Measuring the "Colbert Bump" 674
An anonymous reader writes "Democratic politicians receive a 40% increase in contributions in the 30 days after appearing on the comedy cable show The Colbert Report. In contrast, their Republican counterparts essentially gain nothing. Moreover, even a cursory analysis demonstrates that despite being a comedy program The Colbert Report appears to exercise 'disproportionate real world influence' — likely due to the 'elite demographic' of its audience." In my home we refer to Stephen as "Loud Daddy" because my child would scream bloody murder when we paused him (and only him) on screen. Even at 8 months old the kid has strange taste.
Colbert (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Colbert (Score:4, Insightful)
Mayor is fine...the splatter damage area is greatly reduced to maybe no more than the tri-county area. Regan fscked us with onerous debt and Sonny Bono gave us unconstitutionally long copyright terms.
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Funny)
Using "splatter" and "Sonny Bono" in the same post... I laughed quietly to myself and felt horrible about it.
Re:Colbert (Score:4, Insightful)
Sonny Bono gave us unconstitutionally long copyright terms.
Inigo Montoya would like a word with you.
With all due respect to the Supreme Court, if copyright outlives both the author and his peers, that effectively is an eternal period for anyone who was alive at its creation and would care enough to want to copy it, let alone ephemeral works which may cease to exist in any material form in under a year.
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Interesting)
"Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."
--Ronald Reagan
Reagan has all these great libertarian quotes.. but he shrunk the size of government NOT AT ALL. Even if he really believed what he was talking bout, he didn't really fix any problems. (No Reagan did not kill communism, its a popular myth but it was the unworkable system of communism that killed communism.)
They say the power of the state changes people.. I seen a cartoonist liken it to The One Ring from Lord of the Rings.. as to say those who get power are unable to destroy that power.
The cartoon is here. http://anarchyinyourhead.com/2007/12/14/no-more-kings/ [anarchyinyourhead.com]
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Insightful)
I would rather vote to Stephen Colbert and John Stewart than either Barack or McCain. At least they are honest and actually answer questions and don't try to play the people. I would definitely trust them in the position of power over the choices we have now. Which is actually kinda sad that politicians have disappointed us that much.
Re:Colbert (Score:4, Insightful)
Colbert asked Kevin Costner if he would run for office and Costner laughed and said something like, 'No... I've lead a colorful life."
I think that would probably be the issue with *most* people like Colbert and John Stewart. The facts of Bush's "colorful" youth were largely ignored when he was running for election. I couldn't believe he got away with "I haven't used cocaine since January of 1987." but more power to him since i think cocaine and pot should be legal. I'd never do cocaine-- taking something that has a 1/100,000 chance of killing you the first time you use it isn't my thing. But wise men throughout history have altered their conciousness. And suddenly we disallow it and insist that only the most prissy, straight-laced people who don't even match 90% of the population in actual behavior should be our political leaders. Basically-- PRIESTS should be our leaders. The kings and lords and barons of industry had strong passions and lead bold lives and it gave them the strength of character needed to truly do the right thing.
Perhaps it is time to stop throwing away good leaders because they lead "colorful" lives and aren't priests. I imagine most leaders throughout history were alpha males and lead colorful lives filled with fighting, boozing, womanizing, and drinking. Since our memory is now much longer and much more through, it may be time to adjust the rules to the new "no privacy" reality.
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Insightful)
Colbert asked Kevin Costner if he would run for office and Costner laughed and said something like, 'No... I've lead a colorful life."
I think that would probably be the issue with *most* people like Colbert and John Stewart. The facts of Bush's "colorful" youth were largely ignored when he was running for election. I couldn't believe he got away with "I haven't used cocaine since January of 1987." but more power to him since i think cocaine and pot should be legal.
It's unfortunate, however, that our status quo is one which makes a large portion of our culture into criminals, and then, they can get elected to office, so long as they claim that's how it should be.
I'd never do cocaine-- taking something that has a 1/100,000 chance of killing you the first time you use it isn't my thing. But wise men throughout history have altered their conciousness. And suddenly we disallow it and insist that only the most prissy, straight-laced people who don't even match 90% of the population in actual behavior should be our political leaders. Basically-- PRIESTS should be our leaders. The kings and lords and barons of industry had strong passions and lead bold lives and it gave them the strength of character needed to truly do the right thing.
