Remember when Phil Robertson, the patriarch of TV’s “Duck Dynasty” was widely ridiculed for what were termed his politically incorrect views on homosexuality?
Boycotts of the show by companies (and one truly embarrassing one by Cracker Barrel restaurants) and some viewers ensued. The family was the punchline of every late night comedian and talk show host for weeks.
Well, now Robertson’s son is explaining exactly what transpired during the interview with GQ’s Drew Magary, and it wasn’t pretty.
The details he reveals clearly show what could be termed a “takedown” or “gotcha” interview. Or a “hit piece.” That occurs when the reporter purposely does an interview in order to make the subject(s) look bad.
While some journalists believe firmly in doing unbiased interviews, many today have an agenda. And that agenda is revealed in their writings and should determine whether an interview is granted—or not.
The GQ article was titled “What the Duck?” Although the reporter likely did not write the headline, it is a good indication Magary was there to make fun of the TV stars and their beliefs.
According to Jase Robertson (see video below), Magary came to the Robertson’s home and deliberately insulted the family by dropping f-bombs, cursing and making fun of their values. It was so ugly that all the family members except Phil Robertson left the room (that fact never made Magary’s article).
At that point the family’s publicist should have ended the interview before it ever began. It was obvious the article was going to be a hit piece designed to poke the Robertsons.
“The first statement of the whole process was, he looked at me and said, ‘Do you actually expect people to believe that you waited until you got married before you had sex?’ That was the first statement out of his mouth,” he added. “Well, I kind of looked around at the publicist and I thought, ‘Is this the interview?’ I mean, because this was just the way it came across.”
Robertson told another reporter ”That the line of questioning was meant to rile the family members and elicit controversial responses.”
How can you avoid a “takedown” interview? Well, first your PR person should know exactly who is going to interview you and what the rules are for the interview. Basic research would show the types of interviews he/she does.
In Magary’s case a quick scan of his articles titled “The Make It Stop Guide to Being An Asshole About Soccer,” “The Rise of the Asshole Sports Dad,” “Jesus, Mad Men, Pull Yourself Together” and “Lindsay Lohan’s Other Lists—Because the F— List was Just the Beginning” give a good indication of his writing and/or morals.
His article on the Robertson’s made fun of their beliefs, their lifestyle, and was filled with swear words.
The Robertsons did not need to be in GQ Magazine. A little research ahead of time could have offset the disaster that occurred in January.











MILLIONAIRE CRYBABIES
Boo-hoo. Millionaire crybabies. Waaaaaah! You want to be a homophobic hypocrite? Well, get use to the unwanted attention. The interviewer was no more harmful than a Fox News ambush “reporter.”
ROBERTSONS SAID THE WORDS
But the Robertsons still said the demeaning, degrading and inflammatory words. The reporter may have been an ass but the Robertsons were like that before he came and held their biased views long before the reporter entered their world. You don’t just start spewing those thoughts unless they are already part of your world view.
BOGUS MORAL OUTRAGE
Dear Mr. Landsberg: Thanks for posting this item. What is interesting about the “Duck Dynasty” incident is that it is part of a broader media frenzy that, by my calculation, began in the spring of 2008. This frenzy involved saturation coverage of a small number of issues: gay rights, abortion, and racism. Since early 2008 we have had weekly stories in the media, with Pearl Harbor sized-headlines, “revealing” such stunning news stories as that one of LA’s largest slumlords has un-PC views on race, that a family from rural Louisiana has un-PC views about gay rights, etc. Now, the point is not that the behavior of these individuals is acceptable, the point is why is it even news? Anyone who is really “shocked” over these stories probably believes that in “Casablanca” Claude Rains was really shocked that gambling is going on in Rick’s Cafe. For over six years much of the US media has been compulsively pretending to be shocked and stunned over stories that are not in the least bit surprising-and the question before the house is what is the real agenda of the Main Stream Media in conducting this campaign of totally bogus moral outrage?