Anti-PC people making a mistake on the Duck Dynasty story

[Katzndogz]

Looks like Communists and gays are all for Free Speech...Just as long as you say what they want you to say.

As to the parties involved, this isn't a free speech issue. The freedom to speak is directed only to government imposition.

 

[martybegan]

In essence, yes.

The OP's premise is that if one is the subject of lies he must remain silent and not respond out of fear that might 'jeopardize' the livelihood of the liar.

Or maybe since Phil's opnions of ones lifestlye has ZERO impact on your own life, maybe you should man up, shrug your shoulders and get on with your life. At a maximum you can go on the air and call him an asshole back, but the whole concept of feeling the need to punish someone for what they say is childish, and makes YOU the asshole.

Who is being "punished"? Are you referring to boycotts?

Proposed boycotts, plus the public shaming that appears to crop up when someone breaks the rules of the political class. You people can't just seem to let it go at "I think this person is wrong." You have to go with attempting to ruin them socially and economically.

 

[earlycuyler]

Pretty funny. You are merely defending someone you agree with. So when someone YOU agree with decides to make PUBLIC his or her private beliefs, and those beliefs show their blatant bigotry, intolerance and narcissism, everyone else should just shut the fuck up.

You are an idiot, thanks for making THAT public.

In essence, yes.

The OP's premise is that if one is the subject of lies he must remain silent and not respond out of fear that might 'jeopardize' the livelihood of the liar.

Or maybe since Phil's opnions of ones lifestlye has ZERO impact on your own life, maybe you should man up, shrug your shoulders and get on with your life. At a maximum you can go on the air and call him an asshole back, but the whole concept of feeling the need to punish someone for what they say is childish, and makes YOU the asshole.

Better yet, if it offends on so much, why jump in the muck with em? Why not vote with our remote and your wallet ? This whole thing is just stupid. Don't watch the show, but was compelled to buy a talking duck dynesty piggy bank. Love it. Makes me laugh.

 

[earlycuyler]

Or maybe since Phil's opnions of ones lifestlye has ZERO impact on your own life, maybe you should man up, shrug your shoulders and get on with your life. At a maximum you can go on the air and call him an asshole back, but the whole concept of feeling the need to punish someone for what they say is childish, and makes YOU the asshole.

Who is being "punished"? Are you referring to boycotts?

Proposed boycotts, plus the public shaming that appears to crop up when someone breaks the rules of the political class. You people can't just seem to let it go at "I think this person is wrong." You have to go with attempting to ruin them socially and economically.

Wish I could give you two.

 

[paulitician]

A&E should have simply stated these were this man's opinions, and not their own. Then they should have let it go and moved on. If gays want to get outraged and Boycott, so be it. Too much outrage can often force unintended results. And i think gays are beginning to see that. The backlash against their outrage has been pretty substantial. Time to turn the page. Time to move on.

 

[Katzndogz]

A&E should have simply stated these were this man's opinions, and not their own. Then they should have let it go and moved on. If gays want to get outraged and Boycott, so be it. Too much outrage can often force unintended results. And i think gays are beginning to see that. The backlash against their outrage has been pretty substantial. Time to turn the page. Time to move on.

That's what A&E should have done, maybe give a decent donation to GLAAD and let it be done.

 

[Stephanie]

I can be fired, not for my actions...not for anything I did, but for my being. I should have the same right to fire a Christian for their beliefs, not actions right?

Not according to the law.

Of course your premise is highly improbable.

Exactly. You're beliefs are protected but my being is not. My "premise" happens all the time.

such a poor victim in life...you chose it deal with it
or now you are going to tell us you have no, Free Will?

 

[OODA_Loop]

I don't want you NOT to be able to fire me...I just want to be able to fire you.

So you're cool with employer discretion, you're just vindictive ?

So amend the construction to not protect religious freedom.

 

[Bfgrn]

Every society has what is called 'norms' and 'values'

What you are parroting (PC police) is pure right wing propaganda created by right wing propagandists to protect their bigotry and hatred of minorities. I tried to enlighten you, but instead you decided to double down.

Oh, I see. You're choosing to call it "norms and values".

Good point. One of the basic tenets of PC is changing words and phrases for the sake of expediency, that's pretty ironic.

Maybe we'll call PC "NV" from now on, huh?

