NBC fires Donald Trump

Nov 28, 2007
10,686
0
0
MarsAtlas said:
Maybe now he can focus on coming in ahead of Bobby Jindal, Lindsay Graham and Ronald McDonald in the primaries.

Edit: Also isn't he trying to sue a big media company because somebody said something negative about him? I think it was actually within the NBC network. Not sure why you would continue to employ a guy who is suing your business.
He's in the process of suing Univision, as they've refused to air the Miss Universe pageant because of his remarks. According to Trump, they broke contract or something like that.
 

Imperioratorex Caprae

Henchgoat Emperor
May 15, 2010
5,499
0
0
Kopikatsu said:
thebobmaster said:
"I like Mexico. I love the Mexican people. I do business with the Mexican people, but you have people coming through the border that are from all over. And they're bad. They're really bad... You have people coming in, and I'm not just saying Mexicans, I'm talking about people that are from all over that are killers and rapists and they're coming into this country."
Uh... what's wrong with that statement? It's absolutely true.

The data, released by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Robert W. Goodlatte at the beginning of a hearing with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Sarah Saldana, also showed that the 30,558 criminal aliens ICE knowingly released back into the community in 2014 had amassed nearly 80,000 convictions, including 250 homicides, 186 kidnappings and 373 sexual assaults.



Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/14/feds-releasing-illegal-immigrant-rapists-murderers/#ixzz3eVFhMhvf
There are a /lot/ of reasons to want to disassociate yourself with Trump, but that comment isn't one of them.
Its a poorly handled situation, but it shows me how some institutions want to remain willfully ignorant to the statistics of a situation. Trump had every right to say what he said, as its backed up by the numbers (and in no way did he imply all illegals are criminals). NBC also had every right to terminate contracts, though it seems a petty waste to do it under these circumstances.
I'm not against people having rights to be here at all, but the way this country handles immigration is bass ackwards and it seems more of a crime to bypass the people who've worked their butts off to make the system work for them and immigrate through the proper channels.
I don't necessarily agree with or like Trump, but I also don't agree with the way NBC handled this.
 

Kyrian007

Officially no longer the Enemy of the People
Legacy
Apr 6, 2020
2,145
168
68
Kansas
Country
U.S.A.
Gender
Male
I can add a little to this, there are some legal issues for NBC to consider that have nothing to do with any racist comments. I work in broadcasting, and there is a law that requires broadcasters to offer equal and/or fair time to candidates. This doesn't apply to say, news coverage. But if you sell a commercial to one candidate at "x" price and his opponent wants to buy the same amount of ad space, you are required to sell that time at "x."

Now say a host or contributor who is on the air on your station runs for office. Some district courts could see that as "free air time" even if the election isn't even talked about or mentioned. Meaning you may have to offer free time to all opponents. And ad revenue from an election cycle is super lucrative. The communications company I work for doesn't take chances with the legality. My company took a contributor to one of our programs off the air when he ran for public office. Actually we had legal draw up a document he (our contributor) signed agreeing not to talk politics or the election on the air, and we took it to his opponent asking him to sign it and waive his appearance on that show only from the legal requirement. And the opponent refused to do so, preferring that we just take him off the air.

Now that was at a local level. NBC could more easily than my company fight a decision against them, and as a national broadcaster different rules apply. However NBC may have figured, as did the company I work for, that a simple solution is better in the long run than a long and drawn out legal battle.
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,489
0
0
Well, that quoted tangeant there seemed to trail off from 'responsible immigration handling' and more onto 'blaming Mexicans for problems'. But let's be serious here. Donald Trump is a dick, AND a clueless rich guy. His campaigning to become President is a joke and I doubt he'll have anymore success than JEB.
 

Jingle Fett

New member
Sep 13, 2011
379
0
0
One thing I think you guys should keep in consideration is the fact that NBC Universal is the owner of fucking Telemundo. Telemundo is a broadcast channel aimed at latinos, and a pretty major one at that. Mexico alone has the 11th largest population on the planet (more than a third of the US population). Kind of bad for business to keep around the guy who made sweeping racist generalizations about a big chunk of your audience...
 

