• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Status
Not open for further replies.

pbrauer

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
25,394
Reaction score
7,208
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I have been wondering if A&E knew of his controversal views...

By Scott CollinsDecember 20, 2013, 4:55 p.m.

Anyone looking at the "Duck Dynasty" uproar may wonder why A&E didn't warn Phil Robertson about the dangers of talking too much to reporters.

But it now looks like they did.

Robertson, the long-bearded patriarch of the clan of Louisiana duck-call merchants, is on "hiatus" from filming episodes of the No. 1-rated cable reality show after giving a GQ magazine interview where he made anti-gay remarks and questioned the need for the civil-rights movement. GLAAD and theNAACP, among others, condemned the comments. But thousands of fans - and even Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal - have rushed to his defense, touching off the latest skirmish in the national culture war. Late Thursday, the family said it might not want to continue the show without Phil.

The scandal has turned into the kind of tempest network executives feared all along. A&E knew of Robertson's controversial views - expounded in videotaped sermons and elsewhere - before the show premiered in spring 2012, and warned him not to overshare on hot-button topics such as gay rights and race relations, according to a producer familiar with the situation. Phil and other family members also probably signed contracts containing "morals clauses" in which they promised to, among other things, avoid anything that would embarrass or bring shame to A&E or the brand. Such clauses are standard in the entertainment and sports industries.

More at: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much - latimes.com



 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

I have been wondering if A&E knew of his controversal views...

By Scott CollinsDecember 20, 2013, 4:55 p.m.

Anyone looking at the "Duck Dynasty" uproar may wonder why A&E didn't warn Phil Robertson about the dangers of talking too much to reporters.

But it now looks like they did.

Robertson, the long-bearded patriarch of the clan of Louisiana duck-call merchants, is on "hiatus" from filming episodes of the No. 1-rated cable reality show after giving a GQ magazine interview where he made anti-gay remarks and questioned the need for the civil-rights movement. GLAAD and theNAACP, among others, condemned the comments. But thousands of fans - and even Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal - have rushed to his defense, touching off the latest skirmish in the national culture war. Late Thursday, the family said it might not want to continue the show without Phil.

The scandal has turned into the kind of tempest network executives feared all along. A&E knew of Robertson's controversial views - expounded in videotaped sermons and elsewhere - before the show premiered in spring 2012, and warned him not to overshare on hot-button topics such as gay rights and race relations, according to a producer familiar with the situation. Phil and other family members also probably signed contracts containing "morals clauses" in which they promised to, among other things, avoid anything that would embarrass or bring shame to A&E or the brand. Such clauses are standard in the entertainment and sports industries.

More at: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much - latimes.com




The loser in this will be A&E because, in the end the Robertsons will move the show to a different network and A&E will lose their major money maker. So what they did is a poor business decision. I'm not even going to get into the comments because I don't care what bearded people or non bearded people say on TV shows. I'm a businessman the outcome of this thing seems pretty easy to determine.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

The whole issue could have been avoided had Phil simply had the common decency to measure his words when giving an interview just like anyone else would.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

The whole issue could have been avoided had Phil simply had the common decency to measure his words when giving an interview just like anyone else would.

You're suggesting he should have lied?

I think the issue could have been avoided if the interviewer hadn't set him up. He HAD to know how Robertsin was going to answer the question and if he did, he shouldn't have asked the question.

The Libbos might want to temper their outrage. The Duck Dynasty vote has already gotten one United States congressman elected. It would suck for the Libbos if every single member of theDuck block voted against a Democrat, because of the way the Libbos treated Phil Robertson.

Making a big deal out of this is a bad business decision for A&E and a bad political move for the Libbos.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

You're suggesting he should have lied?

I think the issue could have been avoided if the interviewer hadn't set him up. He HAD to know how Robertsin was going to answer the question and if he did, he shouldn't have asked the question.

The Libbos might want to temper their outrage. The Duck Dynasty vote has already gotten one United States congressman elected. It would suck for the Libbos if every single member of theDuck block voted against a Democrat, because of the way the Libbos treated Phil Robertson.

Making a big deal out of this is a bad business decision for A&E and a bad political move for the Libbos.

Of course they knew, and half decent interviewer would have done his homework in order to determine the questions to ask. GQ wants to sell magazines.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

The loser in this will be A&E because, in the end the Robertsons will move the show to a different network and A&E will lose their major money maker. So what they did is a poor business decision. I'm not even going to get into the comments because I don't care what bearded people or non bearded people say on TV shows. I'm a businessman the outcome of this thing seems pretty easy to determine.

assuming A&E wasn't stupid enough to make them sign a no compete clause or that they did not retain rights.

