Should The View also be cancelled?

[caulfield12]

After reading a number of the stories on the Roseanne show cancellation...one common point keeps coming up, above all others.

That ABC is being hypocritical for having a "double standard" for the two programs.

Obviously, one is an opinion show...whereas the Roseanne situation is more about her personal use of Twitter affecting the core brand of ABC/Disney.

Now the obvious question then becomes have any of the co-hosts of The View said something either on the show or via social media that would "objectively" raise to the same level of the VJ/Muslim Brotherhood/Planet of the Apes/George Soros in concentration camps collaborating with Nazi's and stealing money/Chelsea Clinton's husband is somehow related to Soros chain of tweets...?

Just curious if anyone on the moderate/centrist or Republican side feels this show should also go in the name of "fairness."

If so, what does that say about our rights to Freedom of Speech on both sides, whether it's NFL players protesting by kneeling without being told to leave the country or the reverse, which is that one must be 100% patriotic all the time way of looking at the country?

[Soxbadger]

Disney can do what it wants. It answers to its shareholders. My honest opinion is that the view is such a small thing, that most people dont know or care about it. I have no idea what its ratings are, I dont know what time its on and I dont even know who is on it. In comparison, I watched every Roseanne episode and planned to watch next season as well. As a TV fan, losing Roseanne kind of sucks. I can separate the character from the person. Its a shame but whatever.

Disney's hand was forced by Wanda Sykes. If she hadnt quit, I dont think Disney cancels Roseanne. But Disney is still in a little bit of shock over losing Shonda Rhimes to Netflix, and Im not sure how reliable they thought Roseanne was. Maybe this tweet goes unnoticed, but are you really about to bet millions on her stability? 

While people make this about politics, its really about bottom lines. Roseanne was a show that would make them millions, but how many more seasons were there really? Its not like this was season 1 and Roseanne is an upcoming star. She has been an outcast for a while and she proved once again why people get nervous about hitching their wagon to her talent. 

So Disney should do whatever it takes for share prices to go up in the future. Disney needs to be in the business of money making and Roseanne's antics werent worth the risk. 

As for freedom of speech. It applies only to govt action. NFL is fully within their rights to make rules (forget the CBA for this discussion) and enforce them. Just like Disney can end a show if it wants. 

[caulfield12]

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/29/roseanne-abc-canceled-boycotts-trump-611593

Why ABC had no choice but to dump Roseanne..The threat of massive advertiser boycotts outweighs any fear of stoking Trump’s fury, experts say.

Beckman said that may well have been the case, but added, “ABC did the math.” A boycott campaign might have started with just “Roseanne,” he said, but could have easily spread to the rest of ABC, as well as Disney’s many other properties, including ESPN, the "Star Wars" franchise, and, as he put it, “every fricking superhero movie there is.”

...

That is a risk for ABC, Bonner said, but in the end, the outrage prompted by doing nothing would be worse for the network than being forced to weather a series of presidential tweets. “You can’t have the star of a major sitcom making racist comments. You can’t do that. It’s not done. Not in this day and age,” he said. “I think the blowback from Trump, it doesn’t seem to last, it’s ephemeral, where having a long-lasting boycott, or movement, would be a lot worse.”

Bonner also noted that, most likely, ABC had not yet sold advertising for the show’s second season, which would now be a tall task. “They’re probably in negotiation as we speak. Normally they wrap up in early June,” he said.

 

http://variety.com/2018/tv/news/roseanne-schedule-cancellation-abc-1202824475/

Losing Roseanne leaves a gaping hole in the reinvigorated ABC Tuesday line-up

At its upfront presentation to advertisers two weeks ago, ABC unveiled a fall schedule that boasted “Roseanne” leading off the Tuesday-night prime-time lineup. The revived multi-camera sitcom had just secured its place as the 2017-18 season’s No. 1 scripted show in Nielsen’s 18-49 demo. Heading into the upfront, ABC had positioned the show as the long-sought answer to the network’s Tuesday-night woes and the new face of its comedy brand.

