So Saying That Folks Should Follow Christian Morals is NOW A Firing Offense

@firefly,

Quote:

The only thing that genuinely mystifies me is the appeal of Duck Dynasty as "entertainment".

It may not appeal to you, but it hits home for millions of people. The family is 'them' if they hit the lottery. I think it's a great success story, by itself. It's too bad they thought this ignorant thinking (Phil's remarks) would sell. Obviously they were right. It's a stereotype many people associate with.

1 Reply

As H. L. Mencken said, no one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public.

1 Reply

@IRFRANK,

I think the family's success is a great story.

But that's not really what Duck Dynasty is about. Have you watched it?

Its basic comic premise of being about "redneck millionaires" focuses on the "redneck" part without much evidence of their being millionaires, other than the large chunk of land they own, and their huge family business interests mysteriously seem to run themselves without much effort or input on anyone's part.

Each "semi-scripted" episode of DD focuses on an extremely contrived set-up so the alleged comedy is in how the set-up situation gets resolved and the interactions of family members as that happens.

Most people can't identify with the lifestyle depicted on DD, which may be part of its appeal, but as humor it tends to be pretty flat, and the very contrived situation "set-ups" for each episode are all rather banal and predictable. I found it incredibly boring. I turned off the DD marathon because I couldn't take any more of it, and I switched the channel to a re-run of "Roseanne" episodes. The fictional family on that one seems considerably more authentic than the Robertsons' pseudo-redneck act, their family bonds are just as strong, the situations are much more natural, and it's considerably funnier than anything I saw on DD.

I really fail to understand the entertainment value of Duck Dynasty. But I feel that way about most "reality" TV shows, and I don't watch any of them. I think all of these shows are all relatively cheap ways of filling network air-time without needing to employ the more expensive creative talent involved in crafting good comic or dramatic series shows, and they apparently satisfy some voyeuristic need on the part of viewers who enjoy them. They are like the viewing equivalent of eating junk food or fast food.

I think that the Robertsons, and A & E were only too happy to do anything to hype publicity for this show--they have a symbiotic financial relationship. And they all reaped a windfall of free publicity for their products as a result of this latest flap. The Duck Dynasty show itself is a manufactured "reality", so a manufactured "controversy" doesn't seem a stretch.

But it remains to be seen whether all this hype will boost viewership for DD. They got me to tune in, but what I found didn't want to make me see any more of it. And that may be true for many other people as well.

1 Reply

Quote:

‘Duck Dynasty’: Advertisers Paying Big Bucks Despite Controversy
Variety
By Brian Steinberg
January 7, 2014

What conflict? Advertisers are willing to pay more for a package of ads in A&E’s reality series “Duck Dynasty” than they are for a 30-second spot in plenty of other popular TV programs.

And marketers do not appear to be leaving “Duck Dynasty” despite the controversy stirred by star Phil Robertson with his remarks about gays and African Americans in a recent magazine interview. The fifth season of the show bows Jan. 15.

“Across our client base, it didn’t really reach the level of a reason to remove advertising – at least, not yet,” said one ad buyer, who noted sponsors would likely have been more alarmed had Robertson spoken out on the show rather than in GQ magazine.

According to media buyers, a flight of commercials designed to accompany several airings of an episode of “Duck Dynasty” on A&E goes for $170,000 to $180,000. At those prices, the cost of a “Duck Dynasty” ad deal is more than the average price advertisers plunk down for a single 30-second commercial in such notable programs as CBS’ “NCIS” ($154,025); NBC’s “The Michael J. Fox Show” ($95,597); ABC’s “Nashville” ($107,721) and both editions of Fox’s “The X-Factor” ($166,601 on Wednesdays, $161,429 on Thursdays), according to a Variety survey of commercial prices for the 2013-2014 TV season.

“Duck Dynasty” has enjoyed a surge of ad revenue as its ratings spiked last year. In 2012, the show lured a little more than $40 million from sponsors, according to Kantar, a tracker of ad spending. For the first nine months of 2013, “Duck Dynasty” attracted nearly $80 million. A spokesman for A+E Networks said the company declined to comment on ad prices for the show or conversations it may be having with sponsors.

