ABC Unveils a Strict Post-Lambert Performance Contract

lambert225.jpg

ABC's had a difficult time navigating the wake of Adam Lambert's controversial AMA performance. The Walt Disney Co-owned network claimed no previous knowledge of the "dance moves" which they edited out on the West Coast and defended the performance as a non crisis, yet canceled Lambert's appearance on Good Morning America before booking and dropping a much more controversial guest, Chris Brown. Now, it seems that ABC is pressing forward with an ironclad contractual agreement that will prevent any future crotch grabs, same-sex kisses, middle fingers (and spontaneity) from its live television performances.

Anne Sweeney, the Disney/ABC Television Group President, revealed this morning that the company is taking precautionary measures against any future stage fellatio by contractually obligating artists to deliver a show that "resembles" their rehearsals. Sweeney defended the network's decision to deprive its viewers of any "in-the-moment" artistic flourishes:

"We certainly don't want to suppress artistry at any level, but we also have to be very cognizant of who our audience is."

Does this mean that Lil Mama could earn a penalty harsher than Jay-Z's cold shoulder the next time her "emotions running high?"

· Disney reviewing live shows after Lambert [Reuters]



Comments

  • Pel says:

    He should be charged with LEWD.

  • Just says:

    Way to go ABC, you are letting 1500 complians to take away the right of other 14 millions viewers and stage performers. Why don't you make your show to become Disney award show instead.
    The right way to do is delay the award show so that the show can be air perhaps 1 or 2 hrs later to an hour more appropriate for adult viewers.

  • Linda says:

    I as an adult wouldnt want to see the garbage 1 second later nevertheless 1 to 2 hrs later...disgusting!!

  • Madison says:

    The performance was not as bad as they make it seem, and not worth dropping Adam from good morning america

  • Kathi Lee says:

    I commend you ABC, What part of his act displayed artistry? His lewd behavior was an offensive display of a "no class" performance. Nothing new about sexually explicit moves, been around for ages. Just took someone of his low class calibar to put it it in his performance and act like it was artistic. Sorry ABC you got caught in the middle of it. My TV will never again tune in on one of his performances, I'm sure I'm not the only one, im sure your sponsers aren't to happy about that.

  • el smrtmnky says:

    and yet, we have to watch elizabeth hasselbitch's teabagging every effing morning.

  • Daft Clown says:

    According to Anne Sweeney, the Disney/ABC audience would prefer to live in a world in which homosexuality simply does not exist.
    I beg to differ though, because I recall Beauty and the Beast's Lumiere as being an unabashed flamer and the kids still loved him.

  • law thoughts says:

    From a legal perspective, I question whether this would even be enforceable. It would be difficult, maybe even impossible, to prove in court that a performer materially deviated from his or her rehearsal to the satisfaction of a judge. This might scare performers into doing what ABC wants, but if someone violates that clause, good luck proving it!

  • law thoughts says:

    From a legal perspective, I question whether this would even be enforceable. It would be difficult, maybe even impossible, to prove in court that a performer materially deviated from his or her rehearsal to the satisfaction of a judge. This might scare performers into doing what ABC wants, but if someone violates that clause, good luck proving it!

  • Vicky says:

    Disney is very supportive of gay rights. Sexual orientation is not the issue. Gay couples bring their kids to Disney too. They are no different than other supportive & loving families & gays do not incorporate porn in their identity. Porn is porn no matter how you spell it. Simulated Fellatio on national TV, I don't need to see. I found the whole performance verging on sexual aggession even beyond the simulated fellatio & the final middle finger salute. Dragging women by their legs on the stage, leading people by a dog leash & just the general overall tone of that performance was not acceptable. It might be accepable in a cabaret - if that's what you actually pay to go to, but not on national tv.
    Is there no more morality? Do we have to see everything there is to see? Some things are private & if people want to act that way in private they are free to do so, but this was a nationally televised show - a music award show & kids are the backbone of the music industry. Do we have to be vulgar & disrespectful?
    Clearly, now artists need to be fined if they do anything that crosses the line & isn't what was rehearsed in that they decided to spice up their performance & do or say something obscene.
    In order to enforce this, all rehearsals will no doubt be taped so it can be enforced. Before movies are releashed they are viewed for it's ratings so it's better for sponsors & networks to protect themselves from being fined if this happens again. Artistry is one thing, porn is quite another.

  • Jaimie Reil says:

    The danger to America is not Barack Hussein Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Hussein Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.

  • camsex says:

    Hello there, I located your wicked web site on Yahoo and all I can say is wow you've an amazing site!!!