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/cancelling-roseanne-may-have-cost-abc-100-million-but-saved-parent-company-disney-a-whole-lot-more-2018-5

 

Edited May 30, 2018 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

https://reason.com/blog/2018/05/29/roseanne-barr-valerie-jarrett-cancelled/

 

It was a vile thing to say, though no one has any right to be surprised that Barr said it. The notoriously pro-Trump comedian—who is otherwise something of an ardent leftist—has a long history of offensive, nonsensical utterances. She once said Wall Street bankers should be executed via guillotine, has flirted with 9/11 trutherism, and claimed the Boston Marathon bombing was a false flag operation. She doxed George Zimmerman's parents, and suggested people should go to their homes unless Zimmerman was arrested for killing Trayvon Martin. In March 2018, she falsely accused Parkland survivor and activist David Hogg of making a Nazi salute; it was Roseanne herself, of course, who posed as Adolph Hitler for a satirical magazine in 2009, holding a tray of overbaked gingerbread men labelled "burnt Jew cookies."

Roseanne is crazy, and her disgusting remark about Jarrett is perfectly in character. No one is allowed to pretend that Roseanne finally went too far, or some such nonsense: the Jarrett comment—for which she swiftly apologized, to no avail—is hardly more offensive than any number of things she has said over the years. If people who say very bad things do not deserve to work in television, then Roseanne should never have been rebooted in the first place.

...

And yet I think we ought to be a little worried about what will come of this. Roseanne was by some accounts an interesting show that offered insights into the kind of Trump-voting working class American family that doesn't often grace our TV screens. "Like most of us, they live, and live through, their differences, an accomplishment the show's more ideological critics don't seem to give people much credit for," wrote Reason's Scott Shackford in a review of the show for the July issue of Reason.

Can a person find Roseanne interesting without endorsing Roseanne the person? If so, why was that possible yesterday, but not today—given that nothing about Roseanne's nature has fundamentally changed?

Many conservatives are already criticizing what they will undoubtedly view as ABC's capitulation to political-correctness-run-amok, and it's easy to see how this could play directly into the right's narrative that the left is determined to silence everybody who says the wrong thing. In response to left-of-center pundit Toure calling on ABC to address the fact that "millions are hurt, offended, and traumatized by Roseanne's racist comments," conservative commentator Jesse Kelly tweeted the following:

Jesse Kelly®

✔ @JesseKellyDC

REMINDER:Liberals will come for your career for wrong-think. People on the Right have had about enough of it and will start returning the favor

 

And that's (part of) the problem. Conservatives won't watch football unless all the players comport themselves perfectly, rigidly adhering to the right's version of patriotic correctness. How dare you disrespect the flag, they say. Liberals don't think a television show should continue to exist if somebody central to its production does or says something super bad. How dare you traumatize our marginalized communities, they say.

This race to find more things to be offended about and more reasons to start lynch mobs doesn't seem particularly healthy for the fabric of American society, especially if right and left are determined to one-up each other on the outrage front. Many media companies will attempt to appease viewers on both sides of the ideological spectrum, and their output will be that much less interesting. I won't particularly miss Roseanne, but I do miss being able to appreciate a television show, book, or work of art, even if I thought the artist was a lunatic.

 

 

[caulfield12]

Let's be honest, though: Barr's Twitter feed has been abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with what should have been ABC and Disney's values since long before the show was picked up, and also subsequently. Barr's Twitter feed has trafficked in vile and disproved conspiracy theories and ample content that walked lines many considered racist or xenophobic or prejudiced or judgment-clouded in a number of ways. She has engaged in hostile and insulting fights with Twitter followers high and low. She has shown no interest in controlling herself.

This is not new, and no one at ABC can pretend they didn't know.

Last August at the TCA press tour, I asked Dungey if it was anybody's job to monitor Barr's Twitter feed in case she said something that made airing the show untenable.

