Bob's Grudge

[The Pyramids]

Here is more of the same on Rosie O'Donnell, but also another take on why 'Price' is not on GSN. This columm, by the way, is a great read everyday regardless of the topic.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,284975,00.html

[Jimmy Owen]

That doesn't explain why the post-Janice eps aren't on.  Why not let GSN have those?  That way Bob could make some extra scratch without the girls getting any.

They report, I decide.

[CJBojangles]

Parkinson made sure there was a stain on Barker’s legacy when she sued him for sexual harassment in 1993.

...as he did on hers.

/You knew someone was going to say it.

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'CJBojangles\' post=\'155890\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 12:30 PM\']

Parkinson made sure there was a stain on Barker’s legacy when she sued him for sexual harassment in 1993.

...as he did on hers.
[/quote]
Just on his legacy?

[BrandonFG]

My question is, how much say does Bob have over the reruns, now that he stepped down? Didn't he relinquish his EP duties, or will he still have pull as a "consultant", so to speak?

Come to think of it, I thought the reruns issue was a CBS decision?

[Timsterino]

[quote name=\'PaulD\' post=\'155882\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 08:01 AM\']
Here is more of the same on Rosie O'Donnell, but also another take on why 'Price' is not on GSN. This columm, by the way, is a great read everyday regardless of the topic.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,284975,00.html
[/quote]


The article says that before this summer Price has never been shown in re-runs which of course is BS, but it is FOX news so that is not so surprising. I sure wish these "reporters" would get their facts straight before reporting the BS tho.

[Scrabbleship]

[quote name=\'PaulD\' post=\'155882\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 08:01 AM\']
Here is more of the same on Rosie O'Donnell, but also another take on why 'Price' is not on GSN. This columm, by the way, is a great read everyday regardless of the topic.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,284975,00.html
[/quote]

Between this and Bob's revisionist history to try to void out 58ish years of NOT caring about animals and NOT asking people to have their pets spayed or neutered, I have little respect for Bob's off-camera personality. He's just another bitter old man who is on a power trip and who likes to pretend bad things he did or people he wronged never existed, and those sorts of people are NOT high in my book.

If every celebrity who decided to ditch fur/go veg(geteri)an decided to cover their tracks from their past like Bob did, so much of TV and film would be un-airable because of their objections it wouldn't be funny.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'Scrabbleship\' post=\'155898\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 05:24 PM\']Between this and Bob's revisionist history to try to void out 58ish years of NOT caring about animals and NOT asking people to have their pets spayed or neutered, I have little respect for Bob's off-camera personality. [/quote]
While it's fairly well established by now that off-camera-Bob wasn't all sweetness and light, I think this is pretty harsh.  In the first place, every indication is that Bob has cared about animals all his life.  The fact that he took up his passionate crusade relatively late in life shouldn't count against him, and if he can use whatever power he has to prevent past fur-trimmed episodes from seeing the light of day, why shouldn't he?  If anything, it shows a consistency to his beliefs that he's willing to fight that hard.  And don't forget, this whole thing more or less started with him walking away from a lucrative and high-profile gig with the Miss Universe folks over what many at the time probably thought was a silly and frivolous issue.  I don't care how well-off you are, that takes guts.

His off-camera personality is one thing,  but seeing his support of animal rights as anything but honest and heartfelt seems way out of line.

[Scrabbleship]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'155903\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 06:12 PM\']
[quote name=\'Scrabbleship\' post=\'155898\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 05:24 PM\']Between this and Bob's revisionist history to try to void out 58ish years of NOT caring about animals and NOT asking people to have their pets spayed or neutered, I have little respect for Bob's off-camera personality. [/quote]
While it's fairly well established by now that off-camera-Bob wasn't all sweetness and light, I think this is pretty harsh.  In the first place, every indication is that Bob has cared about animals all his life.  The fact that he took up his passionate crusade relatively late in life shouldn't count against him, and if he can use whatever power he has to prevent past fur-trimmed episodes from seeing the light of day, why shouldn't he?  If anything, it shows a consistency to his beliefs that he's willing to fight that hard.  And don't forget, this whole thing more or less started with him walking away from a lucrative and high-profile gig with the Miss Universe folks over what many at the time probably thought was a silly and frivolous issue.  I don't care how well-off you are, that takes guts.

His off-camera personality is one thing,  but seeing his support of animal rights as anything but honest and heartfelt seems way out of line.
[/quote]

I am all for animal rights, however what he did is a bit too excessive. People screw up things, people make mistakes, most people live with said mistakes and mea cuelpa for them for the rest of their lives and not try to pretend if it didn't exist. Could anyone here imagine a world without The Mary Tyler Moore Show because of the fur coat in the opening in the first season, the ground beef in the grocery cart in the opening, and the fact that the characters of Mary, Lou, and Sue Ann ate meat unlike those who portrayed them?

