Wendy Williams . . . I can't even

[L&Lfan]

I myself refuse to watch the Connors after the way Roseanne was treated. I don’t miss it a bit.
And Will and Grace seems to be imploding with the cast barely speaking to each other and recent episodes getting horrible reviews even from the gay press.

 

[John VN]

Over morning/evening news and prime time? What are you basing "profitable" on?

Afternoon Judge Judy @ $47,000,000/year, recording 52 days/year, est. worth $400,000,000.00 is pretty impressive to me.

 

[sam_gordon]

Afternoon Judge Judy @ $47,000,000/year, recording 52 days/year, est. worth $400,000,000.00 is pretty impressive to me.

That has nothing to do with what's the most profitable time period for a TV station. I know some executives at a local TV station and they said by far they make the most money in morning news, followed by evening news and prime time. The afternoon time period does have less of a cost, but the amount per ad is less (by a large margin) and often the number of ads are less because the syndicated shows often have their own ads included as part of the program. If there's a soap opera from the network in the time frame, there's even less local spot availability.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

I cut the cord with my cable and limit what I take in now, even less social media only back on here planning Disney trip, and had never heard it before. Yes feel great I did that and only just this week or so heard the term "woke" also. I just looked into cancel culture and read that high school and college kids are doing it to each other now?? Where they are calling for massive "shunning"? That sounds even more disturbing. I am so glad I am out of the loop now as social media seems to bring out the worst in people. Calling for mass shunning sounds so disturbing unless it's maybe someone really horribly bad, but from what I am hearing it is for the tiniest things, sounds like bullying and mass abuse.

 

[Julie's Haircut]

Didn't read past page 1. Just wanted to say that when I first saw Wendy Williams on TV about 10 years ago I commented





I always preferred the ORIGINAL Wendy Williams. RIP. Lead "singer" of the shock rock band The Plasmatics.





Wendy O. Williams was awesome in this film.




With Pat Ast as the Matron and Sybil Danning as the Warden.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

I wish everyone did that. Nothing more weak and just sad, then when someone gives an opinion. And folks whine and complain.... then that person says. Oh well. I’m sorry.
BS. Don’t apologise. Double down and tell those spineless folks. To eff off. Don’t ever back down from ones feelings or opinions.

How is calling a powerful person out on what you feel to be an unfair or uneducated opinion "spineless"? That's called "speaking truth to power". Spineless would be saying "Well, she's a rich famous author. I guess we should just agree with her or at least keep quiet".

As for not backing down, what if your feeling or opinion is based on incorrect information? In a previous thread, I said I wasn't going to listen to Piers Morgan because I don't abide the opinions of people involved in the hacking of a dead girl's phone. Because I thought he was the editor of the paper involved in hacking Milly Dowler's phone. Turns out I was confusing Morgan's paper (The Daily Mail), with the paper involved in the hacking (News of the World). While I still don't like Morgan for other reasons, I backed down from my statement because it was factually incorrect.

 

[Julie's Haircut]

Don Rickles was hilarious.

I am not asking to censure anyone. I told you point blank I don't agree with cancel culture. My way of silencing Wendy is by not watching her. Unfortunately she keeps popping up in other places so I see her. And yes, I am sick of seeing her. That is it. If she gets canceled so be it, I won't be sad.

I saw Don Rickles back in 1986 during my first trip to Las Vegas.

The audience was uncomfortable with his jokes, there was only tepid reaction, and more than a few walked out. I don't know what they expected. He was already long known for raunchy humor. Then again, maybe he should have toned it down when he realized what type of audience was there that night.

I'm only vaguely aware that Wendy Williams has made some controversial statements recently. Don't know any details. I haven't watched more than a combined 30 minutes of her show over the years. Usually I saw her gushing over her celebrity guests.

 

[CdnCarrie]

I myself refuse to watch the Connors after the way Roseanne was treated. I don’t miss it a bit.
And Will and Grace seems to be imploding with the cast barely speaking to each other and recent episodes getting horrible reviews even from the gay press.

