Let me begin this entry with an admission.....
I don't hunt. It's not that I don't like it, it's just that I don't have the patience to sit in the woods and wait for something to come to me in order to shoot it. I have friends and family members who hunt and do it well, as well as responsibly, and I have nothing but respect for their ability to do so.
For them, it's about more than just the hunt. It's about the peace and calm of being in the outdoors, which is why they can keep dragging themselves out there time and time again, regardless of whether or not they succeed in their mission to bring home the game.
So, I just want to make it very clear that I am PRO hunting.
Let me also throw out a second admission....
I do NOT watch reality television, and I don't for the very simple reason that most reality television isn't real. If it's not scripted in the truest sense, then it's "organized" into some way to get the shots that will garner maximum ratings. That's not reality, and that's why I'm not a fan.
Okay, now that I've got that out of the way, let's jump into the discussion of the 800 pound gorilla in the room and talk about the much-embattled Phil Robertson.
By this point, I shouldn't have to give you any background on him, but I will anyway for those who might not be aware. Phil and his family are the owners of the Duck Commander line of duck calls and other hunting gear. They are also the subject of the show Duck Dynasty on the A&E network.
As you know, Phil's come under fire for his comments in the January issue of GQ magazine. Those comments are considered by many to be extremely homophobic and hateful, and have led A&E to suspend Phil from taping of the upcoming season of the show "indefinitely". That suspension has led to an outcry from those who believe he's being wrongfully persecuted for speaking his opinion, and put A&E into a very unenviable position.
There's something controversial out there? Guess we better break it down and screw up the outrage by injecting some logic into the argument. Sounds just like the pot of shit I like to keep stirring up.
First things first: If you have an opinion about this situation and HAVEN'T read the GQ article, shut the fuck up until you have. It's available online at gq.com, and I read it twice before I wrote this.
I'll wait for you while you go back and give it a gander.
(insert music from Metallica's S&M album here while we wait)
Okay. Now that we've done that, let me start by pointing out the contradiction of having someone like Phil, who has a "no swearing" policy for his business and his show, doing an interview with a reporter who repeatedly uses the words "shit" and "fuck" in his article. Smells a bit like a set-up to me, but maybe I'm just reading too much into it.
Phil is quoted, in no uncertain terms, about his beliefs concerning what is considered sin, and his comments are definitely, to someone like myself, very homophobic and borderline hateful.
That being said, I completely agree with those who are pissed off that Phil's being dumped on for speaking his opinion. Phil and the rest of his family are paid a good sum of money to travel around the country and help spread the gospel to those who want to hear what they have to say, and if you've read or viewed many interviews with Phil, you can see why. He has an ability to distill the Bible into a form that's easily understood by all. On top of that, there can be no doubt that he believes whole-heartedly in the Bible as the word of God, and that we should follow it in order to have a more perfect society.
I have no problem with Phil speaking his mind. I don't AGREE with a lot of what he says, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have the right to say it. That's the beauty of living in America: we have the freedom of speech that allows for us to say things that other people may not like.
Hell, I know I've written shit on this blog that others haven't liked or agreed with, but I keep writing because I know I can. Plus, I take the opportunity to listen to my critics, because understanding where they're coming from helps me in understanding my own position.
Now, in this case, I think the reporter from GQ tried to have it both ways. I really feel like he tried to allow Phil to speak his point AND frame it in a way that made his (the reporter's) own opinions have the same level of merit. Normally, I wouldn't have a problem with this. In this case, however, I get the feeling the reporter sort of set Phil up to take a hit, and I don't like that at all.
That's not to say I believe people who don't agree with Phil shouldn't have the right to be pissed at him. Of course they do. After all, when you're in the public eye, which Phil and his family are, you open yourself up to that, and if you can't handle what gets thrown at you then you should consider getting OUT of the public eye.
Okay, since I've spent time talking about Phil, let's look at the folks from A&E, who seem to be trying to brace for the full impact of the backlash that's been washing over them.
My thoughts on them aren't going to be popular with many, but here they are:
I completely support A&E in their decision to suspend Phil Robertson over the article.
Why? It's simple, really.
A&E, as a company, has the right to discipline any of their employees (Phil in this case) for actions taken that go against the philosophy of the company.
In other words, even though Phil was speaking his own opinion, the company has the right to defend itself against speech that goes against its own beliefs.
It happens all the time in the "normal" business world. Why the hell should Phil Robertson get a pass just because he's a celebrity? And, honestly, how can Paula Deen be vilified for the things she said that people didn't agree with and Phil NOT be?
He can't, and that's why they did it.
Now, before you start coming at me with the torches, understand something.....
When you sign on to work in radio, television, movies, or ANY entertainment business, you sign a contract. And, as my friends who've spent any time in the entertainment business can attest to, these contracts usually contain a clause that holds you to a certain standard. In other words, the clause states that you won't say or do anything that could potentially make your employer look bad.
I signed contracts with that clause in it when I worked in radio, and it was made very clear when I'd crossed the line. Trust me, it doesn't take too many drunken karaoke nights in a college town to get you called on the carpet for behavior that goes against the clause in your contract, and I paid the price a couple of times before I finally just admitted that it was easier to obey the contract than to lose the cash.
Now, I can't say for sure that Phil HAD a clause like that for Duck Dynasty, but I'd have to believe that the network put SOMETHING in there that was close. And, Phil can't claim he didn't know how the network felt, as there's been issues before with certain things being edited out of the shows that A&E didn't want said, usually of a religious nature. So, if he tries to claim ignorance of where A&E stands, he's only fooling himself.
So, what we have here, in my opinion, is a cluster fuck that doesn't seem to have any chance of clearing up in the near future.
However, if you've read the article like I did, you should have noticed something else, and I'll mention it here just because I want to keep the shit stirred up a bit.....
In the article, Phil talks about the end of the show, specifically mentioning that he knows it can't last forever. This has led some to speculate, and I think they may have a point, that Phil made the comments he made in the interview intentionally, KNOWING A&E would be pissed off and assuming they'd take some sort of action against him that would allow he and his family to get out of the deal with the network and get the show off the air. Don't think for a second that he isn't smart enough to think of it. He, like his children, is a college educated man and is very sharp on the uptake. It's also been revealed in other interviews that he's tired of the pressure and attention the show has placed on him, and he's mentioned in the past that he's looking forward to the end of it.
I'm not saying he did it INTENTIONALLY, but it would make sense if he did. I mean, this gives him a way to get off the show without having to catch hell from the fans, since A&E would take the blame.
Pretty smart, if that's the plan.
Oh, and I wouldn't feel sorry for them if they lose/leave the show. They've made a fortune off their Duck Commander empire and will continue to do so with or without the show.
Trust me. They'll be just fine.
But, hey....it's just one man's opinion, and it's always open to debate.
The Fat Guy
No comments:
Post a Comment