My favorite Duck Dynasty controversy headline is from GQ magazine (the one that triggered it all), “What the Duck?,” forecasting the latest example of media and public relations “expert” miscalculation.

While A&E was being roasted and toasted by lots of commentators and communicators, my guess is that executives at A&E were getting bruises on their chests and on their hands from all the chest bumping and high-fiving going on since the controversy about this show started.

Look, A&E is an alternative channel carrying a variety of what one might characterize as “off-beat” stories and series. This is their product; this is their brand. Besides, “Duck” is 50% of their profits. Since when does moral outrage defeat economic reality in our democracy?

“Duck” achieved the quinfecta of television “buzz” success:

1. Controversy
2. Contention
3. Consternation
4. Conflict
5. Confrontation

Clearly A&E over-reacted by suspending Phil Robertson, the head of the family featured in the series. And, using some rather silly PR advice, tried to explain what Phil was doing, what Phil’s rationale was, and all that stuff. Obviously what Phil was doing was being Phil. And those who watch the show, a minimum of 14 million viewers a week, showed just how deep Phil’s feelings and ideas actually flow through American culture.