I somehow suspect the lawyers weren't that careless on what amounts to routine business practices for a TV network.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

The loser in this will be A&E because, in the end the Robertsons will move the show to a different network and A&E will lose their major money maker. So what they did is a poor business decision. I'm not even going to get into the comments because I don't care what bearded people or non bearded people say on TV shows. I'm a businessman the outcome of this thing seems pretty easy to determine.

So it is Mammon uber alles???? Seriously???

The quackers are free to shop their family around- once the contract is over. The only tweek I can think of to 'improve' the show is to have a minor pregnant unwed teen... :)
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

You're suggesting he should have lied? I think the issue could have been avoided if the interviewer hadn't set him up. He HAD to know how Robertsin was going to answer the question and if he did, he shouldn't have asked the question. The Libbos might want to temper their outrage. The Duck Dynasty vote has already gotten one United States congressman elected. It would suck for the Libbos if every single member of theDuck block voted against a Democrat, because of the way the Libbos treated Phil Robertson. Making a big deal out of this is a bad business decision for A&E and a bad political move for the Libbos.

Something tells me the Quackers didn't influence the red-neck vote much. You REALLY think red necks needed a ZZ-top wannabee to 'guide' them between Libbo or CON?

The Quackers would be preaching to the Choir! :roll:
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

So it is Mammon uber alles???? Seriously???

As offensive as it may be to you, when it comes to business, yes it is.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

I have been wondering if A&E knew of his controversal views...

By Scott CollinsDecember 20, 2013, 4:55 p.m.

Anyone looking at the "Duck Dynasty" uproar may wonder why A&E didn't warn Phil Robertson about the dangers of talking too much to reporters.

But it now looks like they did.

Robertson, the long-bearded patriarch of the clan of Louisiana duck-call merchants, is on "hiatus" from filming episodes of the No. 1-rated cable reality show after giving a GQ magazine interview where he made anti-gay remarks and questioned the need for the civil-rights movement. GLAAD and theNAACP, among others, condemned the comments. But thousands of fans - and even Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal - have rushed to his defense, touching off the latest skirmish in the national culture war. Late Thursday, the family said it might not want to continue the show without Phil.

The scandal has turned into the kind of tempest network executives feared all along. A&E knew of Robertson's controversial views - expounded in videotaped sermons and elsewhere - before the show premiered in spring 2012, and warned him not to overshare on hot-button topics such as gay rights and race relations, according to a producer familiar with the situation. Phil and other family members also probably signed contracts containing "morals clauses" in which they promised to, among other things, avoid anything that would embarrass or bring shame to A&E or the brand. Such clauses are standard in the entertainment and sports industries.

More at: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much - latimes.com




The issue that will need to be addressed by those on the offensive against religion, is the demand one group be allowed to say, act, and believe the way they do, while being allowed to excoriate, demean, and attempt economic harm against another for the doing the same thing.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

You're suggesting he should have lied?

I think the issue could have been avoided if the interviewer hadn't set him up. He HAD to know how Robertsin was going to answer the question and if he did, he shouldn't have asked the question.

The Libbos might want to temper their outrage. The Duck Dynasty vote has already gotten one United States congressman elected. It would suck for the Libbos if every single member of theDuck block voted against a Democrat, because of the way the Libbos treated Phil Robertson.

Making a big deal out of this is a bad business decision for A&E and a bad political move for the Libbos.

No, I am saying that most Christians manage to say that because they believe the Bible to be the inerrant word of God, they believe Homosexuality is a sin, yet they don't then go on to compare it to beastality.

Similarly, older southerners usually can manage to talk about their experiences in the pre-civil rights south, without then implying that blacks under Jim Crow were perfectly happy.

This might be a an abstract concept for you, but in modern society, most people try to be honest about their beliefs in such a way that they do not offend others by making offensive comparisons. One would never know that if all they did was listen to talk radio, but just the same, thats how most people try to conduct themselves. Most Christians believe homosexuality is a sin, very few are so offensive as to then compare it to raping an animal. Many white men grew up poor in the south and worked the fields along side blacks. My grandfather was one of them. He grew up in a home without even a floor in it. When him and his brothers were kids they would walk from El Dorado, AR all the way to Memphis every year following the cotton harvest. He would talk about working alongside blacks in the fields without then going into how he thought they were happier under Jim Crow than they are today.
 
Last edited:
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

The issue that will need to be addressed by those on the offensive against religion, is the demand one group be allowed to say, act, and believe the way they do, while being allowed to excoriate, demean, and attempt economic harm against another for the doing the same thing.

