Via Deadline Hollywood:
Did the controversy surrounding Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson take a toll on the show’s appeal? A&E’s flagship reality series clocked 8.5 million viewers Wednesday night [down from the show’s Season 4 debut, which drew nearly 12 million viewers], snapping a streak of ratings records and posting its first season-to-season drop. Among adults 18-49, the premiere averaged 4.2 million viewers, down 33%.
That’s a bucket of cold water thrown in the Robertson family’s faces.
The show can no longer be seen as an innocent guilty pleasure, as a number of TV columnists seem to have noted, including here: “[W]here watching Duck Dynasty was once a form of escapism, now it can’t help feeling like taking sides.”
That, to a large extent, explains the drop off.
More. Variety reports, “‘Duck Dynasty’ Falls to Lowest Ratings Since 2012.”
Changing times. Utah is now evenly split on marriage equality in a poll taken following a district court decision overturning Utah’s anti-gay-marriage amendment. That ruling was later stayed by the U.S. Supreme Court pending the state’s appeal.
Seeing 1,300 same-sex couples apply for marriage licenses likely gave momentum to shifting attitudes.
24 Comments for “A ‘Duck Dynasty’ Note”
posted by Don on
This is where I think I’ll draw the line to being patient and understanding of others’ flaws and fears. Robertson went out of his way to say spectacularly demeaning things.
Whether the ratings dip holds or not, I’m thrilled that he got shamed for his actions. And it’s somewhat telling to those I know that took to FB to defend him in the name of “Christianity” to see their “hero” take a drubbing.
Once again, I can see conscientious Christians holding to ancient ideas as a matter of faith. But violating all the other tenets of Christianity with vicious statements should no longer get a pass.
posted by Houndentenor on
The media storm about his gay comments completely distracted from his racist comments. I can’t believe he got away with that. But then none of the people I know who watch the show would be the slightest big bothered by even stronger racist comments.
posted by Sonicfrog on
hound… I agree.
His gay comments were pretty lame, but given his relgion, I get where he’s coming from. i don’t ascribe to it or condone it, but I understand it. His comments about black working in the fields being quite content were much worse, especially when he tacked on the bit about how they are less happy now because of welfare and social programs. I’m paraphrasing, but that was the take-away, and that is absolutely absurd.
posted by Houndentenor on
A quick note. The summer ratings were at 12 but the premiere episode was watched by about the same number as watched last season’s premiere. In other words, the same people watch the show as before. No one stopped watching because of the PR-stunt “controversy” nor did any new viewers tune in. All that media driven hoopla was for nothing. Perhaps we will look back at this as the moment when reality shows “jumped the shark”, he said in a rare bout of optimism.
posted by Jorge on
Okay. Now I almost understand why two headlines told completely opposite stories.
Fortunately, I do not take this story seriously. I really don’t care.
Whether he’s a good guy or a bad guy is an open enough question that it’s not my business. I will treat him as a good guy or a bad guy whether he likes it or not. So his righty friends managed to parry the outrage to about 25% damage, if that. That’s pretty much what the result should have been.
posted by Tom Jefferson III on
I would agree that so much of this entire ‘Duck-Gate’ controversy seems to be manufactured by people who wanted to use the series to make more money on advertising/merchandise.
I think that it was thought — too soon to know for certain one way or the other — that if Robertson made some “controversial” statements in press (i.e. GQ Magazine) about gay people and how he felt about pre-civil rights vs. post-civil black Americans it would play well with the ‘red-state’, blue-collar, redneck white, heterosexual male consumer.
Now I suspect a core group of the “Duck Dynasty” consumer demographic has ALWAYS been the sort of “average, every day” white men that would not object to the comments made by Roberston.
While I am Christian and have similar small town ‘Americana’ roots — including hunting/fishing — I never really got into the show because its reality television (which I almost always dislike)
posted by Jim Michaud on
This Duck Dynasty flap is just a sideshow. On important stuff, things that really matter (like marriage equality), we’re making headway and changing minds. Let Mr. Robertson flap his gums all he wants. I’m keeping my eye on the prize.
posted by Mike in Houston on
If you haven’t seen it, this is a fantastic takedown of another Louisiana bigot by a trans woman: http://youtu.be/PaULrJHdMdY
posted by Tom Scharbach on
The Duck Dynasty flap is a scenario that we’ve seen before and we’ll see replayed over and over again.
Duck Dynasty was “reality show” was carefully scripted to portray (in the words the article cited by Stephen) a “cheerful innocence”, a modern redneck version of Ozzie and Harriet. The script reflected the reality of the Robertson family, a family business enterprise shrewdly marketed as a family of swamp-fun and swamp-faith, no more than Ozzie and Harriet, a show business enterprise presenting themselves as an All-American family, reflected the reality of the Nelson family. It was, in the words of the article, a “form of escapism”, a carefully crafted production intended to create “reality” where none existed.