To be sure, sponsors shell out more to appear in TV’s top-rated programs,which include AMC’s “The Walking Dead,” NBC’s “Sunday Night Football, CBS’ “The Big Bang Theory” and ABC’s “Modern Family.” But the willingness to open wallets to such a degree for a cable series suggests advertisers want the big audience numbers the show delivers.

The bearded characters of “Duck Dynasty” have captured the national fancy, particularly in heartland markets, since 2012. The series revolves around the home-spun antics of the Robertson family of West Monroe, La., and the rags-to-riches story of their duck-hunting supply business. The series’ fourth-season premiere in August captured 11.8 million viewers, and ratings stayed in the 10 million-11 million range for the rest of the run.

“Duck Dynasty” has also been a merchandising juggernaut for A&E and the Robertson clan. But things took a turn in December when GQ published inflammatory remarks from Phil Robertson about gays and African Americans. A+E Networks at first said it would suspend Robertson from the series, then made an about-face after that maneuver prompted outcry from supporters. The episodes premiering next week were filmed before the controversy erupted.

The program has enjoyed a surge of ad revenue. In 2012, “Duck Dynasty” lured a little more than $40 million from sponsors, according to Kantar, a tracker of ad spending. For the first nine months of 2013, “Duck Dynasty” attracted nearly $80 million. A spokesman for A+E Networks said the company declined to comment on ad prices for the show or conversations it may be having with sponsors.

Marketers have proven willing in the past to ditch cable reality series that seemed likely to raise eyebrows. In late 2011, home-improvement retailer Lowe’s pulled its advertising from “All-American Muslim,”a reality series on TLC, citing complaints made by an advocacy organization known as the Florida Family Assn. The series followed the lives of a handful of Muslim families living around Dearborn, Michigan. The decision sparked backlash, and other advertisers continued to support the program. Even so,”All-American Muslim” was canceled in Spring 2012.

http://tv.yahoo.com/news/duck-dynasty-advertisers-paying-big-bucks-despite-controversy-170418429.html

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

The only thing that genuinely mystifies me is the appeal of Duck Dynasty as "entertainment".

Perhaps you're a niche snob ff.

Whatever it is, if it's scripted and acted it's a leg pull.

How it works it's a bit of a mystery although the modern, well-educated, sophisticated lady seems, if the ratings are scientific, or nearly so, to be drawn to series incorporating bonnets, voluminous skirts and feechewering females of quite chaste disposition running rings round gentlemen of renown and responsibility, like unto the manner in which wasps are drawn to discarded, unwashed jam jars with the top off. Alike, I mean, in the sense that neither can help it.

Whether it means that they feel, unconsciously, somewhere deep down, that they have made a bit of a blunder with the feminist, equal rights malarky, is a matter for each observer of this strange manifestation to decide for themselves. But very few bonnet movies are authentic about the fleas and the way the plumbing works. But they all show temptations to gluttony in the breaks.

Some men, writers and wits, study those sorts of programme content to learn how to write or be witty on the basis that those entrusted with the script are self-evidently, measured in cash, not mugs. They might, they do, make jokes the censor doesn't get or smuggle into the sub-conscious viewers a message they are unaware of receiving.

Some people, mainly men, record them and study them for anachronisms so they can inform the producer of the solecisms which had escaped his attention and by doing so hope to be invited to join the team. A Wellington boot print in the mud for example.

I daresay a writer on DD would give you a nice blast if you said such a thing in his hearing.

As you constantly remind us we are free to think what we wish about such things, within fairly wide limits at least, and express our views on them if we feel the urge to so do without let or hindrance.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

Perhaps you're a niche snob ff.

Or maybe I'm not just part of the niche demographic Duck Dynasty is aimed out.

If having standards makes one a snob, then I'm a snob. I've said I don't like any reality TV shows, that's not my preferred type of entertainment, and I haven't found these shows to be actually entertaining. And when I want a good burger, I don't head for McDonald's either.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

If having standards makes one a snob, then I'm a snob.

Have you never wondered, ff, how you became a snob? It is not natural as any evolutionist will inform you.

I assume you have seen a photo of the Venus of Willendorf and that only came into the world last week in the context of the unimaginable vistas of time which some nitwits are determined to try to make all the kids understand. And one assumes from the obviously dedicated craft-work of the figurine that the Venus, the artist's model, was an admirable and possibly important lady of the period.

