This is exactly right. I've disparaged Uncle Ted several times on the Bowsite, and each time got lit up like a roman candle.
Field & Stream on outdoor TV clowns
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
This is exactly right. I've disparaged Uncle Ted several times on the Bowsite, and each time got lit up like a roman candle.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Bowsite is an interesting place to be sure...an interesting dichotomy there.
I got swacked there for challenging "Pig" Moore...another bowsite hero with the ethics of Nugent.
I got swacked there for challenging "Pig" Moore...another bowsite hero with the ethics of Nugent.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
I'm still interested in the story he was going to tell about getting beat up a couple years ago
BuzzH
Well-known member
Yeah, me too...he got what he had coming to him. Left in a ditch, unconscious, with the chit beat out of him. Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.
Brian in Montana
Well-known member
I've never understood why hunters are so protective of Ted Nugent. I always thought he was simply a mouthy abrasive celebrity that hunts a lot. The only thing special about him is his former career as a rock star. It should be no surprise as rock stars are known to be self-involved idiots that don't think the rules apply to them. In fact they tend to be celebrated for that.
As far as Bracket goes, I really can hardly stand most hunting shows, but I watched his for about 5 minutes about a year ago and thought, "who is this idiot? Well... Looks like hunting shows are actually getting worse."
Good article in my opinion, but like someone else pointed out, the reason these guys have the platforms they do is because there exists an audience for them. I'm glad to see Field and Stream, a long-established and widely respected outdoorsman media calling them out. It separates the real hunters from the clowns. A little well-managed us/the mentally is warranted. I do not, and never have identified with the Bracketts of the hunting world. He and those like him need to find their place in obscurity at this point.
As far as Bracket goes, I really can hardly stand most hunting shows, but I watched his for about 5 minutes about a year ago and thought, "who is this idiot? Well... Looks like hunting shows are actually getting worse."
Good article in my opinion, but like someone else pointed out, the reason these guys have the platforms they do is because there exists an audience for them. I'm glad to see Field and Stream, a long-established and widely respected outdoorsman media calling them out. It separates the real hunters from the clowns. A little well-managed us/the mentally is warranted. I do not, and never have identified with the Bracketts of the hunting world. He and those like him need to find their place in obscurity at this point.
belly-deep
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 3,459
I don’t think 5% of the hunting TV community is total asshats and 95% are normal.
Even if they’re not breaking the law, most of the rest of them are baiting, shooting fenced deer, and acting like total redneck fudds. Not good for our public image.
I’d say 5% of them are good and 95% we could all live without.
Northwoods Labs
Well-known member
Sadly, I have to agree with the sentiment on here. There are a large chunk of "hunters" that are total idiots (for lack of a better term) that give these "celebrities" a platform. I used to attend a local Wisconsin sports show and the attitudes of the majority of people at them was pretty eye opening. Ethics, conservation, concern for wildlife, etc are just non-issues to these people. They are more concerned with scores, food plots, and "managing" trophy deer, etc.
onpoint
Well-known member
Not normally exactly an optimist, more a pragmatist, I'll give the outdoorsmen/women community a 52:48 split. Probably moving toward the midpoint on it's way to a negative skew.
But I have access to no actual data.
I will agree the "Celebrity" crowd is a completely different ratio......
But I have access to no actual data.
I will agree the "Celebrity" crowd is a completely different ratio......
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Some years ago I started watching a show called surviving nugent. First half hour was unimpressive. Then nugent whips out a chainsaw with a 4 foot bar and procedes to cut his leg. I turned it off thinking I don't need to waste valuable time watching this shit, and haven't watched anything of his since. 5 minutes of the outdoor channel and I came to the same conclusion.
In most instances, it is not necessarily what the serious hunter wants to watch. Some people just watch what is produced and what is distributed. The networks control a huge part of that final outcome. Weave good content (and yes, there are some great people producing outdoor TV who have a concern) among the junk, and see what sticks.
It is more of a function that networks have decided to use "hunting and conservation" as the concept by which they will execute their business model. Make no mistake, the networks are in this to make money via entertainment. If they thought it would sell, I think those in charge would aspire for a camo version of WWE.
I can assure you that the networks do not share the level of concern about hunting and conservation, as most here share. When I, and others, made complaints long before the Busbice/Brackett bullchit, those complaints were ignored. Why does the network actively promote an ass clown like Nugent, a serial violator of game laws, and by most accounts, a net negative for hunting and conservation? Why do they let Theresa Vail continue to host a show, when a worried camera guy who was on the hut reports that she shot two grizzly bears when only having one tag? Why do they let ......(insert poacher here)?
Because the folks inside the networks make the decisions about what makes money in the short term. They do so with little or no regard as to the consequences these decisions have on the image of hunting and conservation.
Jim Posewitz, upon hearing two of his Board Members, me and Still Kickin', were going to start a TV platform to try provide a different voice, had this to say, "Society did not have to invent anti-hunters, along came outdoor TV." I still have no reply that could counter Poz's claim. Rather, his observation from ten years ago is even more valid today.
It will be interesting to see the struggle for control over the image of hunting. The networks think they inherited that image from the print titles, some of which they have acquired. The print titles not owned by the network are not giving up that tussle, as evidenced by this F&S article.
If you are going to subscribe, digitally or in print, to a hunting or outdoor magazine, Field & Stream and Outdoor Life are two that are not owned by the network and are taking on some of these topics. They will make good use of your money.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
I was referring to hunters in general, but agree with you, 90% of outdoors TV is unwatchable and down right embarrassing.
squirrel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Messages
- 709
375H&H
Well-known member
Watch "live the wildlife" with Gus congemi and be sure to have one of those free airplane bags handy.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Head of the nail Fin...and it's not just hunting shows. I recall the first time I heard Big Skip call TV the Idiot Box.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
JohnCushman
Well-known member
I don't understand why Leupold stays with pigman with as much of a tool as he is.
Mountainguide
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2015
- Messages
- 159
I just watched the trailer on his website....it's pretty bad
fishing4sanity
Well-known member
That Hollywood Hunter promo reel was a real head scratcher ............ self deprecating gag reel ............. or does that guy actually thing that highly of himself? On thing for sure - that ain't hunting. I'm glad Big Fin has made the switch to Amazon/YouTube because I pulled the plug on TV awhile back and missed seeing his show as much. Looks like 'outdoor TV' is in a downward spiral ...... or free fall.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
..think Jersey Shore in camo and armed.
