Reruns of Cosby show are being cancelled - Page 7

Mominohio · ‎08-08-2010

On 11/21/2014 Marienkaefer2 said:
On 11/21/2014 Tinkrbl44 said:
On 11/20/2014 Shelbelle said:
Lately it had been coming on Sat and Sun on TV Land for several hours at a time. I always enjoyed it, there was always a moral to be learned in each episode. I wonder if Dr Cosby always practiced what he said in his show. I also wonder what the Cosby kids and Phylicia Rashad think of their mentor and leader now.

It was a SCRIPTED show and he was just playing a part. ${#emotions_dlg.unsure}$

True, but he had a big part in the development of the show as it continued. It wasn't just his role as the dad. I don't think its right to dismiss the show because of his actions outside of it. The show is widely recognized as groundbreaking in how it portrayed a black family, and there were a lot of life lessons portrayed for ANY family. Many people related to the family and children dynamics. There is a reason why it was so hugely popular.

Prior to the Cosby show, African American families were portrayed in sitcoms as less educated, living in poverty (think What's Happening, Sanford and Son, Good Times) and often one parent families. Cosby, and to some extent, The Jefferson's showed another side of life where blacks, whether educated or hard working, climbed the economic ladder. The Cosby show was the first in my recollection, that showed an upper middle class, two parent, black family, without the racial stereotypes being used to get the laughs (like in the Jeffersons). It was groundbreaking indeed, and to have it's legacy tarnished with this is sad.

JeanLouiseFinch · ‎10-03-2011

Since when is it OK for someone to lose a source of income, based on accusation alone? This is a total knee-jerk reaction, and it's wrong. Bill Cosby hasn't been formally charged or found guilty of anything.

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

On 11/21/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
Since when is it OK for someone to lose a source of income, based on accusation alone? This is a total knee-jerk reaction, and it's wrong. Bill Cosby hasn't been formally charged or found guilty of anything.

The source of income for an actor or other public figure is based on the perception of the public. The network won't run a show if it causes too much controversy. It's that simple.

It's not like he was digging ditches.

And it's not like he needs the money either.

I feel a lot more deeply for all the unemployed or underemployed "regular" people - as the holidays approach.

JeanLouiseFinch · ‎10-03-2011

On 11/21/2014 terrier3 said:
On 11/21/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
Since when is it OK for someone to lose a source of income, based on accusation alone? This is a total knee-jerk reaction, and it's wrong. Bill Cosby hasn't been formally charged or found guilty of anything.

The source of income for an actor or other public figure is based on the perception of the public. The network won't run a show if it causes too much controversy. It's that simple.

It's not like he was digging ditches.

And it's not like he needs the money either.

I feel a lot more deeply for all the unemployed or underemployed "regular" people - as the holidays approach.

It doesn't matter who anyone is or what they're way of earning a living is. The public has no right to decide who gets to continue in a particular income arrangement or decide who has enough. Again, nothing has been proven here. The unfortunate circumstances of an unemployed or underemployed person has nothing to do with this either.

Topaz Gem · ‎03-10-2010

I think that the show will be back once this controversy blows over. The reruns of that show got great ratings, so eventually they'll bring it back, possibly very slowly at first.

"Summer afternoon-summer afternoon; to me those have always been the two most beautiful words in the English language." ~Henry James

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

On 11/21/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
On 11/21/2014 terrier3 said:
On 11/21/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
Since when is it OK for someone to lose a source of income, based on accusation alone? This is a total knee-jerk reaction, and it's wrong. Bill Cosby hasn't been formally charged or found guilty of anything.

The source of income for an actor or other public figure is based on the perception of the public. The network won't run a show if it causes too much controversy. It's that simple.

It's not like he was digging ditches.

And it's not like he needs the money either.

I feel a lot more deeply for all the unemployed or underemployed "regular" people - as the holidays approach.

