Shannon Jacobs
2006-06-19 20:30:11 UTC
[Again, from an actual discussion forum elsewhere, but related to this
topic:]
Does anyone around here have a contact at Comedy Central? I think they're
media heroes, but sometimes I wonder. Or maybe their websites are controlled
by BushCo fifth columnists? For one thing, they don't actually accept any
feedback off of the websites. Nor do they have any communications channels
to people like Jon Stewart. Hmm... Rubber room time? Maybe the entire site
is a rightwing pirate site that records the shows off of cable and displays
the worst bits as a kind of distraction?
Today's case in point is the recent Colbert interview with that idiot from
Georgia's 8th. Great video. Should be prominently featured. It is not.
Actually, they just posted another video with a very similar title.
Apparently a couple of unused snippets from the original interview, or maybe
from the version that actually aired on the show. I don't know. What I do
know is that this new video is not nearly as to-the-point as the previous
one. The Republican still looks stupid, but not nearly as stupid as in the
longer video--but the terrible structure of the website makes this new one
much more prominent, effectively replacing the much stronger and more
politically effective video. Incidentally, the replaced video was also much
funnier, which is supposed to be the point of the website.
In the past several of the best videos have quickly disappeared from the
website. They (the webmasters or fifth columnists) claim that the website is
supposed to be selling ads and recordings of the show. Okay, in that case,
you don't hide your best stuff. Or maybe it's just sheer technical
incompetence? The design is *REALLY* stupid and wasteful, sending large
amounts of data for nothing. For example, it sends you hundreds of thumbnail
images that you'll never even see unless you go scrolling way down the
lists.
From the earlier discussion, I think the most interesting aspect of the
rightwing media slant is how they were able to focus on one tiny slip--an
angry shout--by Dean and used it to pressure him out of the 2004 campaign.
If they wanted to do that to Dubya, he produces hundreds of more goofs than
any of the Democratic politicians. A recent example was Dubya's demeaning
jokes about the blind man's sunglasses.
Actually, I think the only prominent media-related production that had a
significant focus on Dubya's goofs was Fahrenheit 9/11--and you saw the
rightwing media uproar about that one. Dean's emotional outburst was
supposed to disqualify him as president. Fahrenheit 9/11 along contained 100
times as many "disqualifications" for Dubya.
Y'all are definitely right about the degree of "don't get it" of the
Democrats. The Democrats just have no idea of how to do propaganda--but the
sad part is that the voters keep falling for it. Well, not all the voters,
but enough. Most of the Democrats are just willing to play the game to keep
themselves in office--but by playing that game they mostly confirm the
worthlessness of the political process and of themselves as politicians
working within that political process. Remember that 2004 was one of the
most important elections in America's history--and about 40% of the voters
didn't bother to vote. (Probably higher if you consider all of the eligible
voters. I'm pretty sure voter participation is only reported for registered
voters.)
That means more voters voted for "none of the above" than voted for *EITHER*
of the actual presidential candidates. Those deliberate non-voters believe
that their votes don't matter and that democracy in America has failed.
That's the story the media *OUGHT* to be covering.
(Well, that and the story of entitled voters who were blocked from voting.
That's actually a kind of tragedy, since those voters at least believe
democracy could still work.)
topic:]
Does anyone around here have a contact at Comedy Central? I think they're
media heroes, but sometimes I wonder. Or maybe their websites are controlled
by BushCo fifth columnists? For one thing, they don't actually accept any
feedback off of the websites. Nor do they have any communications channels
to people like Jon Stewart. Hmm... Rubber room time? Maybe the entire site
is a rightwing pirate site that records the shows off of cable and displays
the worst bits as a kind of distraction?
Today's case in point is the recent Colbert interview with that idiot from
Georgia's 8th. Great video. Should be prominently featured. It is not.
Actually, they just posted another video with a very similar title.
Apparently a couple of unused snippets from the original interview, or maybe
from the version that actually aired on the show. I don't know. What I do
know is that this new video is not nearly as to-the-point as the previous
one. The Republican still looks stupid, but not nearly as stupid as in the
longer video--but the terrible structure of the website makes this new one
much more prominent, effectively replacing the much stronger and more
politically effective video. Incidentally, the replaced video was also much
funnier, which is supposed to be the point of the website.
