Skip to main content

Everybody in blogotopia is buzzing about Colbert's pointed roasting of Bush and the press corps at last night's White House dinner.

Peter Daou has the most interesting take I've seen so far over at Huffington Post. He looks at the reaction of the media to the performance and--not surprisingly--finds it lacking.

The AP's first stab at it - and pieces from Reuters and the Chicago Tribune - tell us everything we need to know: Colbert's performance is sidestepped and marginalized while Bush is treated as light-hearted, humble, and funny. Expect nothing less from the cowardly American media. The story could just as well have been Bush and Laura's discomfort and the crowd's semi-hostile reaction to Colbert's razor-sharp barbs. In fact, I would guess that from the perspective of newsworthiness and public interest, Bush-the-playful-president is far less compelling than a comedy sketch gone awry, a pissed-off prez, and a shell-shocked audience.

This is the power of the media to choose the news, to decide when and how to shield Bush from negative publicity. Sins of omission can be just as bad as sins of commission. . . .

A final thought: Bush's clownish banter with reporters - which is on constant display during press conferences - stands in such stark contrast to his administration's destructive policies and to the gravity of the bloodbath in Iraq that it is deeply unsettling to watch. This may be impolitic, but wouldn't refraining from frat-style horseplay be appropriate for this man? Or at the least, can't reporters suppress their raucous laughter every time he blurts out another jibe... the way they did when Colbert put them in their place?

We hear the phrase "the worst president" in history over and over again, though rarely coming from traditional media itself, unless you count Rolling Stone as traditional.

On the flip side of this phenomenally failed presidency is a fundamentally flawed media that has propped it up since even before it started. They failed in the 2000 campaign, deciding it was more fun to ridicule Al Gore for his color choices, wooden delivery, and to push the falsity that he was a liar than to actually cover the issues, the differences between the two men in terms of experience, ability, vision for the country and ability to lead. And look what we ended up with.

This is the worst presidency in the history of the country. And it happened in large part because we have the worst, laziest, and most irresponsible media since the bad old days of yellow journalism. Thank you, Stephen Colbert, for exposing that.

Update [2006-4-30 15:2:4 by mcjoan]: Frederick has a complete transcript of Colbert's performance.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 11:58 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Corporate media DELIBERATELY ignoring Colbert's (67+ / 0-)

    last night at the  White House Correspondents dinner, in which he absolutely skewed Bush in front of the entire Washington political and media elite.

    I just watched MSNBC talking head Contessa Brewer covering last night's dinner, but she COMPLETELY left out ANY mention of Colbert's skit, which was the event's highlight not only in a literal sense, but in a newsworthy and artistic sense as well. No mention of it WHATSOEVER.

    Instead, she just did one of those patented "Aw, shucks, just look at how cute Bush is" chuckles you see in the right-leaning corporate media as she showed a clip of the skit preceeding Colbert's, in which Bush and an impersonator gave a "speech" at the same time, that poked fun at Bush but in a far less vicious way than Colbert's skit did.

    By deliberately and conspicuously not mentioning the far more vicious (not to mention funny) Colbert piece AT ALL, MSNBC has committed what I firmly believe is a clear and deliberate act of journalistic bias. I contend that by not mentioning it they are INTENTIONALLY trying to help Bush out.

    There is NO WAY you don't cover what was CLEARLY the most newsworthy part of last night's dinner unless you're trying to help Bush. Period. This was not just about journalistic incompetence or oversight. This was a deliberate act of bias on MSNBC's part. They are doing everything they can to not only further dumb down news, but overtly bias it towards support of Bush and the right.

    I've read elsewhere that the same conspicuous lack of mention of Colbert's skit is happening all over the corporate media, from CNN to the LA Times. If this isn't a clear example of how the corporate media is willfully and deliberately covering for Bush, I don't know what is. They are knowingly engaging in media bias here.

    And as I type this I'm watching Robert Scheer on CSPAN. As many of you know, Scheer, a veteran and highly respected reporter and columnist, was fired from the LA Times some months ago, in order to replace him with some right-wing propagandist (I forgot the person's name). How fitting.

    Thank god we still have CSPAN (even though even they have been slowly drifting rightward recently, with their extensive coverage of AEI and Heritage events and right-wing personalities).

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

    by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 11:58:02 AM PDT

    •  Check out headlines: (9+ / 0-)

      http://news.google.com/...

      All highlight Bush's lame skit, while ignoring Colbert.   Tools.

      George W. Bush makes Reagan look smart, Nixon look honest, and his dad look coherent.

      by Dave the pro on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:07:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So do your patriotic duty (9+ / 0-)

        Go to news.google.com, search on "Correspondent's Dinner", and click on the links that highlight Colbert.  That's how Google determines relevance.

