Duck, Duck, Goose! : an iPad Musing
So I realize my past couple of posts have been Christmas-y and festive, but as an internet content creator I feel like I would be missing out if I did not write a Duck Dynasty related post. Now here’s he dealio… I don’t watch he show. I’ve watched maybe two episodes total. So I can’t necessarily speak for the ramifications these actions will have on he program itself. Also, because I don’t want to tarnish anyone’s ability to individually assess and create opinions on he situation, I am going to try and keep this more on the impartial side. So here we go…
Apparently in an interview with GQ magazine, Phil from Duck Dynasty said some pretty insensitive and prejudice things regarding race and homosexuality. I’ve only seen little bits and pieces so I don’t know entirely what was said. Now since his has all come out, Phil’s contract has been suspended with the network mad his presence on the show restricted. Instantly this issue developed two very differing, and frankly quite a grey factions. One group is certain that his freedom if speech is guaranteed by the First Amendment and he can say what he wants. Thusly, them terminating a contract is breaching his rights. He other party strongly supports the decision saying that he is disrespectful and doesn’t deserve to be on the air, regardless of his opinion and the freedoms therein.
Here’s my opinion. 1) I think a lot of people need to look up the proper use of the First Amendment, simply because incorrectly quoting it shows a lack of thorough education of our own country’s history. But that honestly doesn’t relate to the issue at hand. 2) I kind of agree with both parties. I definitely agree with Phil’s right to express himself and his opinions to anyone who will hear them. I am currently writing a blog… Is that not exactly what I’m doing? I think the real issue here comes with branding and marketing. This same issue came up with Paula Dean a few months back. Is it idiotic for someone to say something like that to a mass media source? Yes. However they allowed to. But in the same way major networks are allowed to select the content that is out in their programs in order to best serve their needs as a creator of entertainment. Most contracts are full of clauses stating things like (and luckily for me this is a direct quote from a contract I had to analyze and critique in college): “the Client’s contract may be altered or voided if the actions of the Client negatively affect the Brand or directly counter he beliefs, morals, or values of the Brand.”
So yes, it sucks that his views and ideas are limited by the network. That’s not because I agree or disagree with what he has said. It’s simply because I like the idea of a diverse range of ideas being presented to me on TV. It’s part of what makes entertainment entertaining. If you only watched, listened to, and read material that you directly agreed with, your life would suck. However I will also say that I can’t get all angry and upset with the decision to pull him. The major networks ultimately are looking out for their best interest. By pulling him they limit the possibility of that kind of material making it on air and also because let’s be real about intentions here, removing him draws more interest to the show and will increase views.
So that’s not nearly as festive of a post, but it’s a post none the less. Comment below with your thoughts on all of this nonsense.
Also subscribe for more holiday merriment and more positive musings.