In the past several of the best videos have quickly disappeared from the
website. They (the webmasters or fifth columnists) claim that the website is
supposed to be selling ads and recordings of the show. Okay, in that case,
you don't hide your best stuff. Or maybe it's just sheer technical
incompetence? The design is *REALLY* stupid and wasteful, sending large
amounts of data for nothing. For example, it sends you hundreds of thumbnail
images that you'll never even see unless you go scrolling way down the
lists.
From the earlier discussion, I think the most interesting aspect of the
rightwing media slant is how they were able to focus on one tiny slip--an
angry shout--by Dean and used it to pressure him out of the 2004 campaign.
If they wanted to do that to Dubya, he produces hundreds of more goofs than
any of the Democratic politicians. A recent example was Dubya's demeaning
jokes about the blind man's sunglasses.
Actually, I think the only prominent media-related production that had a
significant focus on Dubya's goofs was Fahrenheit 9/11--and you saw the
rightwing media uproar about that one. Dean's emotional outburst was
supposed to disqualify him as president. Fahrenheit 9/11 along contained 100
times as many "disqualifications" for Dubya.
Y'all are definitely right about the degree of "don't get it" of the
Democrats. The Democrats just have no idea of how to do propaganda--but the
sad part is that the voters keep falling for it. Well, not all the voters,
but enough. Most of the Democrats are just willing to play the game to keep
themselves in office--but by playing that game they mostly confirm the
worthlessness of the political process and of themselves as politicians
working within that political process. Remember that 2004 was one of the
most important elections in America's history--and about 40% of the voters
didn't bother to vote. (Probably higher if you consider all of the eligible
voters. I'm pretty sure voter participation is only reported for registered
voters.)
That means more voters voted for "none of the above" than voted for *EITHER*
of the actual presidential candidates. Those deliberate non-voters believe
that their votes don't matter and that democracy in America has failed.
That's the story the media *OUGHT* to be covering.
(Well, that and the story of entitled voters who were blocked from voting.
That's actually a kind of tragedy, since those voters at least believe
democracy could still work.)
[From a real discussion forum elsewhere:]
I really don't understand the persistent tactical idiocy that is being
displayed on this topic. BushCo is not yet able to "win" every local
election. If they are going to lose a particular race, then they can
*STILL* turn that loss to their advantage. In this case, they can
hold up the gay candidate as a symbol of the Democratic Party, and
thereby gain votes in other races. If you think that Georgia voters
are not stupid enough to fall for that strategy, then I strongly urge
you to go look at the video of Colbert's interview with the
Congressman they elected.
http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=70730
I do not think this is just a matter of clever editing. If so, it is
actually super-clever editing. I think this Congressman is really and
truly and sincerely *THAT* stupid.
The interesting larger question is why they haven't sued Colbert to
remove the video from the website. Everyone on his staff is also too
stupid to understand the joke? They think it's too late? None of the
voters in their district has Internet access? They think that it
would be counterproductive to make an issue of his stupidity?
Or maybe they're planning to use it in their campaign literature,
because this is really the kind of idiot those voters really want?
I really don't understand the persistent tactical idiocy that is being
displayed on this topic. BushCo is not yet able to "win" every local
election. If they are going to lose a particular race, then they can
*STILL* turn that loss to their advantage. In this case, they can
hold up the gay candidate as a symbol of the Democratic Party, and
thereby gain votes in other races. If you think that Georgia voters
are not stupid enough to fall for that strategy, then I strongly urge
you to go look at the video of Colbert's interview with the
Congressman they elected.
http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=70730
I do not think this is just a matter of clever editing. If so, it is
actually super-clever editing. I think this Congressman is really and
truly and sincerely *THAT* stupid.
The interesting larger question is why they haven't sued Colbert to
remove the video from the website. Everyone on his staff is also too
stupid to understand the joke? They think it's too late? None of the
voters in their district has Internet access? They think that it
would be counterproductive to make an issue of his stupidity?
Or maybe they're planning to use it in their campaign literature,
because this is really the kind of idiot those voters really want?
--
The truth alone will not make you free. However, it is one of the
prerequisites. Unless you know the truths underlying your options, you
cannot choose in freedom, whether you're buying shaving cream or a war.
Busheviks are simply slaves to BushCo's lies.
Trolls fed to "The vile spewers of mindless blather thread" and/or
ploinked.
The truth alone will not make you free. However, it is one of the
prerequisites. Unless you know the truths underlying your options, you
cannot choose in freedom, whether you're buying shaving cream or a war.
Busheviks are simply slaves to BushCo's lies.
Trolls fed to "The vile spewers of mindless blather thread" and/or
ploinked.