Then Phil Robertson went off script, and the reality behind the scripted reality showed its dark face. It was as if the darkness in the Nelson family that pushed Ricky down the road to alcohol and drug abuse were suddenly exposed to the light. If that were all that happened, it would be sad, but grounds for empathy. After all, what family isn’t dysfunctional, haunted by hidden demons? What family doesn’t have one or more members who everyone else silently prays will behave themselves, this time, in front of company?
The reason that the flap ensued is that Phil Robertson broke script about controversial issues — homosexuality, segregation history — and one of the issues — homosexuality — played into a modern hot button. That’s the reason that his harsh and stupid comments about gays and lesbians created a stir, but his equally harsh and stupid comments about segregation history elicited pity.
Is anyone really stupid enough to believe — as Robertson apparently does — that Southern blacks in segregation days didn’t have enough cunning than to hide their anger and frustration from white men? Apparently so, but it isn’t an issue likely to create controversy in this day and age, when everyone but a aged remnant of white segregationists and younger white supremacist skinheads knows differently.
In any event, Robertson’s remarks about homosexuality set off the LGBT press and blogosphere, and GLAAD got involved, wisely or not. GLAAD’s involvement, in turn, prompted the religious right into loudly complaining about “free speech” and “religious persecution”, which, in turn, prompted the gay and lesbian “church ladies” (the ones that want us all to “behave ourselves” so that we don’t give offense to the religious right) into their own predictable response, chiding us all that we were poking the beast. Robertson was condemned, gays and lesbians were condemned, hands were wrung, A&E suspended Robertson, Robertson doubled down, A&E un-suspended Robertson, and the religious right claimed “Victory!”
It was all so predictable, and it didn’t amount to a damn thing.
posted by Houndentenor on
A&E put Robertson on “indefinite suspension” (does that even have a technical definition?) while the show was on hiatus. He never missed a day of work, reruns were still in rotation (including a “marathon”) and he was never out a penny in compensation from his previous or potential future involvement on the show. I don’t believe for a second that they ever intended to remove him from the show. It was a publicity move. It may look like it backfired on them and they backed down, but I suspect it was intended to look that way as to (quite successfully) distract from the civil rights comments (which are hardly ever discussed other than on left-of-center blogs).
posted by Tom Scharbach on
I suspect it was intended to look that way as to (quite successfully) distract from the civil rights comments (which are hardly ever discussed other than on left-of-center blogs).
I think Robertson got a pass on the segregation remarks because he didn’t explicitly denigrate African-Americans. All he did was make some profoundly ignorant remarks about Southern life during segregation days. Ignorance is part and parcel of (or at least consistent with) the “cheerful innocence” that the A&E script makes the centerline of the Duck Dynasty story line, and the country as a whole didn’t pick it up because most people expects aging, uneducated crackers to be ignorant.
posted by Houndentenor on
The Utah poll is interesting. It raises the question of how long the national party (GOP) can remain so staunchly anti-gay when public opinion, including opinions among Republicans, are in favor of at least some rights for gay people. How long can this go on until it blows up in their faces? Or is that already happening?
posted by Sonicfrog on
It raises the question of how long the national party (GOP) can remain so staunchly anti-gay when public opinion, including opinions among Republicans, are in favor of at least some rights for gay people.
So long as the right-wing Christian talking heads leaders of the GOP get rating, I assume.
posted by JohnInCA on
How long can this go on? Pretty damn long. Pretty consistently in these polls there’s been a sizable chunk of Republican voters who are in favor or marriage equality. 30% or more, consistently.
But they don’t care. They don’t punish their politicians when they vote against their beliefs. They don’t go out to the primaries and try to get a more moderate guy into place.
It’s, quite simply, not important to them.
And that’s what *every* Republican voter I know says. Yeah, they know that McCarthy is pretty shitty on gay rights, and yeah, they’re all for my civil rights, but they’re just not “all for” *enough* to not vote for McCarthy.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
Utah is now evenly split on marriage equality in a poll taken following a district court decision overturning Utah’s anti-gay-marriage amendment.
I wouldn’t accord a single poll with too much importance, but I think that the public opinion shift in our favor is now irreversible. National polls are beginning to show us in the mid-fifties or higher, and my guess is that we’ll get up to about 75%, as we did on DADT, before we level out.
We are part of the national conversation now, and the reasonableness of “equal means equal”, coupled with the obvious and unthreatening joy of gay and lesbian couples who are finally being allowed to marry, in marked contrast to the increasingly strident, ominous and unreasoned rhetoric coming from the likes of Tony Perkins, Brian Brown and Bryan Fischer, is slowly winning the American people over to our side.