.

Norms and values are accepted sociological terms. PC police is a fabricated term created by right wing rhetors. And as you continue to parrot the term you are refusing to even try to understand that fact.

 

[Bfgrn]

A&E should have simply stated these were this man's opinions, and not their own. Then they should have let it go and moved on. If gays want to get outraged and Boycott, so be it. Too much outrage can often force unintended results. And i think gays are beginning to see that. The backlash against their outrage has been pretty substantial. Time to turn the page. Time to move on.

Report: A&E CEO Suspended Robertson for Sake of Gay Employees

A&E CEO Nancy Dubuc suspended Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson for spouting off on gays partly because her LGBT employees were livid, according to a report from TMZ.

Dubuc felt compelled to take action out of respect for her numerous LGBT employees, including those directly involved with Duck Dynasty, angered by Robertson's comments in GQ. That may be true, but reports also indicate A&E has long been aware of Robertson's extreme far-right views on minorities, which include sweeping generalizations on African-Americans and extreme vitriol against gays; he called the latter sinful, God-less murderers in a 2010 "sermon." Another report indicated the network is hoping the scandal blows over so they can get a few more years out of the cash cow, which is not only a ratings winner, but a merchandising juggernaut.

Regardless of the intention, Dubuc is incurring much blowback, including death threats, from conservative viewers who agree with Robertson's views. No final announcement on Robertson's employment or the future of the show has been made.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Obabble's lies are offensive.....waiting on the consequences.

He saw the consequences in 2012

No he didn't, that was the point dummy.......

Do you believe that's it's out of line, or inappropriate, or immoral, for you to sign a petition or join an interest group

demanding that the President be impeached?

 

[martybegan]

A&E should have simply stated these were this man's opinions, and not their own. Then they should have let it go and moved on. If gays want to get outraged and Boycott, so be it. Too much outrage can often force unintended results. And i think gays are beginning to see that. The backlash against their outrage has been pretty substantial. Time to turn the page. Time to move on.

Report: A&E CEO Suspended Robertson for Sake of Gay Employees

A&E CEO Nancy Dubuc suspended Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson for spouting off on gays partly because her LGBT employees were livid, according to a report from TMZ.

Dubuc felt compelled to take action out of respect for her numerous LGBT employees, including those directly involved with Duck Dynasty, angered by Robertson's comments in GQ. That may be true, but reports also indicate A&E has long been aware of Robertson's extreme far-right views on minorities, which include sweeping generalizations on African-Americans and extreme vitriol against gays; he called the latter sinful, God-less murderers in a 2010 "sermon." Another report indicated the network is hoping the scandal blows over so they can get a few more years out of the cash cow, which is not only a ratings winner, but a merchandising juggernaut.

Regardless of the intention, Dubuc is incurring much blowback, including death threats, from conservative viewers who agree with Robertson's views. No final announcement on Robertson's employment or the future of the show has been made.

Cute how the lumps together the normal backlash being recieved by A&E with the smattering of death threats, and make it look like ALL who are pissed at this not only agree 100% with robinson, but are in cahoots with those making said death threats.

Standard liberal smear tactics.

 

[driveby]

He saw the consequences in 2012

No he didn't, that was the point dummy.......

Do you believe that's it's out of line, or inappropriate, or immoral, for you to sign a petition or join an interest group

demanding that the President be impeached?

Do you believe it's out of line, inappropriate or immoral for you to cheerlead and defend a president that lied to the American people over and over again?

 

[Sunshine]

Phil has no freedoms, according to his Employer. When he signed his contract, he signed his free speech rights away. Unfortunately, that is a disturbing trend in our country. How far can an employer be allowed to go? How much of Citizens' personal lives will be controlled? I mean let's face it, we all have to work. What are Americans willing to sign away to be employed? It seems to be a form of Slavery, no? What good is the Constitution, if your Employer controls your private life too? And that does seem to be where we're headed. The Corporations want to own you completely 24/7. It's pretty sad.

Please post his contract. I would like to read it too.

Here's what he's talking about -- the "morality clause". It's been a standard of first the movie, and now the TV industry, for close to a century.