"She actually publicly announced a few weeks ago that her son is going to be taking over her Twitter feed for the near future," said the exec. "That was all by her. We did not ask her to do that, but she did make that decision. What we’ve heard from Roseanne is she is very excited about the show and wants to be very focused on the show. The writers room has just gotten started, and she’s going to be an active contributor to that."

Several questions are raised here in retrospect.

Why was ABC comfortable with Barr's son running a gross Twitter feed in her name, one that featured a verified check mark and was assumed to be coming from Roseanne? Why was that better?

When did that experiment with her son running the Twitter feed end? Did anything change? Why does it matter?

And why didn't ABC ask Barr to take a break from Twitter? Or to take a break from specific aspects of her Twitter?

And does this imply in some way that at a certain point Barr ceased to be excited about and focused on the show, and this is a manifestation of that?

After Dungey's TCA panel response, according to the transcript, I followed up, "But no matter who is actually doing her Twitter feed, if you look at the things that whoever it is has tweeted in the past week, there’s some wacky conspiracy stuff that either she or her son has tweeted, and it’s not like this is a new thing. I’m just wondering if that concerns you."

She said, "I try to just worry about the things that I can control."

I return again to my confusion. Why was this not something that worried them? And why couldn't ABC control Barr's Twitter feed?

This was August 2017, remember.

At the time, nobody knew how Roseanne would do in its return. Its value to ABC and to Disney was uncertain.

I hadn't yet given the new episodes a fairly positive review in which I attempted to separate artist from art.

Then it premiered huge. And even after weeks of declines, it still remained at a level well above any reasonable expectations for the show. Since March, ABC has known exactly what the show's value was and that value was potentially huge. How has Barr's Twitter feed not become something ABC could or wanted to control since then?

...

This was also inevitable, assuming ABC lacked the power or will to tell Barr to stop tweeting entirely or lose the show. By my read, you could go back through the last two months of Barr tweets and find dozens that could easily have been interpreted as going over some line or at least running contrary to certain values of a network that put her onstage to open its upfront presentation to advertisers just two weeks ago, where she made jokes about Disney/ABC Television Group chairmain Ben Sherwood writing her tweets. Ha ha? I'd guess you could find hundreds of tweets in recent years that many people would have thought were grounds for punishment, censure or a total severing of ties. She could not stop herself. She did not want to stop herself.

As tipping point tweets go, this was a worthy one. There's no ambiguity.

I don't think it was the first tweet that met that threshold and ABC's statement on Tuesday treats it as a single killshot, not as a straw that broke a camel's back or anything cumulative or confirmatory of long-term questionable behavior.

This. Was. Inevitable.

ABC shouldn't be expressing outrage at one tweet. The network should be expressing disappointment at an employee who cost the company millions and cost dozens of extremely talented co-workers their livelihoods by not being able to resist being reprehensibly racist, when merely being tangentially gross was apparently condoned.

This is way too late to count as the frog (ABC) refusing to give passage to this scorpion (Barr). Heck, the frog booked a return engagement.

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/fien-print/critics-notebook-abcs-roseanne-cancellation-a-predictable-tale-frog-scorpion-1115530

[caulfield12]

NEW YORK (AP) -- The Latest on the cancellation of "Roseanne" (all times local):

11:25 p.m.

Roseanne Barr has returned to Twitter and told people not to feel sorry for her while also highlighting supporters' tweets that attacked ABC and others.

Barr's tweetstorm late Tuesday evening came hours after ABC announced it was canceling the reboot of her show "Roseanne" over a racist tweet that referred to former Barack Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett as a product of the Muslim Brotherhood and "Planet of the Apes."

In the post-firing tweet, Barr apologized to "all the wonderful writers (all liberal) and talented actors who lost jobs on my show due to my stupid tweet."

She then retweeted supporters' statements attacking ABC's hiring of Keith Olbermann, who has harshly criticized President Donald Trump, and a meme that placed Jarrett's photo side-by-side with a "Planet of the Apes" actor.

[Brian]

I don't really see the correlation between Roseanne and The View.