Umm...Priests have gotten away with things no politician could ever be forgiven for. Make no doubt about it, our politicians have to live up to a much higher standard than our clergy.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Reagan is still alive and working at a toy store [shortpacked.com].
Re:You understood what he said, didn't you? (Score:5, Funny)
It's "Nip it in the bud." That's not a spelling error, so you should feel happy about that. Butt-nipper.
Re:Colbert (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Informative)
Congress approves the budget, it's drawn up by the executive.
Nope. It's fully Congress' responsibility. [blogspot.com]
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Funny)
I will wholeheartedly throw my support behind this as long as he picks Lewis Black as his VP.
The mental image of Lewis Black presiding over Senate proceedings would make it worth the vote right there.
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Funny)
Dr. Emmett Brown: Then tell me, "Future Boy", who's President in the United States in 1985?
Marty McFly: Ronald Reagan.
Dr. Emmett Brown: Ronald Reagan? The actor?!
[chuckles in disbelief]
Dr. Emmett Brown: Then who's Vice-President? Jerry Lewis?
[rushing out and down a hill toward his laboratory]
Dr. Emmett Brown: I suppose Jane Wyman is the First Lady!
Marty McFly: [following] Whoa! Wait! Doc!
Dr. Emmett Brown: And Jack Benny is Secretary of the Treasury!
Marty McFly: [outside the lab door] Doc, you gotta listen to me!
Dr. Emmett Brown: I've had enough practical jokes for one evening. Good night, Future Boy!
I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Interesting)
Moreover, even a cursory analysis demonstrates that despite being a comedy program The Colbert Report appears to exercise "disproportionate real world influence" -- likely due to the "elite demographic" of its audience.
I saw this news a few days ago and must confess I couldn't draw a logical conclusion from it. I find the explanation in this article to be unsatisfactory also.
... and it would take just one nutjob billionaire who loves The Colbert Report to make those donations. Or it could be like a Hollywood joke for the rich and famous to build a fund.
... ah, what am I saying, there's a real lacking sense of humor on that side of the parties in my mind.
Perhaps it's interesting but little can be learned from this 'study.' There's just too many factors to say
To expound upon the conclusion of the article, what about Democratic guests of The Daily Show which is just a half hour earlier on the same channel with (probably) the same "elite demographic"?
Maybe it's really about Democratic politicians looking really good against Colbert's over the top ultra-conservatism? Just as speculative (and easily dismissed) as the article's conclusion though. Can anyone else reason out a better explanation?
Has the study looked at shows with over the top ultra-liberal hosts interviewing Republican politicians
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
So it leaves what is probably a largely left leaning audience watching a Democrat "handle" the over the top Republican insanity in a humerous way.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Interesting)
The fact that they invited Colbert to host the Correspondents Dinner [wikipedia.org] shows they don't have a fricking clue. (If you live under a rock and haven't seen the video of it linky linky here [google.com]...The man has balls of solid steel).
As per the "bump" I imagine it's more because Colbert is specifically looking for it, and trumpeting it. Free publicity is almost always going to create funding opportunities for politicians.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Either that or the Republicans can take a joke. I'm pretty sure they knew exactly the type of material Colbert would go for.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Funny)
You can see the amusement boiling up into Bush's face at the end of the speech.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
Several of Bush's aides and supporters walked out during Colbert's speech, and one former aide commented that the President had "that look that he's ready to blow". Although President Bush shook Colbert's hand after his presentation, Colbert received an icy response from First Lady Laura Bush.
I believe there was other stuff about the media not picking up the story, etc, that I had read, but I'm not in the research mood, just the foggy memory and talking out of my ass mood. In fact, it's right there in the wiki article as well.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Informative)
Mark Smith was quoted in the New York Times as saying, "...he hadn't seen much of Colbert's work" and he was the one who invited Colbert. People walked out. The reception was mostly silent and unfriendly. Bush himself looks like he's wondering how to get Colbert sent to Gitmo.
