This looks bad
8/10/18 16:24![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
asthfghl posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpolitics“So how did our politics get so poisonous?” - Colbert
Well...
Stephen Colbert ‘Late Show’ writer: ‘I’m just glad we ruined Brett Kavanaugh’s life’
There you've got your answer. Or do you?...
What an awful, horrible tweet. Folks like these are doing a huge disservice to lots of moderate dems by providing ammo to their opponents to paint them all with the same brush. I think that the majority of them would be appalled by this. I understand they may have a different view of the whole Kavanaugh issue but most of them must be full of ideals, not hatred and spite. And attitude like the one displayed by this (now deleted) tweet doesn't help at all.
Too bad for Colbert's show, though. One rotten apple could really spoil the whole thing for many people. I expect some backlash and withdrawal of some audience. Reminds me of a TV show that we have here, mostly doing investigative journalism. One of their reporters was investigating some fraud, and he reported that he was beaten up by the guards of the guys he was investigating. Turns out, though, there was a CCTV on the spot, and it recorded that he had staged the whole "beating" thing. There was much outcry, understandably. And now the TV show, otherwise reputed for their investigative journalism, is under fire because of this moron. He's now speaking out, revealing some secrets from their kitchen, like the fact that they had been encouraging all their reporters to exaggerate, if not even fake some of the stories they had been reporting on. And this is bad for the credibility of investigative journalism in general.
Which brings us back to Colbert's writer. How much of the bias existing inside Colbert's team does this dropped tweet really reveal? Or is she just a single rotten apple? And, will this hurt the show, or it has its core base just as Trump has his, and they'll stick by Colbert no matter what?
Well...
Stephen Colbert ‘Late Show’ writer: ‘I’m just glad we ruined Brett Kavanaugh’s life’
There you've got your answer. Or do you?...
What an awful, horrible tweet. Folks like these are doing a huge disservice to lots of moderate dems by providing ammo to their opponents to paint them all with the same brush. I think that the majority of them would be appalled by this. I understand they may have a different view of the whole Kavanaugh issue but most of them must be full of ideals, not hatred and spite. And attitude like the one displayed by this (now deleted) tweet doesn't help at all.
Too bad for Colbert's show, though. One rotten apple could really spoil the whole thing for many people. I expect some backlash and withdrawal of some audience. Reminds me of a TV show that we have here, mostly doing investigative journalism. One of their reporters was investigating some fraud, and he reported that he was beaten up by the guards of the guys he was investigating. Turns out, though, there was a CCTV on the spot, and it recorded that he had staged the whole "beating" thing. There was much outcry, understandably. And now the TV show, otherwise reputed for their investigative journalism, is under fire because of this moron. He's now speaking out, revealing some secrets from their kitchen, like the fact that they had been encouraging all their reporters to exaggerate, if not even fake some of the stories they had been reporting on. And this is bad for the credibility of investigative journalism in general.
Which brings us back to Colbert's writer. How much of the bias existing inside Colbert's team does this dropped tweet really reveal? Or is she just a single rotten apple? And, will this hurt the show, or it has its core base just as Trump has his, and they'll stick by Colbert no matter what?
(no subject)
Date: 8/10/18 18:53 (UTC)(I think) I remember Letterman and Leno taking subtle jabs at each other - but I'm guessing between writers unions, and hating Trump being the cool thing to do now - that there's no chance of that happening.
(no subject)
Date: 8/10/18 20:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/10/18 20:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/10/18 20:29 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/10/18 16:38 (UTC)But that will never happen either, alas.
(no subject)
Date: 9/10/18 17:18 (UTC)...
Me likey.
(no subject)
Date: 9/10/18 20:00 (UTC)https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/oct/09/australian-government-backs-coal-defiance-ipcc-climate-warning
This needs to be accountable personally; after denying best possible evidence whilst in political power, you should have to stand by your words and decisions, and take the consequences of your wrong opinions, wrong thinking, and wrong policies.
So if folk die because of manifestly wrong political decisions that go against all established expert opinion because of ideology maybe there should be a crime of "death by politics", for which the politicians involved have to stand trial. Climate change may be the biggest killer we have coming in the near future.
And I think it's about time that democratic politicians also had to adopt one of the principles of the Hippocratic oath - first, do no harm.
Never happen, but I can dream.
(no subject)
Date: 9/10/18 20:07 (UTC)That way, I could put Blair on trial for Iraq, and Cameron on trial for the Brexit vote, and Boris on trial for his blatant fibbing during the Brexit vote... the list goes on.
Nurse, bring me more opium for my pipe; I have justice to dream of.
(no subject)
Date: 10/10/18 19:39 (UTC)I know, I know; I omitted the part where "she apologized". I don't know why. She should never have apologized for making a joke, especially one this obvious. I'm not even sure why that article put sarcastic in scare quotes.
The tone-deafness is all in the negative reaction to this, an obvious joke. Kavanaugh is alive and well, his life quite good. Money will see that continues… provided he plays ball like the Federalist Society intends (Leonard Leo über alles!).
(By the way, to those continuing to wallow in tone-deafness, that last bit was, in fact, a joke.)
(no subject)
Date: 11/10/18 04:11 (UTC)Yep, tone argument here. Apparently we care a lot about tone, right?
(no subject)
Date: 12/10/18 00:29 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/10/18 04:18 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 11/10/18 04:27 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 12/10/18 00:28 (UTC)As to why a liberal leaning show would so attempt appeasement, we should note that the show is not public at all. Oh, sure, it's seen by the public; but it is quite private, as is the network that allows its existence, and… quite importantly… as are the sponsors that fund it.
Those sponsors are the very real commercial entities that must be appeased. Those conservative viewers? They may not have much pull individually, but they can scare the bejeezus out of sponsors by just pretending outrage, and making it known.
A few authors have called this "working the refs," a practice coaches use. They point out a call they consider bad, throw a bit of a tantrum and call the ref biased against his or her team, and, even if the call was a good one, refs will second-guess their next calls.
By protesting jokes to sponsors and the network——Colbert's refs——the conservatives effectively reigned in Colbert's show. I pretty much stopped watching after the first show, which featured "guest" JEB Bush.