Friday, December 20, 2013
If it looks like a Duck...
By now if you pay any attention at all to the media in it's various forms, you've seen the sh*t hitting the fan over the Duck Dynasty Debacle. Maybe you've managed to avoid it, and if you want to continue avoiding it... move on to your next blog now.
If you're still reading, to recap very briefly, the Patriarch of the now very wealthy Duck Decoy making family, Phil Robertson, spewed off his appalling opinions regarding homosexuality in an interview and A & E suspended him from the show. People are clamoring... Hey, what about freedom of speech??... others, like myself, are cheering. First of all this whole deal has nothing to do with Freedom Of Speech. Secondly, in my opinion there is a difference between freedom of speech and freedom to criticize people (and his particular criticism was VILE) simply because they are different than you. There's no specific law telling you you can't go pee on your neighbors geranium pot, but you wouldn't do it out of decency, would you.
I found this on another website and I say.. BRAVO.
So.... WHATEVER HAPPENED TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH?!”
I can’t count how many times I’ve explained this, but I’m going to keep doing it. Was Phil Robertson put in jail or fined by the government? Then his freedom of speech is fully intact. That said, should A&E actually be suspending him for his comments that in no way shape, or form should’ve surprised them, it’s in his contract that they can. A&E is Phil’s private employer, and at some point during negotiations for the show, his lawyers were given a contract that included a clause saying A&E can terminate him at any point if he does anything that negatively affects the network or Duck Dynasty. That is standard, perfectly constitutional procedure, and something Phil agreed to in exchange for $200,000 an episode. And if he suddenly doesn’t agree with those conditions, then he’s a sinner who gave false testimony.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
She doesn't live here anymore
Hello there! I got an e-mail yesterday from a fellow blogger whom I lost touch with a few years back when she stopped bl...
I've always...in most cases...been on the side of the underdog and although I believe strongly in freedom of speech, I also believe in treating others as I would like to be treated...with respect and dignity...:)JP
ReplyDeleteI second the first comment above... I don't watch the show, but have seen the family members on tv... and now wonder whether Mr. Robertson was actually out hunting during the filming of the Barbara Walters special this week, or in hiding for his actions!
ReplyDeleteI like you Karen.
ReplyDeletei don't watch this show, but bravo to the network for knowing right from wrong.
ReplyDeletethanks for talking about it :)
xo
again..right on...
ReplyDeleteI never heard of the man until he made the news. I totally agree with your statement his particular criticism was vile. Well said Karen.
ReplyDeleteSam
I was wondering if any of the bloggers whose blogs I read would address this subject, and low and behold, I guesses right. You are so right. I agree with you 100%. Bravo for expressing your freedom of speech!!!
ReplyDeleteI don't think Phil is to worried about what A&E thinks. He doesn't need them. And since it's part of his religious beliefs, then he should say what he believes. Sorry Karen, I disagree with you on this one.
ReplyDeleteOld Phil rose up and took the bait that the interviewer dangled in front of him ... Answered that question in a narrow minded hateful way, which makes really good publicity for the show whether he appears on it or not. Had he answered with his beliefs in a respectful way, there would be no news in it. Phil is no dummy.
ReplyDeleteSusan, I think you may not have read his actual statement. I would find it hard to believe that such vulgarity is something you would approve of in any outlet. He went above and beyond his religious beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Karen. Of course.
ReplyDeleteHowever, newscasters, so called journalists etc are out to make money; they are going to report whatever a person says even to the extent of, in some cases, their body language. I certainly don't think what he had to say should have been made fodder for the news. Obviously, the reporter agreed with Phil or is just downright greedy.
I DISAGREE WITH YOU. Just kidding. Yes it's sort of funny to me that people are making this about the first amendment. If this man were being jailed for his words-that would be a violation of the first amendment. But when you work for a private company and speak controversially (in print, no less!), the company certainly can punish you in a legal way. But in all honesty, this story didn't ruffle my feathers (hehe). I could help him overcome his prejudices by offering him a haircut of goodwill.
ReplyDeleteHe didn't just speak appallingly about the LGBT community, but he also said atrocious things about other minorities, which seems to have been lost in the fray. It reminds me of the children's book, If You Give a Mouse a Cookie...only it's if you Give a Bigoted Redneck a TV show. Great post!
ReplyDeletexo Kat
He's and idiot, just saying, and as usual my friend, you are right on point. People are crazy sometimes.
ReplyDeleteTotally on target with this NOT being about free speech. He can believe anything he wants, he can even say anything he wants - but he isn't guaranteed a national TV show to use as his pulpit. ALL our employers can limit what we say while we're at work. As quirky as they are, aren't their 15 minutes of fame up already?
ReplyDeleteI'm getting so mad over some of the stuff people are posting I'm having to stay off facebook because I can't stand seeing it in my feed.
ReplyDelete