Some conservatives may be able to take a joke (Scalia apparently laughed his ass off), but Bush isn't one of them. In his whole Presidency this was probably the only time he was forced to sit and listen to someone rip on him for his policies, and it's clear from the video that he didn't enjoy it.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Informative)
source [wikipedia.org]
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm watching the video again right now, and the video shows people laughing quite a bit. I'm only half-way through right now, but I've personally witnessed Bush laughing several times at his own expense. So far, the only time crowd seemed offended was at the China crack.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Informative)
The Mike Huckabee "bump" bit lead to the greatest evening on televsion EVER:
The Jon Stewart/Steven Colbert/Conan Obrien crossover.
Colbert isn't republican... (Score:3, Insightful)
Although he makes fun of both sides, it is much easier to make fun of the republicans - since their politics (under introspection) aren't very good. All he does is bring it to the front.
Also, many democrats are younger and don't have 'time' for politics, but do have time for comedy. If they're watching the Colbert R
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
Bill Clinton's policies were fine
Including the Communications Decency Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act?
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait till the Dems get into power in November (unless there's some awesome economic news in the next two months; they got it.). Then these shows will start making fun of them.
Also, many democrats are younger and don't have time for 'politics', but do have time for comedy.
(I moved the quotes). Politics these days is about distraction. It's about focusing on non issues, or at least, focusing on issues that a very small minority finds irrationally important. And even then, whatever comes out of any candidates mouth during a campaign is just pie in the sky.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder if Colbert (The Character) is going to switch sides. I could see him leaning whichever way the wind is blowing. He might turn into a hippy Air-America pot smoking liberal after the elections in November.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
He *has* thrown some jabs at Obama and Clinton lately, but audience reaction was not great. (After making fun of Obama for flip-flopping on public financing: "It's okay to laugh at him, y'know.") He may be forced by his audience to veer left.
Oh I don't know, he lampooned the whole Obama vs Clinton campaign pretty regularly. (Both shows did actually.)
And Bill Clinton in particular has been pot-shotted a fair bit, as has Congress's non-binding resolutions, giving into Bush, and so on.
But Obama, its true, he hasn't taken the same beating the other canditates have on Stewart/Colbert, but quite simply, that's because Obama HAS managed to appear less ridiculous less often, and more importantly, the ridiculous stuff he does do is so thoroughly overblown by the media that the comedy shows are almost forced to lampoon the media, indirectly siding with Obama.
I mean the 'terrorist fist bump'? 'barack HUSSEIN obama' repeated ad nauseum? the loony drama with his preacher?... I think these would have been fair game for Stewart/Colbert punchlines but after the mainstream media got through with them, the media was the much more juicy and pathetic target.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
The Daily Show has been experimenting with making fun of Democrats. They started doing it this past Spring, and their audience doesn't seem to like being shown their own absurdities. I, for one, hope The Daily Show forges on to become "make fun of the people in power and the media that enables them" instead of "make fun of the Republicans in power and the media that enables them."
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem with balance is this: name one popular, over the top liberal pundit. I don't know of anyone who comes anywhere near the extremism of O'Reilly, Hannity, or Glenn Beck. Considering Stewart is primarily satirizing cable news networks that doesn't leave them much to satirize on the left.
That said, I do remember at least a few times when John got in a well deserved jab at the Democratic leadership.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Informative)
they seem more partisan now than they used to be (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't detect much of a partisan air back then---they made fun of Clinton a lot, but it didn't come across as if they were conservatives or anything. And in 2000 they were pretty equal-opportunity in attacking both Gore and Bush. These days they come across as distinctly left-leaning; even as a left-leaning person myself it's sometimes a bit uncomfortable when they seem to lapse from humor into some sort of political monologue. So I'm not sure they can successfully, given the corner they've painted themselves into, go back to the previous, less-partisan approach of just making fun of whoever's in power.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
That, and the Republicans are in power. Being in power normally provides a lot more comedy material than being in opposition. William Hague, Ian and Duncan Smith, and Michael Howard, and anything involving Boris Johnson notwithstanding.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought it was painfully obvious that his Republican character he portrays is a joke to espouse his actual Liberal views. It scares me that this might not be obvious to some.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
Although he makes fun of both sides, it is much easier to make fun of the republicans - since their politics (under introspection) aren't very good.
Nah, it's not a Republicrat/Democan thing. Both sides are equally stupid, and equally easy to make fun of. It's just easier to make fun of the party in the White House, because they're the most visibly active.