I'm guessing if Joy Behar went on a racist twitter rant or threw false Holocaust accusations at people on Twitter, she would probably be let go and replaced. I don't think replacing Roseanne on "Roseanne" would have been an option. Plus it sounds like other cast and crew were going to quit even if it wasn't cancelled.

I'm sure someone will respond saying Joy Behar posts dumb stuff on Twitter. I wouldn't know, maybe she has, but I doubt it is anything as vile as Roseanne tweets.

[StrangeSox]

Joy Behar called Mike Pence crazy for claiming that he hears Jesus talking to him in his head, so that's where all of the performative conservative outrage over "Behar said Christians are crazy!" is coming from.

They're also mad about Bill Maher. LOL if you think most people on the left wouldn't thrilled with him getting dumpstered.

[caulfield12]

The connection is the fact that many conservatives are now calling for a boycott or cancellation of The View...and criticizing ABC/Disney’s contract with Keith Olbermann, who has obviously been anti-Trump from the very beginning.

Turnabout is fair play, yadda yadda.

As noted earlier in the thread, it’s not about FREE SPEECH at all...as nobody is arguing even the KKK doesn’t have the right to march up and down your street if they get the required permits.   The argument is that public corporations are being “unfair” to conservative voices like Tim Allen and Roseanne (although if you research Roseanne’s many public comments, 1/3rd of them are what would probably be termed libertarian.)

 

If it’s not Joy Behar, it’s Whoopi Goldberg.

Just so we’re all clear, you have to know the difference between when somebody’s coming for you, when somebody is paying you a compliment and when somebody is saying, ‘here’s my observation.’ If you can get that together, maybe you can be president.”

In response to Carly Fiorina’s anger as being referred to as a “Halloween mask” and “demented” by The View co-hosts. 

Edited May 30, 2018 by caulfield12

[RockRaines]

People dont understand this isnt the first tweet that she sent out that was fucked up.  Shes been doing this for months.  

[greg775]

Caulfield, why not just say you want greg's take on this? Anyhow, yes, Behar should have been suspended for ridiculing Pence for saying it's mental illness that Jesus talks to Pence. I mean when asked about it, Pence double downed and said his faith is the most important thing to him. The fact she was not fired or suspended shows that her superiors probably also do not believe in God speaking to us. We shall see when we die. There is no proof of God. Maher and the rest can mock believers all they want but nobody knows for sure and won't know until they die. But yes Behar should have been fired. As far as taking the show off the air, no need for that. If you dislike Joy Behar as I do, you don't watch the View. I wouldn't ever watch it. I would, however, click on a youtube highlight or two if the headline is something like "McCain owns Joy Behar" or "Walters blasts Behar." 

As far as Barr ... never thought she was funny. What she did in San Diego was despicable years ago. The team lets her sing and she embarrasses the team like that and puts the Padre organization at risk. Horrible. And what she said on Twitter? Her defense was she was on sleeping pills? Geez, sorry Barr. You are accountable for your terrible words. Chelsea showed some class; I'll give her that. I must admit my disdain for chelsea is turning into respect as she never seems to respond to attacks with venom. Chelsea is becoming OK in my eyes. Though I am a  former republican I love Ventura, Bill Clinton (not his wife Hillary), Jimmy Carter.

[RockRaines]

You want someone fired because they dont believe that an evangelical hears a voice from a magic man in the sky?  Ok

[SoxFan2003]

13 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

If so, what does that say about our rights to Freedom of Speech on both sides, whether it's NFL players protesting by kneeling without being told to leave the country or the reverse, which is that one must be 100% patriotic all the time way of looking at the country?

Can you please explain how ABC firing an employee, or the NFL (or NBA) creating a rule that requires players to stand during the anthem infringes on anyone's right to free speech?  As far as I can tell, nobody has threatened to arrest Rosanne or Colin Kaepernick for their views.  

[caulfield12]

31 minutes ago, SoxFan2003 said:

Can you please explain how ABC firing an employee, or the NFL (or NBA) creating a rule that requires players to stand during the anthem infringes on anyone's right to free speech?  As far as I can tell, nobody has threatened to arrest Rosanne or Colin Kaepernick for their views.  