Typical language reads:
>> "If at any time while Artist is rendering or obligated to render on-camera services for the program hereunder, Artist is involved in any situation or occurrence which subjects Artist to public scandal, disrepute, widespread contempt, public ridicule, [or which is widely deemed by members of the general public, to embarrass, offend, insult or denigrate individuals or groups,] or that will tend to shock, insult or offend the community or public morals or decency or prejudice the Producer in general, then Producer shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action it deems appropriate, including but not limited to terminating the production of the program." <<

Here's a sample TV Production contract for the same type ("reality") show. Too long to quote but see Section 13 on page 15.

More:

>> Morals clauses were initially introduced in the early 1920’s (allegedly following the scandal of silent film comedian Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle) in Hollywood studio agreements with their contracted actors. Morals clauses were also initially employed in agreements between major sports leagues and their athletes (e.g., Babe Ruth). Today, morals clauses are ubiquitous in talent and endorsement agreements. Morals clauses can be drafted broadly to apply to behaviour that may shock, insult or offend public morals or decency, or which may bring the actor (and the brand by association) into public hatred, contempt, or disrepute, or behaviour that is simply embarrassing or inconsistent with the image of the brand (e.g., alcohol abuse or extramarital affairs). << (here)

Remember Tiger Woods or Michael Vick losing commercial endorsement contracts after being caught doing something unsavory? Morality clauses let those sponsors do that.

[MENTION=41527]Pogo[/MENTION], I have a JD. I know what a 'morals clause is.' I did not ask for a 'typical' clause. You said, 'When he signed his contract, he signed his free speech rights away.' As though you are privy to HIS contract. I asked for HIS contract. Now post up or admit you are just making stuff up.

 

[Sunshine]

I thought this was stupid when it was the Dixie Chicks. I think that it is stupid with these 'Duck' people. Making an issue of what someone that is just an entertainer states is silly. The man spoke as what he is. Simply stating that that statement was that of a millionaire redneck, and did not represent the views of the network showing the shows would have been adaquete.

Apples : Oranges

INDIVIDUALS stopped buying Dixie Chicks music. There was no representational group that pressured their recording company to ditch them. If INDIVIUALS had decided to turn off DD and not watch, that would be equivalent to the Dixie Chicks brouhaha.

Radio is what makes or breaks a recording artist, not record companies. Radio and touring, which are the immediate day-to-day business of an artist. TD's here; she if anyone can back me up on this.

Nobody puts out a record album every day. But airplay and concerts, that is very much an artist's daily bread. And that's where the Dixie Chicks boycotts were organized. So the comparison is very much apples to apples.

And individuals have every right not to buy someone's record or not to watch their show. No one got them fired from their recording company.

 

[Stephanie]

Apples : Oranges

INDIVIDUALS stopped buying Dixie Chicks music. There was no representational group that pressured their recording company to ditch them. If INDIVIUALS had decided to turn off DD and not watch, that would be equivalent to the Dixie Chicks brouhaha.

Radio is what makes or breaks a recording artist, not record companies. Radio and touring, which are the immediate day-to-day business of an artist. TD's here; she if anyone can back me up on this.

Nobody puts out a record album every day. But airplay and concerts, that is very much an artist's daily bread. And that's where the Dixie Chicks boycotts were organized. So the comparison is very much apples to apples.

And individuals have every right not to buy someone's record or not to watch their show. No one got them fired from their recording company.

YEP

How amazing they are still bringing up that band...there is no Comparison with A&E or the militant Glaad who had a hand in all this

 

[Bfgrn]

A&E should have simply stated these were this man's opinions, and not their own. Then they should have let it go and moved on. If gays want to get outraged and Boycott, so be it. Too much outrage can often force unintended results. And i think gays are beginning to see that. The backlash against their outrage has been pretty substantial. Time to turn the page. Time to move on.

Report: A&E CEO Suspended Robertson for Sake of Gay Employees

A&E CEO Nancy Dubuc suspended Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson for spouting off on gays partly because her LGBT employees were livid, according to a report from TMZ.

Dubuc felt compelled to take action out of respect for her numerous LGBT employees, including those directly involved with Duck Dynasty, angered by Robertson's comments in GQ. That may be true, but reports also indicate A&E has long been aware of Robertson's extreme far-right views on minorities, which include sweeping generalizations on African-Americans and extreme vitriol against gays; he called the latter sinful, God-less murderers in a 2010 "sermon." Another report indicated the network is hoping the scandal blows over so they can get a few more years out of the cash cow, which is not only a ratings winner, but a merchandising juggernaut.

