The Nazz
21-01-2006, 19:01
Those of you who know me know I'm no fan of reality tv, even though my good friend CToaN was, until recently, making a living on the set of one. So I probably wouldn't have watched "Welcome to the Neighborhood" anyway, partially because of my general distaste for reality tv, and partially because I don't have cable and don't get ABC on what passes for an antenna.
But I have to admit, I'm a little disturbed by the implications of this article (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/21/arts/television/21welc.html?ei=5094&en=43df4035c8d21fca&hp=&ex=1137906000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print) from the NY Times on the show. Why? Because there's the hint, at least from the show's producers, that the reason the show was cancelled after production was completed (and the prize awarded) not because ABC/Disney thought the show would tank, but because they were afraid of pissing off the religious right.
Why would the religious right get pissed off? Because the show's winners were a gay couple who made friends with people in the neighborhood who identified themselves largely as white, christian and Republican. In fact, the early episodes of the show have some pretty potent homophobic slurs being tossed around, according to the article. The worries about the religious right's affect were noted by one of the show's producers.
ABC acted amid protests by the National Fair Housing Alliance, which had expressed concern about a competition in which race, religion and sexual orientation were discussed as factors in the awarding of a house. But two producers of the show, speaking publicly about the cancellation for the first time, say the network was confident it had the legal standing to give away a house as a game-show prize. One, Bill Kennedy, a co-executive producer who helped develop the series with his son, Eric, suggested an alternative explanation. He said that the protests might have been most significant as a diversion that allowed the Walt Disney Company, ABC's owner, to pre-empt a show that could have interfered with a much bigger enterprise: the courting of evangelical Christian audiences for "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe." Disney hoped that the film, widely viewed as a parable of the Resurrection, would be the first in a profitable movie franchise.
ABC denies that the two are linked, and the spokesman may well be telling the truth. There's no evidence to the contrary. But there is this, also from the same article:
In a recent interview, Richard Land, an official with the Southern Baptist Convention involved in the negotiations with Disney last year to end the group's boycott of the company, said he did not recall any mention of "Neighborhood." He added, however, that had the show been broadcast - particularly with an ending that showed Christians literally embracing their gay neighbors - it could have scuttled the Southern Baptists' support for "Narnia."
"I would have considered it a retrograde step," Mr. Land said of the network's plans to broadcast the reality series. "Aside from any moral considerations, it would have been a pretty stupid marketing move."
Paul McCusker, a vice president of Focus on the Family, which had supported the Southern Baptist boycott and reaches millions of evangelical listeners through the daily radio broadcasts of Dr. James Dobson, expressed similar views.
"It would have been a huge misstep for Disney to aggressively do things that would disenfranchise the very people they wanted to go see 'Narnia,' " he said.Now it doesn't feel so much like a coincidence.
And this is really odd, because here in south Florida, Disney has a well-deserved rep as being gay friendly. They were one of the first major corporations to extend benefits to partners of gay employees (a trigger for an earlier boycott by the Southern Baptist Convention). But that may be a case of taking an action out of necessity--their south Florida workforce has a huge gay population.
Is this a case of pandering to the religious right in order to keep potential spenders happy? I don't doubt it, especially since a large part of the show was centered around how the neighbors, who had been homophobic early on in the show, became not only accepting, but challenged their beliefs on many levels. And if there's one thing the Land's and Dobson's of the world can't abide, it's the notion that gay people might actually be, you know, people.
But I have to admit, I'm a little disturbed by the implications of this article (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/21/arts/television/21welc.html?ei=5094&en=43df4035c8d21fca&hp=&ex=1137906000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print) from the NY Times on the show. Why? Because there's the hint, at least from the show's producers, that the reason the show was cancelled after production was completed (and the prize awarded) not because ABC/Disney thought the show would tank, but because they were afraid of pissing off the religious right.
Why would the religious right get pissed off? Because the show's winners were a gay couple who made friends with people in the neighborhood who identified themselves largely as white, christian and Republican. In fact, the early episodes of the show have some pretty potent homophobic slurs being tossed around, according to the article. The worries about the religious right's affect were noted by one of the show's producers.
ABC acted amid protests by the National Fair Housing Alliance, which had expressed concern about a competition in which race, religion and sexual orientation were discussed as factors in the awarding of a house. But two producers of the show, speaking publicly about the cancellation for the first time, say the network was confident it had the legal standing to give away a house as a game-show prize. One, Bill Kennedy, a co-executive producer who helped develop the series with his son, Eric, suggested an alternative explanation. He said that the protests might have been most significant as a diversion that allowed the Walt Disney Company, ABC's owner, to pre-empt a show that could have interfered with a much bigger enterprise: the courting of evangelical Christian audiences for "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe." Disney hoped that the film, widely viewed as a parable of the Resurrection, would be the first in a profitable movie franchise.
ABC denies that the two are linked, and the spokesman may well be telling the truth. There's no evidence to the contrary. But there is this, also from the same article:
In a recent interview, Richard Land, an official with the Southern Baptist Convention involved in the negotiations with Disney last year to end the group's boycott of the company, said he did not recall any mention of "Neighborhood." He added, however, that had the show been broadcast - particularly with an ending that showed Christians literally embracing their gay neighbors - it could have scuttled the Southern Baptists' support for "Narnia."
"I would have considered it a retrograde step," Mr. Land said of the network's plans to broadcast the reality series. "Aside from any moral considerations, it would have been a pretty stupid marketing move."
Paul McCusker, a vice president of Focus on the Family, which had supported the Southern Baptist boycott and reaches millions of evangelical listeners through the daily radio broadcasts of Dr. James Dobson, expressed similar views.
"It would have been a huge misstep for Disney to aggressively do things that would disenfranchise the very people they wanted to go see 'Narnia,' " he said.Now it doesn't feel so much like a coincidence.
And this is really odd, because here in south Florida, Disney has a well-deserved rep as being gay friendly. They were one of the first major corporations to extend benefits to partners of gay employees (a trigger for an earlier boycott by the Southern Baptist Convention). But that may be a case of taking an action out of necessity--their south Florida workforce has a huge gay population.
Is this a case of pandering to the religious right in order to keep potential spenders happy? I don't doubt it, especially since a large part of the show was centered around how the neighbors, who had been homophobic early on in the show, became not only accepting, but challenged their beliefs on many levels. And if there's one thing the Land's and Dobson's of the world can't abide, it's the notion that gay people might actually be, you know, people.