Yes Roseanne was the victim in that situation.

 

[Disneypro1]

How is calling a powerful person out on what you feel to be an unfair or uneducated opinion "spineless"? That's called "speaking truth to power". Spineless would be saying "Well, she's a rich famous author. I guess we should just agree with her or at least keep quiet".

As for not backing down, what if your feeling or opinion is based on incorrect information? In a previous thread, I said I wasn't going to listen to Piers Morgan because I don't abide the opinions of people involved in the hacking of a dead girl's phone. Because I thought he was the editor of the paper involved in hacking Milly Dowler's phone. Turns out I was confusing Morgan's paper (The Daily Mail), with the paper involved in the hacking (News of the World). While I still don't like Morgan for other reasons, I backed down from my statement because it was factually incorrect.

What you described is a mistake. Not what I meant.
It’s spineless because it’s ones opinion. When anyone. Not just a famous person says something that is their opinion. And then folks whine and complain about it being offensive or some other meaningless complaint. Then alot of people then say. Oh. Well I didn’t mean that. Sorry. When they DID mean it. My point is- don’t appease and apologise because a group of people Or person wants you to. We all have our opinions and should never apologise for those. If I disagree with ones opinion... why would I want to silence that person. Or even ask them to apologise? That’s silly. Disagree and move on..

 

[CdnCarrie]

What you described is a mistake. Not what I meant.
It’s spineless because it’s ones opinion. When anyone. Not just a famous person says something that is their opinion. And then folks whine and complain about it being offensive or some other meaningless complaint. Then alot of people then say. Oh. Well I didn’t mean that. Sorry. When they DID mean it. My point is- don’t appease and apologise because a group of people Or person wants you to. We all have our opinions and should never apologise for those. If I disagree with ones opinion... why would I want to silence that person. Or even ask them to apologise? That’s silly. Disagree and move on..

Even if that opinion is racist or of danger to others?

 

[FlightlessDuck]

It’s spineless because it’s ones opinion.

You are saying that going back on your opinion is spineless? I thought you meant the people who complained were spineless.

 

[Disneypro1]

Even if that opinion is racist or of danger to others?

Yes. Who defines that? Certainly not ones opinion. That’s what free speech means. Whether we agree with it or not. What one person says is racist. Another may not.
They guy at the street corner preaching the bible or the guy preaching to hate say short people both have the right to do that. But we have the choice to listen or not. Or agree with whomever. And not apologise.

 

[Disneypro1]

You are saying that going back on your opinion is spineless? I thought you meant the people who complained were spineless.

I’m not asking for an apology. I don’t care what someone’s feelings are about anything or to me. I would never want or expect someone to apologise for their opinion. Nor would I expect them to ask me for an apology. We are talking about people demanding apologies for opinions or statements famous people have made. People even ask for Vince Vaughn to explain why he say by Trump. Or Ellen to explain why she is friends with Bush. That’s insane. It’s no ones business. You can be friends with a person you disagree with 100% politically. Sadly some think you can’t. So yes. People that want apologies or explanations for an opinion is spineless. They can’t handle someone disagreeing with them and that’s not right. Don’t ever go back on ones opinion just to appease. Apologising is even worse. Just to appease.

 

[CdnCarrie]

Yes. Who defines that? Certainly not ones opinion. That’s what free speech means. Whether we agree with it or not. What one person says is racist. Another may not.
They guy at the street corner preaching the bible or the guy preaching to hate say short people both have the right to do that. But we have the choice to listen or not. Or agree with whomever. And not apologise.

Saying something derogatory about a group of human beings based on skin color, religion, sexual preferences or ethnicity is being a bigot.
There is no grey area.
That is not someone’s “opinion “. That is not free speech.
That is hate speech.
Even kindergarteners can understand this concept. It’s not hard.

Who defines that?
Society.
As a society we have agreed it’s wrong to make derogatory comments about people’s ethnicity, sexual preferences, religion or colour of skin.
Sorry you missed the memo.its called being a god person.