And the natives Darwin encountered in Tierra del Fuego had manners which left a great deal to be desired. They were not snobs.

So here you are--a snob. I can tell you have very high standards by the choices of nutrient novelties you have posted on the Cafe Lola thread. And there is other evidence.

I do so like snobbish ladies. Christian fundamentalists at bottom.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

As H. L. Mencken said, no one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public.

AMEN,AMEN. I dont think any preacher in the country could have said it better.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

I think Mencken's statement is complete rubbish derived from snobbery. Those who quote it are snobs and those who approve of it are snobs.

It is really just a claim to have good taste which in Setanta's case is laughable.

2 Replies

@firefly,

Exactly. You're not separating the characters from the actors. The success story rests with the actors. The people we see in the before pictures, readily available. Like Lucy and Desi, not the buffoons we see on the show. You can't argue with their success. I have watched the show and I would agree, it is dry, stupid humor, by design. Many people love that humor. Similar to I love Lucy, three stooges, etc. people making fun of each other and looking stupid. It is entertaining and has a lot of followers. Stereotypes on parade. My point is that it is unfortunate that the ignorance and bigotry associated with the stereotype was put on display. I don't knw if that's how Phil really thinks or if he was in character. Either way the display was a sad commentary.

0 Replies

@spendius,

I can't tell if you do, or don't, like snobs. In which category would you find yourself?

1 Reply

@IRFRANK,

Quote:

A snob is a person who believes in the existence of an equation between status and human worth. The term also refers to a person who believes that some people are inherently inferior to him or her for any one of a variety of reasons, including real or supposed intellect, wealth, education, ancestry, power, physical strength, class, taste, beauty, nationality, fame, extreme success of a family member or friend, etc. Often this form of snobbery reflects the snob's personal attributes. For example, a common snobbery of the affluent is the belief that wealth is either the cause or result of superiority, or both. Both definitions are used as a pejorative.

I am not a snob. I'm a really, really well evolved microbe and have been treated as such by numerous women and other authority figures. If I allowed myself to unevolve by any margin it would be pretentious and thus snobbish. It would be like letting a lady win a snooker game by positioning the balls to her advantage.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Thanks for the comment Rev.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

I'm a really, really well evolved microbe . . .

You mean you're composed of only one cell? Laughing

1 Reply

Topic title: So Saying That Folks Should Follow Christian Morals is NOW A Firing Offense

Well, considering true Christians will never sneak days off, never show up for work drunk and will never let their boss down in any way, I'd think it'd be downright bad business sense to fire them.. Wink

PS- About 5 years ago the jobcentre sent me on a 'Working Links' course here in Britain to teach us unemployed schmucks how to write job applic letters, write CV's and so on.
In one applic letter I said "I've got christian leanings and don't drink or smoke"
"NO NO NO" said the young lady who was running the course, "YOU CAN'T SAY THAT because employers wouldn't be interested".

So how about it A2Kers, if you were a boss hiring people, wouldn't you be interested?

1 Reply

@wmwcjr,

Quote:

You mean you're composed of only one cell?

It feels like that.

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Quote:

So how about it A2Kers, if you were a boss hiring people, wouldn't you be interested?

I have some experience as an employer and I would never have employed a chap who needed advice from a young lady. And water-drinking non-smokers are too much of a trial.

I can't see how Jobcentres serve any useful purpose.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Very interesting. Smile

Unfortunately, that particular feeling (whatever it is) is beyond the range of my limited experience. But carry on. Smile

Gotta go.

1 Reply

@wmwcjr,

Try turning over in bed.

1 Reply

Quote:

Spendius said: I have some experience as an employer and I would never have employed a chap who needed advice from a young lady..
I can't see how Jobcentres serve any useful purpose

Their only use is to push a piece of paper across the desk for you to sign so that you get your dole.
If you've been out of work for 6 months they order you to go on a Working Links course or lose a chunk of your dole, that's the only reason I went.
The WL young lady "adviser" was hopeless like I said; at one point she wrote out a CV for me "to show how it should be done", but it was so full of spelling and grammar mistakes that I tore it up.. Smile

1 Reply

So Saying That Folks Should Follow Christian Morals is NOW A Firing Offense

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know