Back when Clinton was in office, Rush Limbaugh was often hilariously funny with the way he made fun of the Democrats. After Bush got into office, he had to switch to supporting his side rather than making fun of the dems because there was so much less material available. At that point, he became a lot less funny.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
Nah, it's not a Republicrat/Democan thing. Both sides are equally stupid, and equally easy to make fun of.
Sorry, but that's just not true. The democrats are not a perfect liberal party, but insofar as they are liberal they are less stupid than conservatives. The majority view among intelligent, educated people always supports liberal positions which is why it is liberal, not conservative, politics that shares the label "progressive." Historical trends through the last two centuries have born this out worldwide: liberal views/values/norms steadily become adopted over time while those of conservatives are abandoned. It is overwhelmingly likely that this trend will continue. Just as we now think it was barbaric and grotesquely stupid to enslave black people and deny women the right to vote 150 years ago, we will progress to hold similar views about gay marriage and religion 150 years from now. Any person of nominal intelligence will grant this as indisputable.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
And you seem to forget that these are not the Republicans of the 1860s. Or even the 1960s. There was a time when Democrat = southern state (and all that implies), and that time has passed as the parties traded politicians and values.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps this is the only way to get young people interested in Politics - to make the stupidity that goes on at capitol hill equally accessible to everyone... through satire.
The reason I watch the Daily Show and Colbert Report (as someone from the younger generation) is that underneath their hyperbolic lies, they seem more honest. The current state of American news seems to be geared towards irrationally demonizing liberalism or leftist view to such an extent that it makes the bile rise. I can understand being fiercely against raising taxes for social projects (hey I hate taxes too), but when the foundation of an argument boils down to they're liberal, it loses all sense of weight and content. At least on those comedy shows, they back up their absurdity with a logical chain of examples to show that their comments have some grain of truth. For instance, they might show a series of clips of newscasters copying one another as a comment on the laziness of news in general. I like those shows because they're a bit more honest and because my faith in the quality of other (American) news channels has been degrading. (Though, I've found CNN and BBC news ok from time-to-time.)
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
Although he makes fun of both sides, it is much easier to make fun of the republicans - since their politics (under introspection) aren't very good. All he does is bring it to the front.
It's sad that people actually interpret the situation this way, no matter what you think "introspection" means. It has been easier to make fun of republicans because, for the most part, they've been the ones in power for the last 8 years. That's what Jon Stewardt has been saying forever now, and I'm sure Colbert is in the same line of thinking but you never see him talk out of character.
I think left-leaning politos should put a check on themselves with their self-indulgent tripe.
Lets be clear: humor is most often, but not always, about laughing at absurdities. Now, what a person happens to consider absurd depends on what they've been accultured to. Liberals, suprise suprise, simply have different standards on what they consider absurd and normal than conservatives. Trust me, conservatives have their moments when they can be funny also. The sad thing is when someone from one side simply can't find any humor in the jokes of the other side. Liberals: Just so you know, Ann Coulter is funny! And I don't even mean in that overly sarcastic way you mean it.
And the first one to assume I'm a conservative/Republican is a doofus.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Informative)
"one nutjob billionaire" wouldn't explain this, since there are contribution limits. The actions of no one individual, no matter how rich, could explain this. There are interesting dynamics at work here, some people may find it enjoyable to discuss them. But simple answers aren't the solution.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Informative)
TFA states that there is a significant increase not just in the amount of donations but also the number of donations.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
I assume appearances on the Colbert show are correlated with increased campaigning which results in increased contributions. I like Colbert, but to me, this sounds like exactly the sort of meaningless pompous statistic he would have fun with and mock.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, it is pretty safe to conclude causation here as there are /very/ strictly monitored limitations of PAC funding. The limitations are so low that the difference between what "one nutjob billionaire" can give compared to the average mortal is less than you're likely to spend on a decent meal in Penn Quarter.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's face it, the Daily Show and the Colbert Report are both the equivalent to the Fox channel shows for the Democrats. Before you flame me, know I'm a Democrat.
Of course they are.
They are making a mockery of the media. The difference is that DS and CR freely admit that that's what they're doing and the majority of their viewers know that.
Fox, pretends that they're a legitimate news source when they're nothing but anti-American propaganda and their viewers do not get that.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Interesting)
Demographics? (Score:4, Interesting)
But perhaps Conservatives don't watch the show in the same numbers that their Liberal friends do, equating to the "gain nothing" for the right side of the aisle?