Hyperstorm

New member
Nov 27, 2013
61
0
0
There is a very fine line between free speech and hate speech in this case and while Trump is entitled to his opinions so is NBC entitled to distance themselves from someone if they do not share those opinions or if it in some way damages their image.

I really feel sorry for those charities that will no longer benefit from The Celebrity Apprentice though should NBC decide to cancel the show.
 

Hyperstorm

New member
Nov 27, 2013
61
0
0
There is a very fine line between free speech and hate speech in this case and while Trump is entitled to his opinions so is NBC entitled to distance themselves from someone if they do not share those opinions or if it in some way damages their image.

I really feel sorry for those charities that will no longer benefit from The Celebrity Apprentice though should NBC decide to cancel the show.
 

Parasondox

New member
Jun 15, 2013
3,229
0
0
Right to free speech? NBC can do what they want and decided, "Hey, this guy who we are paying, is creating some hateful comments about Mexicans and alienating a large group of people. That's not a good thing at all".

I laugh when that defence is being used to defend a hateful arsehole.
 

AJvsRonin

New member
Nov 11, 2010
119
0
0
People keep confounding this and other people losing their jobs in these scenarios as an issue of free speech.

When you openly wear your label of who you work for you do not get to claim freedom of speech while you wear that label.

My Facebook account does not say who I work for nor is it in anyway linked, I don't even "follow" the business. I can say what I like there so long as I'm complying with NDA's etc.

My LinkedIn* account very clearly states who I work for and many potential clients can see me there. I have to watch what I say there as I'm not just representing me, I'm representing my employers too. I don't have to be on LinkedIn, or I can not say on there who I work for, and in that case it's no different than Facebook.
But if people are paying attention to who you are because of who you work for then every time you open your mouth you're on the job.

If you are hired as a spokesperson you get paid a lot of money to physically embody the public front of a business. In that case you are effectively "on the job" every time you make any open public declaration for the duration of the contract.

*Side Note: I hate LinkedIn, it's filled with as much vapid fluffy navel-gazing as instagram.
 

jklinders

New member
Sep 21, 2010
945
0
0
This is the same guy who thought that "Rocking in the Free World" is a patriotic anthem suitable for a presidential run. The guy has a certain amount of business sense but he otherwise has barely the brains of a bag of hammers. We are talking about one of the bigger poster boys for the "birther" movement after all. No one in their right mind should give this idiot the time of day.

A lot of trouble crosses the border in to the US from Mexico but any presidential candidate who riles the hispanic vote like he did does so at their peril. There are not enough right wingers to elect him for all the moderates he just pissed off. He's lost before he started. The GOP delegates are going to crunch the numbers and say "uh uh, Jeb's looking a lot better than you right now, we don't want another 4 years of the dems in power especially if it's Clinton."
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
Fappy said:
He probably violated his contracted with NBC when he spoke out like that, so no, his rights weren't violated. People get fired for this sort of thing all the time. Freedom of speech =/= freedom from consequences.
Given the sudden cancellations of Honey Boo Boo and 19 Kids and Counting on TLC, and Jeremy Clarkson being fired from Top Gear, it seems there's an aspect of every TV show contract which states the network can cancel the show or fire the person at any time if they feel it is a threat to their brand name or reputation. Which totally makes sense--it could mean disaster for them if they're contractually obligated to stick with the person if they have some kind of meltdown. And as you said, freedom of speech is not the same as freedom of consequences from your speech. NBC isn't saying Trump can't say what he wants, they're simply saying they refuse to do business with him due to what he said. And it is within their rights to not do business with him for that reason--speech is not protected against such discrimination.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
Dynast Brass said:
Lilani said:
Fappy said:
He probably violated his contracted with NBC when he spoke out like that, so no, his rights weren't violated. People get fired for this sort of thing all the time. Freedom of speech =/= freedom from consequences.
Given the sudden cancellations of Honey Boo Boo and 19 Kids and Counting on TLC, and Jeremy Clarkson being fired from Top Gear, it seems there's an aspect of every TV show contract which states the network can cancel the show or fire the person at any time if they feel it is a threat to their brand name or reputation. Which totally makes sense--it could mean disaster for them if they're contractually obligated to stick with the person if they have some kind of meltdown. And as you said, freedom of speech is not the same as freedom of consequences from your speech. NBC isn't saying Trump can't say what he wants, they're simply saying they refuse to do business with him due to what he said. And it is within their rights to not do business with him for that reason--speech is not protected against such discrimination.
I'm a little shocked these same people weren't raging on behalf of the unfair treatment of Tiger Woods by his sponsors. I mean, surely his sex life is of even less moment than the expressed views of a presidential candidate, right?