We need to stay the course and we will get to the goal.
The battle for equality will largely be played out in the courts now, but I think that it is important to keep in mind that one of the two major political parties remains in the thrall of social conservatives. We should not give up on trying to turn that party, and here is a concrete way to help out: Ron Sandack, one of the Illinois Republican legislators who voted for marriage equality, is facing a hard primary challenge from a social conservative. Consider a contribution to Sandack’s campaign.
posted by Sonicfrog on
I was showing the poll to the mate…. Yeah, I know, I just left myself wide open for a juicy retort… We just noticed taht the margin of eroor was 4 1/2 percent. That is not very reliable statistically. As a rule, you’d prefer a MOE to be about 3 to really matter.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
I noticed the margin of error, too, which is why I don’t give too much credence to individual polls, but instead look to patterns in polls and trend lines. A sample of 600 is respectable, but most polls are double that, which explains why the margin of error is so high.
The poll might be an outlier; a BYU poll conducted during the same period showed about 42% support. The BYU poll, however, suggests an important trend line: In 2010, the BYU poll showed 24% support; in 2012, 28% support. That data suggests that there has been a significant uptick in support during the last year.
What I found most interesting about the Salt Lake Tribune poll, though, is the comparison of party affiliation numbers state to national. Percentages of marriage equality support for both Democrats (81% Utah) and Republicans (30% Utah) are reasonably consistent with party affiliation percentages in national polls taken during the last year, but percentages for Independents (50% Utah) are significantly lower than the national polls. Why, I don’t know.
posted by J. Bruce Wilcox on
I wrote this a couple of weeks ago- but after the above comment- I’m posting it now- I did have to edit/update it a bit…
Phil Robertson did all us homosexuals an enormous favor. GLAAD did all us homosexuals an enormous favor.
Stephen H. Miller did the very few people commenting on this site a favor- because it triggered this conversation- but beyond that- he did nothing. Why? Because Stephen H. Miller is more interested in being a moderate conservative that actually standing up against the actual enemy- which is not- in fact- GLAAD. Are we so ignorant to think biblical christians want us here- at all- much less want us to be their EQUAL- recognized as such under secular law? Do we think we’ve come so far that thousands of years of religious heterosexism will end in 1 or 2 human generations?
BECAUSE BC’s NOT ONLY DO NOT WANT US HERE- THEY’VE DETERMINED WE ARE SATAN’S SPAWN- THAT OUR HUMAN SEXUALITY MEANS WE HAVE NO OTHER REDEEMING SOCIAL QUALITIES- AND OUR PRESENSE HERE/NOW INDICATES THE FALL OF OUR JOINT COMMUNAL CIVILIZATION- WHICH AT THE MICRO LEVEL THEY DON’T REALLY WANT- BUT AT THE MACRO LEVEL MEANS ARMEGEDDON AND THE SECOND COMING OF THEIR CHRIST.
THEIR LAW IS “GOD’S” LAW- WHICH TRUMPS SECULAR LAW.
So until we fags and dykes stop fighting with each other over bullshit and realize how and where the problem still festers- we stupid fags and dykes will keep attacking the wrong target.
Oscar Wilde- Alan Turing- and 50,000 other british men were arrested for the ‘crime’ of ‘gross indecency’. I’ve been arrested- twice.
Phil Robertson did us all a favor by making some ignorant sexual comments- because we adult humans can’t have conversations about the actual physical characteristics of our actual sexuality because everybody think it’s GROSS. And only once previously- did Tom S. make the statement that included how PR’s statement demeaned ALL WOMEN TOO. No where else have I seen anybody- including ANY FEMALE react NEGATIVELY to the comments intended to demean gay men- concerning just how demeaning to women they were- reducing all women to their respective vaginas.
Which is precisely why I made the comment I made previously- (which except for 1 comment got ignored) using sexual terms and saying back to you all- what Phil said. Because it’s GROSS- and we just can’t handle it. It’s still taboo- and we are a bunch of children.
And I’m more of a cocks*cker- and less of a butt-f*cker- so PR’s comments don’t even apply to me- even though I’m gay!
Do we not all realize the tyranny associated with what our swear words are? You (evil) cocks*cker. You (filthy) mother*cker. And the reality that when a straight male (or female) uses these terms to demean- they’re taking some really great things and bastardizing them?
The heterosexual definition of sex is: Vaginal intercourse intended for procreation- ONLY. And we all know how ridiculous that definition is- even Bill Clinton didn’t have “sex” with Monica Lewinsky. But anything else is (perceived to be) deviant. And out there in pornland there’s an amazing amount of anal heterosexual sex going on- in case nobody noticed.