Re:Demographics? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is why Colbert 'bumps' donations to Democrats and not Republicans--individual Democrats appear to have more money to spend on donations this year.
Re:Demographics? (Score:4, Interesting)
Quoteth Alexander Tyler:
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship."
The true reason for the "Economic Stimulus Package".
Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Central (Score:5, Informative)
Not to overplay the "Republicans are a bunch of old humorless farts" stereotype, but let's face it, Republicans aren't exactly Comedy Central's chief demographic in general (and they sure aren't the primary audience of "The Daily Show" or "The Colbert Report"). Even when conservatives do come on Stewart or Colbert, it's generally a very uncomfortable interview (polite applause from the audience, host trying desperately to think of something good to say).
There have been a few attempts at more conservative humor. Colin Quinn used to have a show [wikipedia.org] that followed Stewart that was more to the right (and very funny), but unfortunately it got cancelled after two or three seasons. And Fox News did a Daily Show-esque show called the "1/2 Hour News Hour" [wikipedia.org] that was just abysmal to watch and not even close to funny (it ran for 13 episodes before the Fox conservatives abandoned their opposition to euthenasia long enough to grant it a mercy killing).
I know why. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, they're the joke. (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, the joke is on us.
Re:Yes, they're the joke. (Score:5, Funny)
Democratic (Score:4, Informative)
The correct adjective form is Democratic.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
Have there been many attempts at "liberal humor". I don't think the Daily Show counts. Jon seems to make fun of whoever would be...er... funny. It is not surprising that Bush fits the bill most of the time. Any show that plans on being funny in a "conservative" or "liberal" way is probably going to be terrible. Picking a side just reduces the possible objects of ridicule.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
He mocks everyone constantly, but there is a bit of a difference in how he does it that betrays his bias.
His mockery of republicans is usually along the lines of "what are those crazy people thinking?"
Whereas against democrats he tends to be more "come on, guys, I was counting on you and then you sucked."
He doesn't give anyone a free pass (which I greatly appreciate) but he does betray his bias a bit.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
Limbaugh's success is almost entirely due to his sense of humor. He was basically a Colbert/Stewart of the Right, before Comedy Central was a political humor channel. Now, humor is somewhat subjective, and Limbaugh has a mean streak that comes out at odd times and spoils the party. His mask only slips occasionally though, and he can usually convince his loyal listeners that he was joking or that the monster they saw was just misunderstood. (for example, when he made fun of Michael J. Fox's Parkinsons Disease, or expressed glee at the suicide of Kurt Cobain.)
Even so, Limbaugh has a great sense of the absurd, and his selective reporting of the news has been great at finding things that are both idiotic and obviously "left-inspired." Now, he's dishonest to a degree, so he'll lie, exagerate or misreport when it suits him. Still, it's actually fairly easy if you go to the right places to find some absurdity related to environmentalism or feminism. Shooting fish in a barrel, it is. Frankly, he doesn't outright lie that often, because he doesn't have to. Clowns attach themselves to any political movement that has any power.
The new young Turks of Right Wing talk haven't been humor oriented, they've been revenge oriented. So people like O'Reilly and Hannity come across as hate-filled trolls without anything resembling a sense of humor. This is all to the good, because people with no sense of humor make perfect straight men victims for satirists.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
The funniest thing that Limbaugh ever did was call for harsher penalties for drug users then get himself busted for being an oxycodon addict.
The icing-coated irony was delicious for everyone.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought it was even funnier that his doctor shopping got a slap on the wrist, thus illustrating the way the law operates differently for the Haves and Have Mores than for the rest of us.
Well, no, that wasn't funny... that was more stomach turning than funny.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
1/2 Hour News Hour (Score:5, Interesting)
" And Fox News did a Daily Show-esque show called the "1/2 Hour News Hour" [wikipedia.org] that was just abysmal to watch and not even close to funny (it ran for 13 episodes before the Fox conservatives abandoned their opposition to euthenasia long enough to grant it a mercy killing)."
Hell, I'm a conservative, and I'll be the first to tell you that show wasn't just bad, it was plain embarrassing. Bad skits. Canned laugh tracks. Every bad trick in show business you can think of, that abomination had it. It couldn't die fast enough for me.
