Phil Robertson returns to A&E

Buck Ewer · Dec 24, 2013

scatt said:
Absolutely not. They can walk.

If they do it will cost them a bundle and it will cost them what they cherish the most ... their egotistical fame.
A&E will retain the rights to the show and continue to profit from it for many years to come.
IMHO the show has run it's course anyway and a new "lets laugh at the stupid hillbillys" show will easily replace it.
A&E executives know this all too well.

ChrisL · Dec 24, 2013

Captain America said:
Read 'em and weep! LOL!

Phil Robertson to Return to Duck Dynasty |

I'm quite sure all of their decisions are based upon the almighty dollar, so you know they were afraid of losing viewers. It's only natural that they would take him back.

TheNextEra · Dec 24, 2013

ChrisL said:
I'm quite sure all of their decisions are based upon the almighty dollar, so you know they were afraid of losing viewers. It's only natural that they would take him back.

That's a definite possibility. The other is that this whole thing was staged as a publicity stunt and both A&E and the Duck Dynasty crew were in on it.

No matter what though, I agree, it is due to the almighty dollar no matter what possibility is correct.

clownboy · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
If they do it will cost them a bundle and it will cost them what they cherish the most ... their egotistical fame.
A&E will retain the rights to the show and continue to profit from it for many years to come.
IMHO the show has run it's course anyway and a new "lets laugh at the stupid hillbillys" show will easily replace it.
A&E executives know this all too well.

Sorry to inform you, but these show contracts are from season to season. Anything more would be major stupidity on the network's part.

Buck Ewer · Dec 24, 2013

clownboy said:
False as I've already addressed. And you don't seem to understand that the show is not where the principles make their fortune. The Robertsons are already quite wealthy from their own efforts. If you had ever watched the show you'd know that already.

I understand that fully well.
The Robertsons will not throw away millions. They may be rich but they are not stupid.

scatt · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
If they do it will cost them a bundle

Have you seen the contract?

clownboy · Dec 24, 2013

TheNextEra said:
That's a definite possibility. The other is that this whole thing was staged as a publicity stunt and both A&E and the Duck Dynasty crew were in on it.

A&E had to know about the GQ interview and most likely was the first to get a transcript.

Buck Ewer · Dec 24, 2013

clownboy said:
Sorry to inform you, but these show contracts are from season to season. Anything more would be major stupidity on the network's part.

Season to season at least one season in advance.

vesper · Dec 24, 2013

disneydude said:
I never said Robertson was imposing on anyone. He has an absolute right to say whatever he wants. A&E is also free to decide whether to fire him or not consistent with the terms of his contract.

What is not allowed is discrimination based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation. If you can't comply with the demands of the Constitution and anti-discrimination laws, then don't open a business. Its as simple as that.

No it isn't that SIMPLE. When you have discrimination laws that violate another's First Amendment rights you have bad law. When you have discrimination being redefined to include "hurt feelings" you have bad law. When you have groups like GLAAD trying to use a person's personal religious beliefs as a case for defamation by shopping for politically appointed judges who rule in their favor resulting in silencing another, you have a constitutional crisis.

TheNextEra · Dec 24, 2013

clownboy said:
A&E had to know about the GQ interview and most likely was the first to get a transcript.

Well like I said, it falls well within the possibility that both sides were in on it as a publicity stunt to increase viewing.

clownboy · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
I understand that fully well.
The Robertsons will not throw away millions. They may be rich but they are not stupid.

You don't seem to understand that, or how any of this works. In any event, you can eat your crow when the new season is aired and the whole family reappears.

Buck Ewer · Dec 24, 2013

scatt said:
Have you seen the contract?

All contracts for TV show players are similar. There is nothing to indicate that their's is special in any way.
Have you seen it?

clownboy · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
Season to season at least one season in advance.

No. That's how they film. Their contract for the season in the can now is over. New one to be negotiated after film hiatus, about the time when this current canned season comes to broadcast end.

scatt · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
All contracts for TV show players are similar. There is nothing to indicate that their's is special in any way.

