What is this Duck Dynasty shit going on?

[Silcc69]

*A&E Network has reportedly had to beef up security at its New York headquarters after receiving death threats and suspicious packages from people enraged about the network’s decision to suspend “Duck Dynasty” patriarch Phil Robertson, reports Deadline.com.
On Wednesday, the family threatened to abandon the series, saying in a statement they “cannot imagine” doing the show without Phil. That said, the network, which has had a good working relationship with the family (as the family noted in its statement), is “always talking to them,” as one source with knowledge of the family said.

The decision to suspend Phil Robertson triggered a firestorm and has created some strange bedfellows; last night Jon Stewart defended Phil’s “right to say ignorant sh*t” — joining Phil defenders Sarah Palin, who’d tweeted “Those ‘intolerants’ hatin’ and taking on the Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing his personal opinion are taking on all of us,” and Republican Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who defended Phil’s anti-gay and racist statements by saying, “It is a messed up situation when Miley Cyrus gets a laugh, and Phil Robertson gets suspended.”
Nine of the 10 episodes ordered for the next run of the hit series have been shot, and Phil appears in the nine episodes, which are not scheduled to debut until January 15.
Robertson was suspended from the show for an indefinite period of time after a GQ story came out in which he made incendiary comments about homosexuality, and the condition of blacks in pre-civil-rights-era U.S.
In Drew Magary’s GQ article profiling the family behind the reality hit, Robertson — who described his family as “Bible-thumpers who just happened to end up on television” — called homosexuality a sin and said, “It seems like, to me, a vagina — as a man — would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”
Asked what is sinful, Phil replied: “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.”
He also expressed his belief that the Japanese attacked the U.S. in WWII because they did not have Jesus, among other points, and noted that his personal observations of black Americans in the pre-civil rights South was that they “were happy; no one was singing the blues.”
Not long after the article was released, A&E issued a statement saying, “We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series Duck Dynasty…His personal views in no way reflect those of A+E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely.”


http://www.eurweb.com/2013/12/duck-d...ily-ultimatum/


Anybody watch this show? Looks like a right wingers wet dream.

[Ben in LA]

Even though I didn't like his statement, he has a right to say what he wants...and as a private company A&E has a right to discipline his as they see fit. It's EXACTLY like the Martin Bashir controversy...

[trish]

Yeah, all my conservative, Christian friends are jibbering at me about "PC police." Give me a break!

So Phil says something stupid about gays and blacks in Esquire. Then A&E execs say to themselves something like, "This is a God-send. First we suspend Phil from the show. We let the media hype simmer and stew for awhile. People who never before gave a rat's ass about DD will watch an episode or two. Maybe we'll hook a few. Our sponsors will scarf it up. We'll look good for taking the appropriate action, and then we'll have Phil give a half-hearted apology and put him back in the show before next season starts. He never misses a beat. This is a win-win. It's just what we need to put some life back into an aging reality series."

[Dino Velvet]

A&E had every right to suspend Robertson. Losing that show will cost the network a few bucks. What will they do and what will their priorities be? Someone gets a pat on the head eventually.

[NightmareX0666]

I may not agree with him, but he does have the right to say whatever the hell he wants. I also think he had to change a lot in his life and what he would usually say due to the tv show, so maybe this is his way of ending the show. And to be honest, this guy has money and will continue to make the money, hell probably more now then before from people who will support his views.

[Dino Velvet]

He has a right to free speech and for the government to not intervene but this is not a 1st Amendment issue any more than when the Dixie Chicks were complaining about free speech when Bush was in office because certain stations wouldn't air their music.

We need to be consistent.
http://entertainment.time.com/2013/1...endment-issue/

[trish]

I don't think there's a single person in the U.S. who say he doesn't have the right to say what he wants. But if he says it on someone else's dime he may pay the consequences. In this case, I bet he doesn't. Wait and see, he'll be back in the show and the ratings will be boosted.

[Dino Velvet]

I don't think there's a single person in the U.S. who say he doesn't have the right to say what he wants. But if he says it on someone else's dime he may pay the consequences. In this case, I bet he doesn't. Wait and see, he'll be back in the show and the ratings will be boosted.

That's right. I been fired for all kinda bullshit but it was still legal. I sneer at the business(es) every time I pass by but know better that I don't have beef with them at the labor board. "Asshole" should be commonly written on my pink slip(s) because I sure darn can be one at times.

[broncofan]

The first amendment was never meant to guarantee a right to say whatever you want without any repercussions. Only the government is prohibited from punishing someone based on the content of their speech.

As Dino and many others have said that does not mean a private company cannot fire someone for saying something they don't like. In fact the prerogative of an employer to fire someone is pretty close to unfettered. There are a variety of statutes protecting vulnerable parties and mandating certain work safety standards but I highly doubt the government is going to pass a hate speech protection act any time soon.

So, if you don't think the guy should be fired, there must be some other grounds than free speech. Simply referring to some vague and standard-less ideal of free speech is not doing it.

[Silcc69]

My thing is doesn't that show appeal to that demographic anyways. They wouldn't be offended. This show doesn't seem to appeal to blacks, gays, nor japanese. Mainly religious folks and conservatives. BTW since the 1st Amendment only applies to the government then how does FCC manage to censor broadcast TV and or slap heavy fines on stations?