So Jorge- to comment to you specifically- I’m a body worker- and a shamanic energy channel- and my touch is mind-blowing- in case you can’t relate.
GLAAD did us all a favor- because it pushed back- it pushed the beast’s button- and we all got to watch THE BEAST rise up- free speech being what it is. So all the ‘christians’ who agree with PR’s anti-gay message got to support some ignorant comments- AND WE ALL GOT TO SEE WHAT THE BEAST LOOKS LIKE- in 2013.
We should be glad for GLAAD- AND THEIR COURAGE TO CHALLENGE THE BEAST.
Stephen H. Miller- not so much. He’s more interested in not being associated with a ‘liberal’ organization.
And really- until all humans get beyond an us-and-them reality and accept us all as part of a stunning human family- we’re all screwed- sexual pun intended.
Grow up.
It’s the USA- it’s 2014- and I have FREE SPEACH- to call the beast- THE BEAST.
And I turned 60 in 2013 and I don’t care anymore.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
GLAAD did us all a favor- because it pushed back – it pushed the beast’s button – and we all got to watch THE BEAST rise up- free speech being what it is.
I agree with this. I’m of two minds about whether the call for a boycott was a good tactic, but there is no question at all about GLAAD pushing back. It was the right thing to do. It is always the right thing to do.
We are probably in for another round, by the way.
I’ll be curious to see how many Christians and 2016 Presidential hopefuls rush to the defense this time around.
posted by Jorge on
1) Urgh. Disgusting.
2) Setting a bad example for the kids? Good grief, he’s part of the problem! Kids shouldn’t even be watching the kind of backbiting and grease and fake pining of the Bachelor in the first place. Or it’s sleazy imitators.
I have very strong memories of watching a group home of LGBTQ teens getting high off watching “I Love New York” a couple of times. You want bad examples for the kids? Well at least there was the parental supervision and cultural values of appropriately-timed bemusement from the staff. A desperate gambit, that, passing down urban values from predominantly a single racial group in place of a hodgepodge of failed family values.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
I have very strong memories of watching a group home of LGBTQ teens getting high off watching “I Love New York” …
Teenagers love anything that makes adults look like mindless idiots, and reality shows certainly do that in spades …
posted by Tom Scharbach on
It looks like the potential Bachelor flap is going to die aborning. Galavis apologized and ABC rebuked him for his comments.
A good thing. I’d hate to see the convoluted “logic” conservative Christians would use defending Biblical marriage by auction.
posted by Jorge on
Are we so ignorant to think biblical christians want us here- at all- much less want us to be their EQUAL- recognized as such under secular law?
What’s a “Biblical Christian?” Have you any evidence for what defines them and what they believe? I’ve been in the cafeteria so long I don’t acknowledge any other type as Christian.
That many people wish homosexuality did not have to be is nothing of consequence. It’s how people choose to act that counts. I have spoken or heard in person a number of highly devout Christians over the years. I have never heard in from them the view that the “of course homosexuality is wrong” means that gay people are evil, much less that we have no redeeming social quality. Only the view that gays are misguided.
I think you fall afoul of the same sin you accuse of Biblical Christians: you equate skin-deep demographic characteristics with morality.
So until we fags and dykes stop fighting with each other over bullshit and realize how and where the problem still festers- we stupid fags and dykes will keep attacking the wrong target.
I’ll make most of my alliances opportunistic and retaliatory. The airing of differences is healthy, so long as the difference between major and minor differences is kept in mind. Seems to me that the direction of this country and society is a legitimate thing to be passionate about. The gay rights movement overall has the interests of the many at heart, and that it is as a force moving in a halfway decent direction is enough for me.
So Jorge- to comment to you specifically- I’m a body worker- and a shamanic energy channel- and my touch is mind-blowing- in case you can’t relate.
I do not mean to offend, but your comment is poorly-timed. I was just ruminating over the practice of, hmm, Christians holding prayer over ostensibly secular “holiday” parties. It grates on my Catholic sensibilities. I always have to “un-bless” the food.
I suppose I should not dwell on the negative. Thank you for your energy channel touch. If it is allowed, here’s a blessing from me.
posted by Tom Jefferson III on
I remember watching — online — an old clip from SNL back in the 1990s, when their was a lawsuit about the Irish group not letting a group of gay Irish into the parade or some such thing.
Basically, the SNL bit remarked that it was odd/ironic that a group of drunken Irishmen were worried about gay people making them ‘look bad’. This sort of reminds me of the think with guy who made the anti-gay comments Bachelor series.
Reality Television is — at least what I have seen — is not reality and it sure as heck is not the sort of thing I would want my kids to be watching. Heck, I am not really sure that adults should be watching reality tv — although it does provide E!’s The Soup with good material.