How much will they lose and how will they lose that money?

Buck Ewer · Dec 24, 2013

clownboy said:
A&E had to know about the GQ interview and most likely was the first to get a transcript.

A&E had a representative AT the the interview.
They knew exactly what they were doing.

clownboy · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
A&E had a representative AT the the interview.
They knew exactly what they were doing.

Knowing that, how can you argue as you have?

Buck Ewer · Dec 24, 2013

scatt said:
How much will they lose and how will they lose that money?

A&E would sue them for breach of contract and get from them what the show would have profited in damages.
It could potentially wipe them all out financially.

clownboy · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
A&E would sue them for breach of contract and get from them what the show would have profited in damages.
It could potentially wipe them all out financially.

Nonsense, their current contract expired when this season went in the can.

Buck Ewer · Dec 24, 2013

clownboy said:
Knowing that, how can you argue as you have?

I have said all along that A&E wanted Phil off the show for quite a while now.
They gave him the rope to hang himself.
Like any egotistical asshole he predictably did.

scatt · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
A&E would sue them for breach of contract and get from them what the show would have profited in damages.
It could potentially wipe them all out financially.

Is that profit dependent on the currently suspended person being in the show?

clownboy · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
I have said all along that A&E wanted Phil off the show for quite a while now.
They gave him the rope to hang himself.
Like any egotistical asshole he predictably did.

You're full of it. Make some more stuff up. It's just silly to think A&E had a rep at the interview to capture Phil "screwing up". If they wanted that there would have been no need for someone to follow him around. Occam's Razor, look into it.

Fenton · Dec 24, 2013

rocket88 said:
Right, so nothing on topic, you're just offended because your hero proved she's an idiot. Figures.

I just countered your arbitrary judgment with my own.

Sarah Palin isn't responsible for this mess, or Millions losing their insurance, or millions being introduced to perpetual unemployment. That's on you folks, and the administration you continue to defend.

Fenton · Dec 24, 2013

Buck Ewer said:
A&E would sue them for breach of contract and get from them what the show would have profited in damages.
It could potentially wipe them all out financially.

Oh I hope A & E sues them for breach of contract. Man I hope they do, and I hope the left continues to pile on the Robertson Family and the Patriarch of that family.

You people are just taking all the rope you need so to speak.

disneydude · Dec 24, 2013

vesper said:
No it isn't that SIMPLE. When you have discrimination laws that violate another's First Amendment rights you have bad law. When you have discrimination being redefined to include "hurt feelings" you have bad law. When you have groups like GLAAD trying to use a person's personal religious beliefs as a case for defamation by shopping for politically appointed judges who rule in their favor resulting in silencing another, you have a constitutional crisis.

Not it isn't. There are many instances throughout the jurisprudence history of this country where the Court has had to deal with conflicting rights. Why do you believe the civil rights legislation of the 50's-60's to be "bad law".

There is no "Constitutional crisis" in disallowing people to use their religion as a ploy to do that which the Constitution and anti-discrimination laws prohibit. Religion was never meant to be used as a means to get around the law.

Buck Ewer · Dec 24, 2013

clownboy said:
You're full of it. Make some more stuff up. It's just silly to think A&E had a rep at the interview to capture Phil "screwing up". If they wanted that there would have been no need for someone to follow him around. Occam's Razor, look into it.

Cable network A&E is acting as if Phil Robertson sandbagged them with his comments about homosexuality, resulting in the network suspending him from the program Duck Dynasty. However, a report has emerged that the network had a publicist with Robertson during the interview and must have known what he was saying.

Click to expand...

Report: A&E Likely Knew What Phil Robertson Said in Fateful GQ Interview

"A&E sent a publicist for the duration of the interview, but she was not there for the 'anus v vagina' comment. But to be honest, Phil was making similar comments throughout the interview and it's not like he wouldn't have said it in front of her. It was just that they were riding ATVs and the publicist was not there for that specific moment,"