General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNY Times Op-Ed: "Roseanne is gone, but the culture that gave her a show isn't"
Roseanne is gone, but the culture that gave her a show isnt
by Roxanne Gay
For once, a major network did the right thing. But before it did the right thing, it did the wrong thing. It is not new information that Roseanne Barr makes racist, Islamophobic and misogynistic statements and is happy to peddle all manner of dangerous conspiracy theories. ABC knew this when it greenlighted the Roseanne reboot. ABC knew this when it quickly renewed the reboot for a second season, buoyed, no doubt, by the shows strong ratings.
The cast, the writers and the producers knew what Ms. Barr stood for when they agreed to work on the show. Everyone involved made a decision to support the show despite its co-creators racism. They decided that their career ambitions, or desire to return to network television, or financial interests would best be served by looking the other way. It was only when Ms. Barr became an immediate liability that everyone involved finally looked at her racism and dealt with it directly.
...
Ms. Barr was free to speak her mind, but she was not free from consequences. Now that she is reaping those consequences, many people are praising ABC and its swift action. But there is no nobility in what anyone involved in Roseanne has done at any point during the reboots trajectory. Certainly, I empathize with all of the people who are now out of work, particularly those in the trades the grips, best boys, camera people, production assistants and others who are not famous faces. But I also question what kind of empathy the decision makers had for the targets of Ms. Barrs hateful rhetoric as they supported this show and her. They seemingly had none. Even at the recent network upfronts, ABC executives were joking about Ms. Barrs Twitter feed.
Channing Dungey, the president of ABC Entertainment, said in a statement, Roseannes Twitter statement is abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values, and we have decided to cancel her show. Bob Iger, the chairman and chief executive of Disney, ABCs parent company, said, There was only one thing to do here, and that was the right thing. The cast member and producer Sara Gilbert lamented the shows demise and said, Roseannes recent comments about Valerie Jarrett, and so much more, are abhorrent and do not reflect the beliefs of our cast and crew or anyone associated with the show.
All of these statements sound conscientious and righteous. These statements make it seem as if ABC is invested in doing the right thing. The statements make it seem as if the cast and crew are nothing like the shows star. These statements are but part of an elaborate and lucrative illusion. ABC is the same network that shelved an episode of Blackish because it addressed the N.F.L. anthem protests.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/opinion/roseanne-canceled-abc-racist-tweets.html
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,323 posts)Crutchez_CuiBono
(7,725 posts)We just have to keep flushing. And flushing......and flushing these people out of the reins of power. When we get it back, no more patty cakes. We have too much to make up for just to get back to pre dt days. Why can't we just pass an omni bill putting all actions of djt on hiatus and returning America to status quo before this ugliness all happened? INCLUDING the Supreme Court Justice. Gorsuch needs to go. He came in under a cloud. Justice Obama has a nice ring to it. IMAGINE.
Solly Mack
(90,762 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)That sounds like they were being so sensitive for the deplorables without having to have a major incident (like the Roseanne statement that was finally too much for them). Yet to shelve Roseanne, they waited until she'd done something completely outrageous. Very fishy indeed.
ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)I think ABC was willing to stoop to the deplorables' level to gain viewers. It wasn't about looking the other way; rather, they thought they could moderate the racism. They played with fire and got burned. Do they deserve applause for that?
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)They were using her nasty nature to appeal to a new audience of deplorables (and normal folk who were enticed by her racy reputation). I see no difference between the media spotlighting tRump's contentiousness over the last couple of years just to capture their audience's attention and what ABC did with Roseanne.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)ABC happily gave Trump massive uncritical coverage.
All the talk of values overlooks the fact that the corporate media only values their stock valuation.
msongs
(67,394 posts)dung heap, is the show some sort of balanced educational experience in regard to human behavior? that's the element that ought to be applied to all the staff and workers actually making the show.