 

[Disneypro1]

Saying something derogatory about a group of human beings based on skin color, religion, sexual preferences or ethnicity is racist.
There is no grey area.
That is not someone’s “opinion “. That is not free speech.
That is hate speech.
Even kindergarteners can understand this concept. It’s not hard.

Who defines that?
Society.
As a society we have agreed it’s wrong to make derogatory comments about people’s ethnicity, sexual preferences, religion or colour of skin.
Sorry you missed the memo.its called being a god person.

I think the part you are missing is the Bill of Rights. Society doesn’t decide what speech is acceptable or not. Not in a free society. Nor would anyone want that. Hate speech or any speech is protected. So if someone wants to be in a nation where speech is regulated. I could name a few..... No one is arguing right or wrong. Yet the freedom to express it.
The problem is you have a segment of society that labels people as a racist or etc. Just because they disagree with the opposing persons political opinion. It’s their way to silence an opposing viewpoint. When nothing that was said was racist or etc.

 

[DLgal]

I think the part you are missing is the Bill of Rights. Society doesn’t decide what speech is acceptable or not. Not in a free society. Nor would anyone want that. Hate speech or any speech is protected. So if someone wants to be in a nation where speech is regulated. I could name a few..... No one is arguing right or wrong. Yet the freedom to express it.

You might want to brush up on what constitutes "Free Speech." It doesn't mean you can say whatever you want without consequence. It literally only means that THE GOVERNMENT cannot silence you from speaking out by creating laws that prohibit you from doing so.

 

[Disneypro1]

You might want to brush up on what constitutes "Free Speech." It doesn't mean you can say whatever you want without consequence. It literally only means that THE GOVERNMENT cannot silence you from speaking out by creating laws that prohibit you from doing so.

Didn’t say otherwise. Yet there are some that would want to create those laws.
Too many people want to silence an opposing view. Instead of just ignoring it. Or turning channel. Radio dial. Etc.
But remember. WE are the government. It is not an entity. That’s the whole idea of the Bill of Rights. Not allowing it to become an entity and encroach. Government doesn’t give us our rights. Those we were born with.

 

[msjprincess]

I think the part you are missing is the Bill of Rights. Society doesn’t decide what speech is acceptable or not. Not in a free society. Nor would anyone want that. Hate speech or any speech is protected. So if someone wants to be in a nation where speech is regulated. I could name a few..... No one is arguing right or wrong. Yet the freedom to express it.
The problem is you have a segment of society that labels people as a racist or etc. Just because they disagree with the opposing persons political opinion. It’s their way to silence an opposing viewpoint. When nothing that was said was racist or etc.

Is Wendy Williams being prosecuted by the government for what she said?

 

[Disneypro1]

Is Wendy Williams being prosecuted by the government for what she said?

That’s my point. There is a segment of society that would want that to happen. Regulate speech. Or thought police.
My point was. It’s even as bad though that people would want her taken off of the air for free speech. That is just wrong. Agree or not with her.
I don’t even watch her. But nothing she could say would bother me. Her right to. Life goes on.

 

[ronandannette]

Saying something derogatory about a group of human beings based on skin color, religion, sexual preferences or ethnicity is racist.
There is no grey area.
That is not someone’s “opinion “. That is not free speech.
That is hate speech.
Even kindergarteners can understand this concept. It’s not hard.

Who defines that?
Society.
As a society we have agreed it’s wrong to make derogatory comments about people’s ethnicity, sexual preferences, religion or colour of skin.
Sorry you missed the memo.its called being a god person.

What? You do know that the term "racist" actually has a definition - one that includes at least some reference to race. You might even be able to lump ethnicity in there, but really, ethnicity and/or nationality does not determine your "race". Being derogatory, discriminatory, disrespectful and hateful towards people based on their religion, creed, sexuality and/or any other sundry reason for hating is called bigotry. It's all terribly wrong but it's not all racist, and to say so is just, well, silly.