Yet there was odd silence on that one, except for some mocking laughter.
Well, what people rage about depends entirely on how justified they feel it is. Wood's wife straight up attacked him and his car, but nobody thought to be mad at her or his sponsors because they felt he had done badly, or at least worse than them. It's the same reason nobody gets mad about prison rape--people feel it is justified enough that it can be overlooked.

But as for the sponsors, it's the same as this Trump thing, and it's how all sponsorships are. A sponsor is in the position of highest power--they're the one giving the money and the prestige of their favor and brand recognition. If the person they're sponsoring becomes a threat to their brand, it's both within their power and a wise business decision to stop giving that support. That's just the nature of the relationship. Sponsors are not obligated to go out of their way to stand up for those they sponsor if they don't want to, that's the nature of the relationship and what the sponsored agree to when they make deals with sponsors.
 

gigastar

Insert one-liner here.
Sep 13, 2010
4,419
0
0
NBC cant 'fire' Trump because he doesnt even work for them.

What theyve done is terminate thier partnership with The Trump Organisation.

Kopikatsu said:
thebobmaster said:
"I like Mexico. I love the Mexican people. I do business with the Mexican people, but you have people coming through the border that are from all over. And they're bad. They're really bad... You have people coming in, and I'm not just saying Mexicans, I'm talking about people that are from all over that are killers and rapists and they're coming into this country."
Uh... what's wrong with that statement? It's absolutely true.

The data, released by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Robert W. Goodlatte at the beginning of a hearing with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Sarah Saldana, also showed that the 30,558 criminal aliens ICE knowingly released back into the community in 2014 had amassed nearly 80,000 convictions, including 250 homicides, 186 kidnappings and 373 sexual assaults.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/14/feds-releasing-illegal-immigrant-rapists-murderers/#ixzz3eVFhMhvf
There are a /lot/ of reasons to want to disassociate yourself with Trump, but that comment isn't one of them.
I think its being used as a pretext. The big broadcasters play a big role in US politics, and its not a stretch to imagine that NBC may not want Trump to be in the final running for presidency.

Also, true or not there are just some things you dont say on a national broadcast when youre trying to appease as many people as possible. Though one assumes there arent many republicans of spanish ethnicity anyway.
 

FPLOON

Your #1 Source for the Dino Porn
Jul 10, 2013
12,531
0
0
I feel like NBC is missing the opportunity to possibly have the first President to [still] have a running television series on cable TV... I mean, do they not realize how much money they might be missing out on? Plus, even if Trump doesn't win, the show will still be making the moneyz and shit, so not even the long-term plans have any faults to my knowledge... unless there's some kind of "unwritten rule" about Presidents having and/or running their own shows, let alone any running under the "reality show" umbrella, so maybe that's that case or something like that...
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
It's hard for me to worry about Donald Trump. Aside from personal dislike of the man and his arrogant, self-promoting ways, his personal wealth means that if he wants a podium to disperse his opinions to the public, he'll almost certainly get one.

I get far more concerned when people whose persona is less a part of the work they do get threatened in that work for stray comments they make on Twitter or podcasts or even allegedly private conversations, comments that actually have little or nothing to do with their professional life or performance.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
Besides the stunt that was firing him over the asinine comments, isn't there a conflict of interests of being a spokesman of a corporation and running for president of a country? Wouldn't he had to distance himself from his job if he decided to continue forward with his candidature?

And if NBC just plainly decided to fire him, I would say its about time. He seems like he is using his toupee to hide the hole on his head. Yes, he is free to say whatever he wants, but his employer is also free to fire his ass if they feel he doesn't represent their interests...