Regardless of the intention, Dubuc is incurring much blowback, including death threats, from conservative viewers who agree with Robertson's views. No final announcement on Robertson's employment or the future of the show has been made.

Cute how the lumps together the normal backlash being recieved by A&E with the smattering of death threats, and make it look like ALL who are pissed at this not only agree 100% with robinson, but are in cahoots with those making said death threats.

Standard liberal smear tactics.

Making excuses for death threats, standard conservative tactic.

 

[Katzndogz]

Please post his contract. I would like to read it too.

Here's what he's talking about -- the "morality clause". It's been a standard of first the movie, and now the TV industry, for close to a century.

Typical language reads:
>> "If at any time while Artist is rendering or obligated to render on-camera services for the program hereunder, Artist is involved in any situation or occurrence which subjects Artist to public scandal, disrepute, widespread contempt, public ridicule, [or which is widely deemed by members of the general public, to embarrass, offend, insult or denigrate individuals or groups,] or that will tend to shock, insult or offend the community or public morals or decency or prejudice the Producer in general, then Producer shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action it deems appropriate, including but not limited to terminating the production of the program." <<

Here's a sample TV Production contract for the same type ("reality") show. Too long to quote but see Section 13 on page 15.

More:

>> Morals clauses were initially introduced in the early 1920’s (allegedly following the scandal of silent film comedian Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle) in Hollywood studio agreements with their contracted actors. Morals clauses were also initially employed in agreements between major sports leagues and their athletes (e.g., Babe Ruth). Today, morals clauses are ubiquitous in talent and endorsement agreements. Morals clauses can be drafted broadly to apply to behaviour that may shock, insult or offend public morals or decency, or which may bring the actor (and the brand by association) into public hatred, contempt, or disrepute, or behaviour that is simply embarrassing or inconsistent with the image of the brand (e.g., alcohol abuse or extramarital affairs). << (here)

Remember Tiger Woods or Michael Vick losing commercial endorsement contracts after being caught doing something unsavory? Morality clauses let those sponsors do that.

[MENTION=41527]Pogo[/MENTION], I have a JD. I know what a 'morals clause is.' I did not ask for a 'typical' clause. You said, 'When he signed his contract, he signed his free speech rights away.' As though you are privy to HIS contract. I asked for HIS contract. Now post up or admit you are just making stuff up.

I've been asking for the same thing for days.

 

[Vox]

Homosexuals are always Playing a victim

and wonder why people get tired of hearing it and disapprove of them

yet acting like a gestapo. that is why people are tired.

 

[Sunshine]

Morality clauses are strange clauses. Not all contracts have them because they are very hard to prove violated. For instance a star who is openly homosexual would not violate a morality clause if he was giving an outspoken speech on gay rights even if he worked for the Family Channel. Someone known to be a drug user or alcoholic would not violate a morality clause when arrested for a drug or alcohol offense. Aaron Hernandez killed someone and no one thought that violated some morality clause.
Even morality clauses are construed under what you see is what you get. You might think that a blanket clause that an individual is prohibited from embarrassing the employer network or studio is important but it would be void as being too vague. One person's embarrassment may not to someone else. That might be the reason that no one is discussing a morality clause but you.

How embarrassed is this network if they are running DD marathons? Not too embarrassed are they? Can they come back later and say they are too embarrassed to have him on their program lineup? No. Even if there were an applicable morality clause subsequent behavior has destroyed its usefulnes
Industry leaders have called what A&E did is a rookie mistake. Now they have to find a way out.

It's hardly "no one but me" mentioning the morality clause; several posters here as well as several articles on several sites including Fox news have brought it up. The fact that you're so pigheaded that you insist on pretending nobody's mentioned this, that's your problem.

And no, the network is neither "embarrassed" nor "looking for a way out". Second, there is no situation to need a "way out" of, because it's done. And first, once again for the obtusely deaf, a corporation does not act out of "embarrassment", "outrage" or "upset". Those are emotions. It operates for its bottom line. That bottom line explains both the suspension and the continued running/rerunning of the show.

There is no issue here. Take your fingers out of your ears and move the fuck on.

And not a one of you has read his contract.