I should have phrased it differently...in the sense that (many/most) people believe it’s a free speech issue (being infringed upon) when it’s really about the rights of corporations to run their businesses as profitably as possible, as long as they’re adhering to the law.

[Soxbadger]

43 minutes ago, SoxFan2003 said:

Can you please explain how ABC firing an employee, or the NFL (or NBA) creating a rule that requires players to stand during the anthem infringes on anyone's right to free speech?  As far as I can tell, nobody has threatened to arrest Rosanne or Colin Kaepernick for their views.  

Its best to keep the issues separate. Roseanne's firing has no govt involvement at all, so no infringement.

The NFL issue is trickier. If it is true that Trump called NFL owners and indirectly threatened them, that would begin to go down the road of the govt trying to infringe on free speech. 

But any 1st amendment claim requires govt action. 

[caulfield12]

Bob Iger of ABC called Valerie Jarrett to let her know that ‘ABC does not tolerate comments like those’ made by Roseanne Barr,” Trump tweeted, referring to Disney chief Iger. “Gee, he never called President Donald J. Trump to apologize for the HORRIBLE statements made and said about me on ABC. Maybe I just didn’t get the call?”

 

If Trump now threatens ABC/Disney, tries to block a merger or acquisition down the line...that’s where it gets murkier.  What happens when Iger doesn’t respond to Trump’s request, setting off another billionaire pissing contest like he has had with Jeff Bezos already?   You’re also jumping into freedom of the press potentially being infringed upon.

[RockRaines]

43 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Bob Iger of ABC called Valerie Jarrett to let her know that ‘ABC does not tolerate comments like those’ made by Roseanne Barr,” Trump tweeted, referring to Disney chief Iger. “Gee, he never called President Donald J. Trump to apologize for the HORRIBLE statements made and said about me on ABC. Maybe I just didn’t get the call?”

 

If Trump now threatens ABC/Disney, tries to block a merger or acquisition down the line...that’s where it gets murkier.  What happens when Iger doesn’t respond to Trump’s request, setting off another billionaire pissing contest like he has had with Jeff Bezos already?   You’re also jumping into freedom of the press potentially being infringed upon.

When was an employee of ABC racist towards Trump?

[greg775]

3 hours ago, RockRaines said:

You want someone fired because they dont believe that an evangelical hears a voice from a magic man in the sky?  Ok

Yes. Rock I generally love your posts but how offensive can you be? See nobody cares if they offend Christians or believers might be the better word. We are just Christians, believers. We believe in God who is the magic man in the sky. He doesn't exist. Nobody with a brain would think he exists. Well ... a lot of people think He exists in the form of the Trinity. By the way I noticed some publications don't capitalize God anymore. It's cause they scoff and refuse to acknowledge the possibility of God. How do you know there's no God? Are you the one person with proof? Joy said the Veep had mental illness cause he heard voices. Hmmmm ... fireable offense considering a lot of people believe in God? No, cause nobody cares if they offend us believers. Shame on Rock for purposely offending greg here.

p.s. If I tell you God has spoken to me would u all want me committed? Would you want me jailed? Hidden from your family members? I will not confirm this has happened on this board but answer the question please.

Edited May 30, 2018 by greg775

[greg775]

I've been thinking more about Barr and greg is close to going on a rant. Who the hell do these actors think they are??? How in the hell can anybody tweet that crap who has a No. 1 hit show? Is she insane? What she is is entitled celebrity. I mean my gosh, she deserves all the scorn she's getting. The only excuse for this is she thinks she's so powerful she can issue some racist rants on Twitter and simply say she's a comedian. I mean comedy is fine, but she thinks she is above everybody else to think she was gonna get away with those tweets. Improper Barr, improper!!!

[StrangeSox]

Nothing she said is worse than what the President of the United States said before, during and after his campaign. Why should she have expected to face any consequences?

