Originally Posted By DDMAN26 <a href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Hank-Williams-Jr-pulled-from-ESPN-after-compari?urn=nfl-wp8592" target="_blank">http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/bl...l-wp8592</a> First of all anytime you drop the Hitler reference within an argument that's saying you have no argument. In fact unless it's proceeded by the phrase: "It's too bad we didn't get the chance to kill Hitler" then it's never really acceptable. And as an avid football watcher, Are you ready for some football was getting pretty tiresome, so if the song is no longer part of the intro that's fine. I say go back to the old theme.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I thought "Are you Ready" was tired years ago. I'm ready for a re-engineered MNF theme. That said, I still think this is an example of political correctness run amok. Mel Brooks seemed to be able to get away with a lot when he used Hitler.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Mel Brooks used humor to lampoon Hitler and turn him into a laughing stock. Hank Jr. just plain doesn't see a difference between our president and Hitler. It's funny, but not Mel Brooks funny.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Did you watch the comments are read them? I thought it was a poor attempt at analogy but it was said pretty tongue in cheek and it something that isn't out of character for the guy. If networks want something canned and safe then they should think twice about who they have on their air. I seem to recall Madonna being roundly criticized for her demeanor, lyrics, dress, etc yet look who is going to be the halftime act for the next Super Bowl. (Is Madonna even relevant anymore, by the way?)
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Did you watch the comments are read them?<< Both. I didn't get any tongue in cheek, I got that he kinda hates Obama and Biden. A lot. It was another lazy "they're all the same" comment that a lot of people throw around without really thinking it through. But then, Hank Jr. isn't known for thinking much through.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Well, we can disagree on your first point but I agree with your second. Which begs the question...why was he being interviewed in the first place? Interestingly, a teacher in San Antonio, Texas called the school board member there a Nazi...and the teacher did not lose his job. But, to be honest, ABC and ESPN are private companies and they can do whatever they heck they want. It is no different I suppose than Country Radio not playing the Dixie Chicks when people got upset for their comments about Bush.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 ABC can do whatever it wants and losing Hank Willaims Jr is no loss to me from MNF - however I wonder why the firestorm to remove him that quickly-. What he said was boneheaded to be sure-- but if ABC had banned everyone in Hollywood who took nasty shots at George Bush while in office there would have been dead air. So why the distinction ? because what Hank Willaims said was stupider ? It was dumb but I am trying to see the difference. I agree with K2- he obviouslyhates him, but more than Kanye , or Streisand or so many others hated W ? Ban 'em all for all I care...when I want my political thought process enhanced- I do not turn to the entertainment industry for rational thought
Originally Posted By fkurucz <i>I thought "Are you Ready" was tired years ago.</i> I thought the NFL was tired years ago. I find it to be excrutiatingly boring. Plus I find the whole notion of a bunch of fat guys (some of them have huge guts) to be "athletes" to be risible.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>It was dumb but I am trying to see the difference.<< On this, I agree. Banning his opening number is dumb over-reaction, too, and only draws more attention needlessly to an idiotic remark. And feeds into the paranoid delusions of dummies.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <ABC can do whatever it wants and losing Hank Willaims Jr is no loss to me from MNF - however I wonder why the firestorm to remove him that quickly-. What he said was boneheaded to be sure-- but if ABC had banned everyone in Hollywood who took nasty shots at George Bush while in office there would have been dead air. So why the distinction ?> I basically agree with that. (Of course, I don't think most entertainers who took shots at Bush equated him with Hitler, but a couple -Roseanne maybe? - came pretty close.) I think people should be free to run their mouths and show themselves to be idiots, and really shouldn't be "banned" for it (a la the Dixie Chicks, for saying something far milder than this). That said, ABC is a private company and has no requirement to have anyone as de facto spokesperson for their programming that they don't want to. It's not a free speech issue, first-amendment-wise, as the government is not involved here. ABC made a business decision that folks who like Obama might not like HWJ kicking off their MNF any more, and took the safe route, as businesses often do. And yeah, it was time to retire "Ready for some Football" a long time ago anyway.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 "and only draws more attention needlessly to an idiotic remark. And feeds into the paranoid delusions of dummies" hadn't thought about that but I think you're right. I hadn't heard about the stupid comment UNTIL they banned him from MNF and ran that banner on ESPN with the sports scores. Then I went to look for it. If not for that I likely would have misse3d it completely. Why give the morons of the world more press than they deserve and a rallying point
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I think ESPN/Disney/ABC wanted to head off any potential advertising boycott as well. Glenn Beck's racist crapola on Fox News eventually drove so many major advertisers from the show, it simply didn't make financial sense for his show to stay on the air, in spite of how popular he was with his audience. It cost Fox a ton of money to keep him on the air. So perhaps that's why they wanted to nip this controversy in the bud.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 Considering the numbers MNF draws less than it used to be but still the highest rated cable program. And usually the local ABC affilate carries the game I don't necessarily think advertisers would be leaving.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Not over this, especially because ESPN/ABC got out in front of it. But if Williams started fielding more interviews, and wanted to try and outdo himself (although where do you go once you've used the Hitler reference?) it could become a problem. Obviously, they wanted to distance themselves, at least for this week, from being associated with his dopey comments. Wouldn't surprise me if they just went ahead and came up with something fresh and let the whole tired "rowdy friends" thing go away for good.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Not necessarily, no. But why risk even one major one leaving or ticking them off against your whole network conglomerate? And if this became a "thing," you actually could have a targeted boycott, or combo boycott/buycott (i.e. "we're going to stop buying Bud and buy Miller instead"). The network doesn't need the headache, the sponsors don't need the headache, and the solution - coming up with a new opening they should have come up with years ago - is a whole lot less of one. I still don't like it, but that's undoubtedly how Disney/ESPN looked at it.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I think ESPN/ABC had all the controversy they ever wanted when they had Rush Limbaugh on MNF. Still one of the strangest ideas ever, and strange they were surprised when he predictably stuck his foot in his mouth. So perhaps that's why they didn't want to go down that road again.