That show was a prime example of somethings conservatives sometimes do that they never should... try to make a right wing version of a successful liberal phenomena. "Hey, we'll make a conservative Daily Show!". No, you wont. You'll make a cheap knockoff that nobody likes and is done badly. And to be fair, liberals also do this stuff as well... how many attempts have we seen to try and do a liberal version of Limbaugh's program? There's a long and distinguished list of utter failure on that front (Hello, Air America!).
For whatever reason... one sides' success.... The Daily Show, Limbaugh, pick your example... just doesn't seem to translate well to the other side. Any attempts to "reverse engineer" it and make your own seems destined to fall on it's face.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Interesting)
Even when conservatives do come on Stewart or Colbert, it's generally a very uncomfortable interview (polite applause from the audience, host trying desperately to think of something good to say).
Eh, John McCain did pretty well on The Daily Show, and when I saw him a few years ago Bob Dole was absolutely awesome.
But that's The Daily Show, which has a slant sure but is perfectly willing to tear Democrats and liberals a new one whenever its appropriate. I think mostly it's because Stewart and the show came unto their own during a period when Republicans were in power and thus provided the majority of the targets. Stewart is liberal in his politics, but I don't think that dominates the show which is mostly about deriving humor from the news. It's not the same as 'liberal' or 'conservative' talk shows.
Colbert Report, though, is obviously dominated by its slant. There's no avoiding it, as his character is a caricature of a conservative talk show host. He "praised" the President to his face for going with his gut instead of facts, saying "reality has a well-known liberal bias".
But yes, even though they're different shows, I don't doubt that their demographics are largely the same, and that it doesn't include a lot of Republicans.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm rather conservative. I watch both Colbert and Stewart because I find them both funny. Their bias is quite obvious, but I don't mind. The fact they are open about it (as opposed to trying to pretend to be neutral) makes me like them more.
Rarely do I not find something funny because of my views. I'll disagree with some of the things Stewart says (for example), but I don't take him seriously enough to be put off by it (and it doesn't happen that often).
What they spend most of their time doing, making fun of the media and politicians doing dumb things, works just as well for either party. If they ignored the Dems I would be turned off, but they are always right there to poke fun at Pelosi if she does something notably stupid.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Funny)
Right, next you'll be saying that the greatest threat to America isn't Bears.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the problem with conservatives, they can't approach things without an intensely partisan mindset. [...] just because it's a lot easier to make fun of republicans than democrats, that's what the shows do more of.
Funny, because that's the same thing I hear Conservatives say about Liberals and they both back it up with the same "proof".
See the point yet? They're both wrong.
The greatest thing that's wrong with politics right now is this team sport cheerleader mentality. You're either a Democrat or a Republican. You have to show up to games wearing your team colors or be chastised by the other fanatics (aka "fans") of the team. And god forbid that you might actually be a fanatic of the other team! That will result in nothing less than the tossing of stereotypical derogatory chants back and forth which, of course, will lead to some parking lot brawl.
Don't dare try to have a different opinion other than the teams party lines, otherwise, they'll try a hostel take over of your position. Just ask Joel Liberman, who supports the Iraq war and some tax cuts and was attacked by his own party by them running and financing another Democrat to take his seat.
Don't dare try to say you support the right to abortion, gay marriage or that you're agnostic or atheist, as a Republican. You'll be similarly cast down from the rank and file.
The point is, the problem with politics are people you the parent. Those people who actually THINK one side is better than the other by default. That one side a bigger joke than the other or what have you. Sadly, the true joke are these people and these are the people that Colbert and Stewart make fun of. These people are blind to the obvious and sheep of the proverbial Shepard. These are the people who make easy targets for jokes because others can clearly see their blind ignorance and stupidity on ISSUES, not political affiliation.
People who think like the parent are the one's who think with an intensely partisan mindset. They're the one's, are there are a lot of them, who keep these political charades going. Nothing is going to change until we break down the walls of party affliction and the team sport mentality. Politics are not a game that's played on Sundays and Monday nights. Competition and competitiveness only amongst people only lead to a loss for everyone as important issues get ignored for a few small mindsets of a minority of people who are bullied and repressed into taking the same stances as the party out of fear or reprisal. This is the true killer of independent thought and critical analysis, yet it'll be the last thing anyone will be willing to "fix".
