Shocked, shocked!

  • Thread starter Thread starter didymus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

didymus

Guest
Gilbert Gottfried has been fired from his job as the annoying duck on the AFLAC commercials for tweeting insensitive comments about the Japanese tsunami.
Come on already. AFLAC, or their ad agency cannot have not known that he is known for offensive humor.
This is the same hypocrisy as the producers of 2.5 Men firing Charlie Sheen after letting him work for years without addressing any of his problems.
All of a sudden they’re surprised?
 
Why is it hyprocricy? Being “on the edge” and “over the line” are TWO differnt things. Edgy comedians are often funny and politically saavy. They are a good benefit. But sometimes they do get too big for their britches and SHOULD be fired. I say YAY to the managment. You can be funny, and even edgy, without being a complete a-hole.
 
You know, I am no fan of dirty jokes. I don’t think they’re funny. I think the comments made by Mr. Gottfrried on Twitter were offensive.

And yet, I don’t think that he should have been fired. Why didn’t Aflack simply say that Mr. Gottfried’s comments were in no way those of Aflack?

Oh it’s EASY to get all huffed up and virtuous when we see people who say the ‘wrong thing’ be punished.

But what will happen when (and it is when, and indeed it is NOW) the ‘wrong’ thing being said is really right? Really true?

What will happen when you speak the truth about abortion being grave sin, and you get fired because your comments ‘offended’ people?
 
I didn’t even realize Gilbert Gottfried was the voice of the Aflac duck, but now it makes perfect sense!!
 
Tiger Woods and Michael Phelps both lost sponsorships for their actions (although Tiger’s were much more severe and numerous than Phelps’). The whole point of sponsorship is to associate a brand with a celebrity. So when the celebrity harms his/her image, and a brand is linked to that, the brand itself is bound to suffer.

That being said, the OP is correct - Gottfried is the same man who made 9/11 jokes at a comedy show less than 3 weeks after that horrific day, and that is not uncommon for his line of humor. I am surprised AFLAC would hire and retain him as a spokesman considering his material. And just like Charlie Sheen, why is this the straw that broke the camel’s back? Why did it not fall for all of those other offensive comments?
 
They can fire him if they want. At least in the state I live in, an employer can fire an employee for any reason as long as it is not discriminatory (due to race, gender, religion).

No one is putting him in jail for his comments - his free speech is not being denied. But if his employer wants to fire him for being a jerk, that’s their prerogative.
 
A private company has the right (within the contract they signed with a celebrity) to hire and fire spokespersons and celebrity advertisers at will.

I don’t think that the producers of 2 1/2 Men or Aflac did anything wrong. I probably would have canned both celebrities earlier, but it wasn’t my decision it was theirs.

They can hire or fire whoever they want, as long as they are within the legal bonds of whatever contract they signed with them. It is a PR and Marketing decision. When a celebrity’s behavior starts to damage your brand it is perfectly Ok to can them.

I can’t see why this is shocking at all, it’s completely normal. Should they have been fired sooner…probably, but again not our decision.
 
I’m glad he was fired. Anyone who makes light of nearly 3000 people being killed deserves what he got.
 
A little more insight, courtesy of Reuters. Apparently, AFLAC derives 75% of its revenue from Japan. Its likely this is part of the reason why they fired him now, rather than after his 9/11 comments…
 
Mumbles140 said:
A little more insight, courtesy of Reuters. Apparently, AFLAC derives 75% of its revenue from Japan. Its likely this is part of the reason why they fired him now, rather than after his 9/11 comments…
Click to expand...
Thanks for the “insightful” information there, Mumbles140.

Apparently we have here a mixture of sincere outrage and a good old fashioned pragmatic business decision. “I’m offended, but I’m VERY offended this is costing me money.”

Yes-----very “insightful” indeed. 👍😛
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top