It doesn't matter who anyone is or what they're way of earning a living is. The public has no right to decide who gets to continue in a particular income arrangement or decide who has enough. Again, nothing has been proven here. The unfortunate circumstances of an unemployed or underemployed person has nothing to do with this either.

The public INDIRECTLY affects what's on TV. That's what Nielsen ratings are for.

The networks retain the rights to pull any show at any time for any reason.

If enough people object (Ex.: DD guys) - the shows come back.

If there isn't enough public support - Honey BooBoo, Paula Deen - the shows go away forever.

Nothing is a guarantee when you are a public entertainer...it's not like belonging to the Ironworkers Union!

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

On 11/21/2014 Topaz Gem said:
I think that the show will be back once this controversy blows over. The reruns of that show got great ratings, so eventually they'll bring it back, possibly very slowly at first.

The re-runs attract people over 65.

Not the demographic that networks look for.

adelle38 · ‎03-09-2010

On 11/21/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
On 11/21/2014 terrier3 said:
On 11/21/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
Since when is it OK for someone to lose a source of income, based on accusation alone? This is a total knee-jerk reaction, and it's wrong. Bill Cosby hasn't been formally charged or found guilty of anything.

The source of income for an actor or other public figure is based on the perception of the public. The network won't run a show if it causes too much controversy. It's that simple.

It's not like he was digging ditches.

And it's not like he needs the money either.

I feel a lot more deeply for all the unemployed or underemployed "regular" people - as the holidays approach.

It doesn't matter who anyone is or what they're way of earning a living is. The public has no right to decide who gets to continue in a particular income arrangement or decide who has enough. Again, nothing has been proven here. The unfortunate circumstances of an unemployed or underemployed person has nothing to do with this either.

The public always decides who's going to earn a living in the entertainment business. If people don't want to see, you'll lose your income.

It's always a victory for me when I remember why I entered a room.

Tinkrbl44 · ‎08-23-2010

On 11/20/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
On 11/20/2014 adelle38 said:
On 11/20/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
At this point I really believe that BC is being railroaded.

By whom? Based on what evidence? These women have nothing to gain from this.

By the media.

The interview that's being played all over the airwaves tonight is a total spin. Prior to the interview BC and CC had an agreement on what would be discussed. This isn't unusual for celebrities to do such a thing. When the interviewer broached the subject BC replied something to the effect of "We aren't talking about that". Based on the prior agreement, BC asked him to show his journalistic integrity and eliminate that portion from what was going to be on TV and the interviewer replied that he didn't think he could do that. So now all the network teasers are making it look like BC has something to hide. Not cool.

Oh stop with the "Cosby up on a pedestal" stuff ......

This is a HUGE controversy right now and BC is right in the middle of it. ANY reporter would give BC a chance to say something about it but Cosby just sat there like an embarrassed, guilty man. ${#emotions_dlg.thumbdown}$

JeanLouiseFinch · ‎10-03-2011

On 11/21/2014 adelle38 said:
On 11/21/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
On 11/21/2014 terrier3 said:
On 11/21/2014 JeanLouiseFinch said:
Since when is it OK for someone to lose a source of income, based on accusation alone? This is a total knee-jerk reaction, and it's wrong. Bill Cosby hasn't been formally charged or found guilty of anything.

The source of income for an actor or other public figure is based on the perception of the public. The network won't run a show if it causes too much controversy. It's that simple.

It's not like he was digging ditches.

And it's not like he needs the money either.

I feel a lot more deeply for all the unemployed or underemployed "regular" people - as the holidays approach.

It doesn't matter who anyone is or what they're way of earning a living is. The public has no right to decide who gets to continue in a particular income arrangement or decide who has enough. Again, nothing has been proven here. The unfortunate circumstances of an unemployed or underemployed person has nothing to do with this either.

The public always decides who's going to earn a living in the entertainment business. If people don't want to see, you'll lose your income.

If done legitimately. I totally agree, if a person makes a rotten movie, for instance, and it flops then that's the risk the actor took and his/her income will be affected. That's a whole lot different than taking away his OPPORTUNITY to make an income.