Wait a second... (Score:5, Interesting)
"That's the problem with conservatives, they can't approach things without an intensely partisan mindset"
Uh, some can, some can't. Are you actually going to claim liberals are any different? Because I'd love to point you to several major liberal websites where the denizens will readily prove to you that if it ain't liberal, it's downright evil. No room for gray areas. Democratic Underground, Daily Kos, Truthout, Alternet... there's a pretty long list here. So if I were you, I'd reconsider this notion that liberals are all capable of tolerant, non-partisan thinking. They're just as human as the conservatives they oppose.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Informative)
You must not be watching the same show that I am. Jon Stewart is an extremely kind/generous/softball interviewer. I've seen him conduct a 'contentious' interview maybe two or three times (one of those was Feith). Colbert is contentious and slightly in-your-face (with everyone), because he's impersonating Bill O'Reilly's evil twin. The venom you see there is necessary, if one is going to pretend to be a conservative.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:4, Interesting)
That being said, his least contentious/biggest softball interview? Lynn Chaney, by far.
Eh, I actually think that was appropriate on his part. Lynn Cheney doesn't set policy. I don't see the point of beating up on someones wife just because you disagree with his policies.
Colbert is the only Liberal in America with Balls (Score:5, Insightful)
The first person to actually question the Bush regime said it right to his face at the press awards banquet.
And he gave Scalia the finger and made him laugh.
And then he basically called the sheep like media whores to their faces.
And everyone who had been keeping their mouths shut woke up
Re:Colbert is the only Liberal in America with Bal (Score:5, Interesting)
That speech was the reason I started to watch the show and then the Daily Show. :)
Since I don't have cable I don't get Comedy Central.
Even if I did have cable, I wouldn't get the US Comedy Central since I live in in the NL
So now I have a daily ritual of watching TDS and TCR online the day after it aired
One of the best things of the Daily Show imho is that they call the politicians on their stupidity and hypocrisy (sp?) every time they do something they said they wouldn't. :)
Colbert is just fantastically funny, his book is funny, the Tek Jansen DVD is funny. I just love the guy
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Colbert is the only Liberal in America with Bal (Score:5, Insightful)
And he's not a diplomat.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Colbert is the only Liberal in America with Bal (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude, *lighten up*. Stephen Colbert is a comedian and satirist. Is roasting China along with everyone else in the room him being undiplomatic or him doing his thing?
If China can't take some ribbing from a comedian, what kind of super-power does that make them? Remember when that guy got a monkey to throw up just like Bush? Hilarious! Did we get on his case for lacking in diplomacy?
The only "misstep" diplomatically was putting Colbert in the room with that many powerful people, and then handing him a mike and asking him to do his thing. If the people in that room couldn't handle some humor, then he shouldn't have been asked to do the speech.
And frankly, I'm getting tired of everyone pussy-footing around China. Welcome to the World stage, China! You wanted to be a super-power? You wanted recognition and a bigger say in how things go? Well guess what, my Chinese friends? Along with greater visibility and decision making power comes a lot more criticism, outrage, and being mocked.
Welcome to our world. People have been beating on the US for years. Sometimes it was just whining (hey, I wanted to be in charge instead of you!), and sometimes it was because we used our power to run rough-shod over people. Regardless, the world didn't spare us anything--and they shouldn't.
But China? Oh, poor China! Everyone is so insensitive, so judgmental! Poor, poor China! They only own everyone on the planet through trade imbalances or by owning the country's debt. When people start to complain about China's policies, a Chinese representative reminds them that China owns them lock stock and barrel, and then an apology along with copious amounts of back pedaling ensues (see US toy makers after the lead paint fiascos).
So pardon me if I don't feel sorry for them. No one in the rest of the world is treated with as much fear and trepidation as China. And when they don't feel they get enough respect, they come down on people hard. They are big-boy country. They can clearly take care of themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I believe on most male mammals, the balls are not far from the asshole. So it makes sense, there is a very thin line between the two.
- The Saj
Democracy (Score:5, Funny)
Shouldn't it be Democrat politicians rather than Democratic politicians. After all, whatever your views on Republican politicians, aren't they Democrati...
Ah, I see your point.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I forget, which party is the one that runs un-democratic caucuses during their primaries?
Did I miss something (Score:4, Funny)
Wait... Colbert is pregnant?
Whoah.
This is a surprise? (Score:5, Insightful)
"In contrast, their Republican counterparts essentially gain nothing."
Well there's a shock. I've always thought that Republicans going on Stewart's or Colbert's show was a complete waste of time, unless their aim was to be mocked mercilessly with no benefits whatsoever. Stewart at least tries to be somewhat balanced (as much as his politics will allow him), but Colbert wastes no time with such ideas.
It'd be like a liberal Democrat going on Rush Limbaugh's program. Just what do you think you're going to get out of it? You're certainly going into hostile territory with little hope of reward. You're not going to sway that audience's opinions... they're pretty well set. I think a Republican going on Colbert's show is not only a waste of time, it's worse. He has a young liberal audience, and if anything changes their opinions, it'll be time and experience. Nothing you say is going to sway them.
Comparing Colbert to Nothing (Score:3, Insightful)
"despite being a comedy program" (Score:5, Interesting)
Both the Colbert Report and the Daily Show are not mere news parodies or simple comedies. They're actual news shows that also happen to be funny. They don't make stuff up like SNL or the Onion, they present real news.
Sort of like the movie Shaun of the Dead. Despite what people think, it was not a parody of zombie movies, it was a real zombie movie that also happened to be really funny.
The Bump starts before Colbert (Score:5, Informative)
If you look at the charts in the original article [apsanet.org], the bump starts around two weeks before they actually appear on the show. Which makes me suspect that the Bump is more likely due to the candidate making a round of interviews (of which Colbert is one), rather than it being due specifically to the Colbert interview.
consider the bigger picture (Score:5, Insightful)
Could the appearance on Colbert's show be part of a wider ranging media blitz by some of these candidates? Could they be appearing on Colbert, Leno, Letterman, Meet the Press, The Muppet Show, and Larry King all over the course of a week or two? Then following it up with a few high profile public publicity events coordinated with a few big fund raising events?
Its called a media blitz.
If there is a 'Colbert Bump' then we need a controlled experiment. Have a Democrat and a Republican appear on Colbert's show, and make no other public appearances for a month after word. Then measure the outcome.
I think it is just an artifact of campaign style differences between the two parties. The Democrats have been fond of the Madison Avenue marketing blitz style for a while (lots of flash and no substance). Republicans are more of the smoke filled back room style. (Have third parties funded by wealthy friends and talk radio media figure-heads smear your opponent with a constant feed of lies and innuendo).
I really doubt the bump in donations is attributable to an appearance on Colbert's show alone.
Nice way to further media narratives here (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice job feeding into the media narrative that Republicans are pushing: That liberals are elistist snobs. Slashdot should not do politics.
8 months old watching TV? (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only one bothered by an 8 months old being close enough to a TV for long enough to be noticeably affected by it?
That's a growing consumer, alright...
Re:8 months old watching TV? (Score:4, Insightful)
Given the alternative (Sitting in a playpen with much LESS stimulation), sitting a kid in front of the TV (where they hear music, language, however low quality it may be) is actually better from a developmental standpoint!
Kid-friendly Colbert? (Score:4, Insightful)
In my home we refer to Stephen as "Loud Daddy" because my child would scream bloody murder when we paused him (and only him) on screen. Even at 8 months old the kid has strange taste.
Now that I think about it, this makes sense. Babies love faces, and Colbert's broad satire comes with some really broad facial expressions. Angry, hurt, sad, gleeful, and more angry. It's probably the only grown-up show on TV which spends most of its time showing a big full-screen shot of a man making goofy faces. Even the Daily Show doesn't compare: Stewart has to deliver most of his punch lines with a newsman's straight face.
Re:bring on the flamefest (Score:4, Insightful)
Be fair, it's not slashdot that's the problem.
It's the corrupt assholes that pay lip service to the electorate during campaigns and then go right back to screwing them for money the minute it's all over.
The big two party systems is the problem, not the people that it's driven to cynicism.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, it's news for Nerds and stuff that matters.
The Colbert Report is a popular show among a lot of demographics (nerds included). I'm sure if John Stewart or Stephen Colbert dropped dead today the story would make it onto Slashdot's front page and nobody would complain that it wasn't truly Slashdot material.
On top of which, the story connects with politics so that adds just of a little of "stuff that matters."