Once again, no one is offended by Phil saying that he believes homosexuality is a sin. They are offended by him then going on to basically compare 2 lesbian chicks living together to a sicko raping a dog.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Once again, no one is offended by Phil saying that he believes homosexuality is a sin. They are offended by him then going on to basically compare 2 lesbian chicks living together to a sicko raping a dog.

What if the chicks aren't hot though??
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

The loser in this will be A&E because, in the end the Robertsons will move the show to a different network and A&E will lose their major money maker. So what they did is a poor business decision. I'm not even going to get into the comments because I don't care what bearded people or non bearded people say on TV shows. I'm a businessman the outcome of this thing seems pretty easy to determine.

A&E owns the show.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

A&E owns the show.

but do they own the rights to duck indignity
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Once again, no one is offended by Phil saying that he believes homosexuality is a sin. They are offended by him then going on to basically compare 2 lesbian chicks living together to a sicko raping a dog.
He said no such thing from what I read.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

I have been wondering if A&E knew of his controversal views...

By Scott CollinsDecember 20, 2013, 4:55 p.m.

Anyone looking at the "Duck Dynasty" uproar may wonder why A&E didn't warn Phil Robertson about the dangers of talking too much to reporters.

But it now looks like they did.

Robertson, the long-bearded patriarch of the clan of Louisiana duck-call merchants, is on "hiatus" from filming episodes of the No. 1-rated cable reality show after giving a GQ magazine interview where he made anti-gay remarks and questioned the need for the civil-rights movement. GLAAD and theNAACP, among others, condemned the comments. But thousands of fans - and even Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal - have rushed to his defense, touching off the latest skirmish in the national culture war. Late Thursday, the family said it might not want to continue the show without Phil.

The scandal has turned into the kind of tempest network executives feared all along. A&E knew of Robertson's controversial views - expounded in videotaped sermons and elsewhere - before the show premiered in spring 2012, and warned him not to overshare on hot-button topics such as gay rights and race relations, according to a producer familiar with the situation. Phil and other family members also probably signed contracts containing "morals clauses" in which they promised to, among other things, avoid anything that would embarrass or bring shame to A&E or the brand. Such clauses are standard in the entertainment and sports industries.

More at: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much - latimes.com



Warn? I bet he could school most at A&E on the 1A.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Once again, no one is offended by Phil saying that he believes homosexuality is a sin. They are offended by him then going on to basically compare 2 lesbian chicks living together to a sicko raping a dog.

Lie. Not what he said, but he good job at joining the ranks of the other progressives and liars on the board.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Warn? I bet he could school most at A&E on the 1A.

yea, where did that ability get him?
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Μολὼν λαβέ;1062694884 said:
Millions of supporters.

Not to mention a nice nest egg.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Μολὼν λαβέ;1062694884 said:
Millions of supporters.

now you can include among your cohort of supporters the westboro church, which has announced its intent to picket A&E. that should make you very proud of such an association
kind of like A&E being proud of its association with phil robertson
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

The loser in this will be A&E because, in the end the Robertsons will move the show to a different network and A&E will lose their major money maker.

A&E surely realized this from the beginning. They rode the Duck train as long as they could.
 
re: 'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

You're suggesting he should have lied?

I think the issue could have been avoided if the interviewer hadn't set him up. He HAD to know how Robertsin was going to answer the question and if he did, he shouldn't have asked the question.

The Libbos might want to temper their outrage. The Duck Dynasty vote has already gotten one United States congressman elected. It would suck for the Libbos if every single member of theDuck block voted against a Democrat, because of the way the Libbos treated Phil Robertson.

Making a big deal out of this is a bad business decision for A&E and a bad political move for the Libbos.

a) why wouldn't the interviewer ask these kinds of questions? To spare Robertson from having to answer? that's not being a good interviewer

b) From reading the GQ article, it sounds like Robertson just rambles on all day, stream-of-consciousness; don't know that many questions had to be asked. The interviewer said Robertson had no problem if you interrupted his stream of talk and diverted it, but he pretty much expounded on his various themes all the time. I hope you read the full article.

c) Robertson is free to say what he wants to say. A&E is free to suspend him for that. I don't remember Palin leaping to Bashir's defense when Bashir made not-so-nice comments about Palin. What is different about this case? Oh yeah, Robertson isn't a liberal; conservatives apparently have "more" free speech rights than liberals, according to Fox news and such....

d) I watched the show a couple times and didn't see the allure. However, I have nothing against the Robertson family; yea for them for creating a show that so many want to watch. But now that they are media figures, they have to live by the informal rules of the media - or if they don't want to, their business may suffer. Or may not.

While you blame this all on liberals, do you yourself really agree with his comments? you don't find them at all offensive, even if you don't think they merit suspension? is there no conservative out there who can say "He can say what he wants, but I found his comments offensive too?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom