I think how things are turning out show that what he said did not hurt A&E, but shutting him and the show down has hurt A&E more than anything.

Therefore, from a business perspective, I think they made the wrong decision. I think ultimately this will hurt them. This show had put A&E back on the map, which up till now I think everyone forgot they even existed

They just killed their one main show that brought them revenue. Financially, this could be bad for them. Their decision could backfire.

 

[Rincewiend]

A fact that is important to keep in mind about his statements, he did not say them on camera.

You want statements on camera?

Here you go:

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fk5VmM4pRhM[/yt]

Not on the show, granted, but it's worse than the GQ interview and you can't say it was fabricated by a magazine...
And yes, it will be reason for A&E to discuss the future of the show because it reflects poorly on them...

 

[Thestral]

You realize these "great men" with "moral values" saw it as perfectly okay to use other human beings as farm equipment and to treat women as, at best, second-class citizens, right?

As it should have been. I've got no problem what they did.

 

[Trekker4747]

Seriously, do something that might make your employer look bad and see how long you keep your job.

Who determines if it makes the employer look bad?

The employer themself. Look this may end up not working for A&E which is a risk you take when you take a stance. But they have the right to say, "we think this makes us look bad so we're going to take action." Which is their right.

You have the freedom of speech.

You don't have the freedom of having a reality show.

It should be noted this is by no means the worst thing the guy has said and he's said some other awfully racist, anti-homosexual, sexist and borderline pedophillic things in the past.

A&E felt this made them look bad, they're allowed to take action whether that action works out for them in the long-run or not.

 

[cooleddie74]

Michael Richards' notorious racist rant happened at night inside a moderately-populated comedy club and not on Seinfeld or in another television show or film, yet he faced the societal consequences for knowingly going on a racist rant on stage and taunting some black audience members.

If it had happened when Seinfeld was still on the air you can pretty much guarantee that NBC and Jerry would have had terse words with him if not worse, friends and valued comic actor and cast member or not.

 

[JoeZhang]

Seriously, do something that might make your employer look bad and see how long you keep your job.

Who determines if it makes the employer look bad?

In the case of A&E it is the people that watch the channel, and the sponsors/ad providers. Currently, the people that watch the channel and this show are in support of the duck dude speaking his mind, so it isn't hurting the viewers. I'm not sure about the sponsors and ad providers. I think how things are turning out show that what he said did not hurt A&E, but shutting him and the show down has hurt A&E more than anything.

Therefore, from a business perspective, I think they made the wrong decision. I think ultimately this will hurt them. This show had put A&E back on the map, which up till now I think everyone forgot they even existed

They just killed their one main show that brought them revenue. Financially, this could be bad for them. Their decision could backfire.

You have your lens set to the wrong magnification, the channel is 50% owned by the Hearst corporation and 50% Disney, their concerns override the individual business unit and the finance.

 

[Thestral]

The overnight ratings are in for Duck Dynasty. One week ago, DD topped all of cable’s ratings with 8.885 million viewers. Last night, they free fell down the list to 2.521 million viewers.

Also, aside from the incredibly damning comment about slavery is this stupid stupid claim. December 11 (ie last week) was the Season 4 finale. Of course it's gonna have great ratings, and of course the ratings are gonna plummet the next week since new episodes don't come back until January.

 

[Brent]

Seriously, do something that might make your employer look bad and see how long you keep your job.

Who determines if it makes the employer look bad?

The employer themself. Look this may end up not working for A&E which is a risk you take when you take a stance. But they have the right to say, "we think this makes us look bad so we're going to take action." Which is their right.

You have the freedom of speech.

You don't have the freedom of having a reality show.

It should be noted this is by no means the worst thing the guy has said and he's said some other awfully racist, anti-homosexual, sexist and borderline pedophillic things in the past.

A&E felt this made them look bad, they're allowed to take action whether that action works out for them in the long-run or not.

I guess we will see what happens in the long-run as you say.

Either their decision will be positive for them, or it will be negative.

Right now there are passionate opinions on both sides.

Personally, I never watched the show

 

[Guy Gardener]

Yes it reflects poorly on them.

But not how you think it does.

They lost 70 percent of their audience the other night.

What that says to me is that either the audience doesn't care that he's racist, thinks he's been misunderstood or they are as racist as he is and feel that they are being victimized as he is.

The ratings demand his return, otherwise the network will fail.

Taking a moral stand that will instigate their death is a shitty business decision.

Universally it doesn't matter what content is on TV, as long as inbetween the entertainment media that millions of consumers are watching the advertising and being seduced and manipulated by the advertising, ipsofacto logically the advertisers should want that racist back to be racist and sell their crap to people who love racism, otherwise there is no profit in their staying on A&E in that timeslot, and they should skedaddle.

 

[Shilliam Watner]

A fact that is important to keep in mind about his statements, he did not say them on camera.

You want statements on camera?

Here you go:



Not on the show, granted, but it's worse than the GQ interview and you can't say it was fabricated by a magazine...
And yes, it will be reason for A&E to discuss the future of the show because it reflects poorly on them...

Phil can say whatever he wants to say.
Those who don’t like it, they can cry themselves to sleep with their Obama Collector Plates. This video has been on youtube for 4 years even when the show was on the air. Makes you wonder why there were no gay protests back then instead of now.

 

[nightwind1]

And we can still agree or disagree with A&E's decision. In my opinion, what they did was wrong. I think they did it for the wrong reasons. In my opinion what the duck dude said was not wrong, or racist, or homophobic. He was expressing his religion's views, and he has every right to do so. That extends to every religion. Everyone has the right to express their religion's views. I don't think anyone should be punished for doing that. Any entity that fires someone because of expressing their views, is in my opinion completely wrong for doing so. We should maintain and uphold the ability to state our religions beliefs without punishment.

And in what way were his comments NOT homophobic or racist? He spoke out against homosexuality .

You're a sensitive little fellow aren't you? The 67-year-old says he doesn't judge others and he wasn't.

"We never, ever judge someone on who's going to heaven, hell. That's the Almighty's job," Robertson told GQ. "We just love 'em, give 'em the good news about Jesus - whether they're homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort 'em out later."

There is not a racist or homophobic thing in what he stated.

You bolded the wrong words. He equated gays with terrorists. If that's not homophobic, I don't know what is.

And you do know that "Let God sort 'em out" comes from the phrase: "Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out", right. That's even worse than homophobic, that's inciting to murder.

 

[Shilliam Watner]

And in what way were his comments NOT homophobic or racist? He spoke out against homosexuality .

You're a sensitive little fellow aren't you? The 67-year-old says he doesn't judge others and he wasn't.

"We never, ever judge someone on who's going to heaven, hell. That's the Almighty's job," Robertson told GQ. "We just love 'em, give 'em the good news about Jesus - whether they're homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort 'em out later."

There is not a racist or homophobic thing in what he stated.

You bolded the wrong words. He equated gays with terrorists. If that's not homophobic, I don't know what is.

And you do know that "Let God sort 'em out" comes from the phrase: "Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out", right. That's even worse than homophobic, that's inciting to murder.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Many gays are violently militant in nature.

 

[Nerys Myk]

You're a sensitive little fellow aren't you? The 67-year-old says he doesn't judge others and he wasn't.

"We never, ever judge someone on who's going to heaven, hell. That's the Almighty's job," Robertson told GQ. "We just love 'em, give 'em the good news about Jesus - whether they're homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort 'em out later."

There is not a racist or homophobic thing in what he stated.

You bolded the wrong words. He equated gays with terrorists. If that's not homophobic, I don't know what is.

And you do know that "Let God sort 'em out" comes from the phrase: "Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out", right. That's even worse than homophobic, that's inciting to murder.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Many gays are violently militant in nature.

You got some stats on that?

 

[JoeZhang]

I live in fear for the knock on the door that might be a practising homosexualist who has come to take his militant tendencies out on me. Similarly when I walk the street, I am fearful that one wrong move will lead to the cry of "you dirty straight".

 

[cooleddie74]

Militant in what way? They just want and would like to be considered human beings on equal footing with fellow heterosexual citizens? They want to share their lives with someone who loves them and vice versa? What's militant about the vast majority of gay citizens, whom I might add lead pretty private lives and don't obnoxiously impose their orientation on others nor bully heterosexuals?

The way some right-wingers and cultural reactionaries both in this country and elsewhere around the world describe them in their propaganda and talking points you'd think they were a violent, heavily armed guerilla army that wants to impose collectivism and force schoolkids to marry classmates of the same gender beneath a scowling portrait of Lenin.

Gay men, lesbian women and bisexuals of both sexes are people just like you. They just happen to be attracted to the same gender (or both of them) and they're no threat to your life nor your liberty.

 

[Turtletrekker]

A bigot is a bigot and religious persecution is still bigotry. Bigotry drives away sponsors, which are the reason the show is on the air in the first place. At worst, A&E is covering their ass.

As for me, I couldn't give a shit. "Duck Dynasty" is neck and neck with "Honey Boo Boo" for the most brain-dead show on television. I would like to see the show canned altogether and replaced with something that doesn't actively lower the IQ's of the viewership.

 

[EnderAKH]

You have no idea what you're talking about. Many gays are violently militant in nature.

Only if you wear the wrong pants with your shirt.

 

[bigdaddy]

You have no idea what you're talking about. Many gays are violently militant in nature.

I'm pretty sure 95% of the people here will agree with me on this. It's CLEARLY you who has no fucking clue what they are talking about.

So you know a lot of gays? How is that? Trying to help them? Or maybe you are looking for them to help you.

The most militant people I have met and seen on the news are all crazy white religious nut bags.

 

[J.T.B.]

Not to mention the stuff about eating shellfish and women on their menstrual cycles.

I'll eat shellfish, but...

Since slavery is being discussed, I just want to state my personal beliefs on that topic. Slavery was an evil thing, a very evil thing that man created. If I was alive during those times, I would never support such a thing. It goes directly against Gods word to enslave other people. In fact Jesus freed the slaves at that time, he was very well known for doing that sort of thing

What the hell are you talking about? Jesus had no influence over the status of slaves in the Roman empire. If God objected to slavery he should have gotten it on the record, because it's not in the Bible.

I'm pretty sure 95% of the people here will agree with me on this. It's CLEARLY you who has no fucking clue what they are talking about.

The mere idea that European white males from the same socio-economic background might not automatically be calling all the shots anymore seems to have sent him around the bend.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Guys. He's a troll. He said he's in favor of slavery. Come on.