[Dick Allen]

I just don’t understand how anyone thinks she should or would have gotten away with what she wrote. There would have been advertiser backlash for sure. They say it had nothing to do with it, and maybe it didn’t, but if they didn’t do anything, like OReilly, the show would have lost all of its sponsors and died.

 

Several years ago, when I was living in a high rise, the condo association had a survey for unit owners. They did it through Survey Monkey, and had a poster by the elevators reminding owners to take the survey. Since it was survey monkey the person that made the poster had a picture of a monkey with reading glasses on typing on a keyboard in front of a computer. A couple of our African American doormen were offended by it and thought it was racist. Obviously they were assured it was not, but the poster was changed. 

Roseanne even after her apoplogy retweeted side by side pictures of Valerie Jarrett and Planet of the apes characters. She’s acked and deserved to go down in flames.

[greg775]

2 hours ago, StrangeSox said:

Nothing she said is worse than what the President of the United States said before, during and after his campaign. Why should she have expected to face any consequences?

Did he really say anything that resembles this? Chelsea has every right to be very upset and until this I was no Chelsea supporter.

[greg775]

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

I just don’t understand how anyone thinks she should or would have gotten away with what she wrote. There would have been advertiser backlash for sure. They say it had nothing to do with it, and maybe it didn’t, but if they didn’t do anything, like OReilly, the show would have lost all of its sponsors and died.

 

Several years ago, when I was living in a high rise, the condo association had a survey for unit owners. They did it through Survey Monkey, and had a poster by the elevators reminding owners to take the survey. Since it was survey monkey the person that made the poster had a picture of a monkey with reading glasses on typing on a keyboard in front of a computer. A couple of our African American doormen were offended by it and thought it was racist. Obviously they were assured it was not, but the poster was changed. 

Roseanne even after her apoplogy retweeted side by side pictures of Valerie Jarrett and Planet of the apes characters. She’s acked and deserved to go down in flames.

Yes this is another indefensible action by a Hollywood figure. No sane person could defend her IMO.

[caulfield12]

For whatever it’s worth, the rate for a 30 second commercial on Roseanne was about $167,000 (8 episodes) for this past season.  That was #5.

For the upcoming season (12 episodes), it was reported to be a $400,000 (or $800k per minute) rate for 30 secs, #1 in the industry.

 

As for why Trump is complaining about ABC/Disney, it’s probably the same complaints he consistently makes about CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT...basically, any news network that’s NOT Fox, local/regional newspapers (mostly conservative now) or call-in radio shows (85-90% conservative) like Limbaugh or Huckabee’s program.

Don’t ever recall a specific episode with ABC/Stephanapolous.

[caulfield12]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/31/us/tom-arnold-roseanne-anderson-cooper-cnntv/index.html

Tom Arnold knew Roseanne reboot wouldn't end well...

 

Arnold, who had turbulent four years of marriage with the sitcom star prior to their divorce in 1994 told Cooper that she had a long history of racist tweets.

 

"It's a meme that she and thousands of her alt-right fans do," Arnold said. "They love calling black people monkeys. It's not a one time joke, OK. They do it because we have a white trash racist president. That's a fact. Donald Trump -- Roseanne and I have both known him 30 years. That's an absolute fact."

 

Arnold went on to criticize Trump for his past controversial comments.

 

"I generally believe he thinks black people are dangerous and Mexicans are rapists," Arnold said. "He believes that. As he perpetuates that fear to America, watch out Mueller is lying, he is after me. And so, Americans are sitting home like Roseanne and her fans, are like, oh my God, what is happening out there? And they get anxiety. "

 

...

 

Arnold also questioned whether Trump was really ever a fan of his former wife or just wanted to take credit for her ratings' success. He told Cooper of a time that Trump criticized her directly after their divorce.

 

"He's with Melania and I'm with my wife at the time, Shelby Roos, who's a political consultant," Arnold said. "And he said to me, oh my gosh, you married up in the world. And he goes, Roseanne was disgusting. And he said that to me out of the blue. Like, you know what, no matter what kind of divorce you had, that's a weird thing to say."