Personally, I loathe fur and wish a pox on those who buy it and I think it should be illegal, but Bob should have lived with his mistakes like anyone else. Call me when the episode of The Golden Girls with the mink breeding B plot (contrary to the fact that the entire quartet is anti-fur) next airs.

The deal is that nobody from the same boat would do what Bob did, and coupled with his mistreatment of his former models he is a jerk, plain and simple. I hope Dian, Holly, and Janice get the upper hand, they at least have class and are not jerks and should sue Bob into bankruptcy.

[Mario500]

Will Rosie be exclaiming “Come on down!” soon to contestants?

Nope, only Rich Fields will be exclaiming that phrase, Roger Friedman (writer). Sorry, I will only believe in the network's reason for not giving the rerun rights back to Game Show Network.

[Robert Hutchinson]

[quote name=\'Scrabbleship\' post=\'155907\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 07:03 PM\']I am all for animal rights, however what he did is a bit too excessive. People screw up things, people make mistakes, most people live with said mistakes and mea cuelpa for them for the rest of their lives and not try to pretend if it didn't exist. Could anyone here imagine a world without The Mary Tyler Moore Show because of the fur coat in the opening in the first season, the ground beef in the grocery cart in the opening, and the fact that the characters of Mary, Lou, and Sue Ann ate meat unlike those who portrayed them?[/quote]
First of all, I can easily imagine a world where the MTM Show openings had those first two items edited out of them.

Second of all, did Bob raise a stink about old episodes that featured meat products?

Thirdly and lastly, you can't see where it might take things to another level when you're giving away furs as glamorous prizes that any sensible gurl would be thrilled to win?

[Scrabbleship]

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'155910\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 09:32 PM\']
[quote name=\'Scrabbleship\' post=\'155907\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 07:03 PM\']I am all for animal rights, however what he did is a bit too excessive. People screw up things, people make mistakes, most people live with said mistakes and mea cuelpa for them for the rest of their lives and not try to pretend if it didn't exist. Could anyone here imagine a world without The Mary Tyler Moore Show because of the fur coat in the opening in the first season, the ground beef in the grocery cart in the opening, and the fact that the characters of Mary, Lou, and Sue Ann ate meat unlike those who portrayed them?[/quote]
First of all, I can easily imagine a world where the MTM Show openings had those first two items edited out of them.

Second of all, did Bob raise a stink about old episodes that featured meat products?

Thirdly and lastly, you can't see where it might take things to another level when you're giving away furs as glamorous prizes that any sensible gurl would be thrilled to win?
[/quote]

1: I never noticed the former (the first season theme sucked), but every time I've seen it the meat in the cart existed.

2: Not to my knowledge, and I've lurked and such since ATGS.

3: Not in this day and age where fur is a shadow of what it once was. Any sensible girl cares about animals and would protest and beg for cash in lieu of the fur. Fur is a relic and when the old generation dies nobody will care about it anymore.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'155910\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 09:32 PM\']Thirdly and lastly, you can't see where it might take things to another level when you're giving away furs as glamorous prizes that any sensible gurl would be thrilled to win?[/quote]
[quote name=\'Scrabbleship\' post=\'155907\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 07:03 PM\']3: Not in this day and age where fur is a shadow of what it once was. Any sensible girl cares about animals and would protest and beg for cash in lieu of the fur. Fur is a relic and when the old generation dies nobody will care about it anymore.[/quote]Those are fairly wide-sweeping generalizations that you've made, and you're in no position to make them. ("Scrabbleship," not Mr. Hutchinson. Robert is on the money here.)

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'Scrabbleship\' post=\'155912\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 10:13 PM\']1: I never noticed the former (the first season theme sucked), but every time I've seen it the meat in the cart existed.[/quote]
Robert was addressing the hypothetical tone of your original question.  As far as I know, both images have always remained in the show's opening; he's just saying that if the fur and the meat in the opening really presented a problem, it would be a simple thing to remove them.

The difference between reruns of MTM and reruns of TPIR are so dramatic as to make the analogy pretty weak anyway. If you want to pretend not to recognize that, you're just being obstinate.  The bottom line is that Barker has the power, and whether he's acting out of malice, out of fear of embarrassment or out of a genuine and sincere believe that he's doing right by his four-legged friends, it's still his power to wield.

[bclark71]

I suppose that, since we have heard of certain celebrities not clearing their appearances on other shows, Bob could simply not clear his appearances on any Price Is Rights that he so chooses (like, say, the first 5,500 or so).

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'155893\' date=\'Jun 23 2007, 03:24 PM\']
My question is, how much say does Bob have over the reruns, now that he stepped down? Didn't he relinquish his EP duties, or will he still have pull as a "consultant", so to speak?

Come to think of it, I thought the reruns issue was a CBS decision?
[/quote]