        Also go to news.yahoo.com, log in and rate up the relevant stories.

        "I hear the voices" -- George Walker "Son Of Sam" Bush
        Darcy Burner for WA-08

        by FaithAndReason on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 01:01:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thanks for the links (0+ / 0-)

          What a RIOT

          Have A Bloggy Day :)

          by eeff on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 02:00:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, this is the spirit (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ladybug53, kovie, bluebrain

          Enough whining about the corporate media already.  Okay, fine, they suck and they don't cover what they should.  

          But come on, duh.  We've known this forever.  Now let's stop whining and actually DO something about it.

          Georgia is right to bring this specific oversight to our attention -- now let's not just keep whining, let's DO something.  

          This suggestion from Darcy is worth about a thousand echos about how much the corporate media sucks.  But my two cents:

          1. The corporate media has its flaws, but if you know how to work it, you can.  It's not a brick wall, it's a hurdle to be overcome.
          1. 99% of the time when someone is bitching about the corporate media, it's just an excuse to avoid the hard work of figuring out how to do good marketing.
          1. Curse the rain, or buy an umbrella -- it's your choice.  Bitch about the corporate media -- or learn their game, and figure out how to force them to cover us.
          •  Specifics? (0+ / 0-)

            I agree with you in principle, but not knowing how exactly to go about this, I'm open to specific ideas and suggestions.

            How exactly do we get the corporate media to cover the news properly, when in fact it is precisely against their interests on all sorts of levels to not do so?

            They don't want to offend the ruling party, which can pass legislation or initiate investigations that would be very costly to them. Just the opposite, they want to please it, in order to get favorable legislation passed and avoid investigations that might force it live up to its legal and moral obligation to cover the news properly.

            They don't want to alienate their right-wing audience, whom their advertisers would not be pleased with. They want to please these people.

            They don't want to alienate their advertisers directly, many of whom are completely in bed with Bush and the GOP.

            They don't want to run news that undermines their own corporate owners and their agendas.

            And they're filled with idiots who literally don't know any better, cowardly and careerist suck-ups who are easily bribed and/or cowed by BushCo, and right-wing ideologues who like them.

            So how, exactly, are we to "play" this system?

            The only way I see of doing this is to bypass big media entirely and develop an entire alternative and progressive media structure to compete with and eventually replace it, based on the internet.

            "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

            by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 03:15:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Fair questions, for sure (4+ / 0-)

              My two cents, for what it's worth, on what's worked for me:

              1. Help them make money:  I'm not kidding -- the media is a business, first and foremost. If the companies don't make money, they go out of business.  So... give them stories that will help boost their audience, and let them make more money.  On that note...
              1. Get creative:  No one gives a rat's ass about another "hey hey, ho ho, fill in the blank has gotta go" protest, or yet another (yawn) day/week/ or month of "outrage."  Throw out the paleo-liberal playbook, and think about a creative way to deliver your message.  During the draft Clark movement, one of the most successful media stunts we pulled was handing out Clark bars.  It was novel, and it was fun, and it got covered, big time.  And of course when they covered it, they had to cover the whole story.  
              1. Use humor:  When I was fighting a Bush administration policy on the drug war, I created a satirical new effort: "Students for a Drug Free White House."  I got way more coverage than was merited, including a 10-minute stint on (hold your breath) Fox News.  Billionaires for Bush is a brilliant example of this -- they get covered, and they get their point across.
              1. Work your ass off:  Get the names and contact info of the reporters who could cover your story (i.e., right beat, right tone, etc.) and make sure to get them a good, professional release with a fun, interesting, NEWSWORTHY hook.  You may be working for a grassroots effort, but if you make your press release and your outreach look like the "grassroots weirdo amateur hour," you will be ignored.
              1. Get personal:  Don't send the same message to all the reporters.  Find out what interests them specifically, and make sure to stress the angle of your story that is most appropriate for them.  For example, you wouldn't expect a teen-focused reporter from MTV News to have any interest in the same story as a financial reporter from the WSJ, but if you're smart enough and creative enough, you should be able to spin it so there's two angles, and hopefully two bites.
              1. Get real:  Fox News might be a mouthpiece for the administration, but the reality is that most media outlets are not.  I guarantee you if you search the top 10 papers, TV networks, and magazines, you will find ample examples of negative articles on Bush, large corporations, etc.  These stories are not blackballed, they're simply not done as often as we would like or feel is appropriate.   I agree there is a bias, though I think it's far less a "right vs left" bias, and more a bias in favor of the mainstream.
              1. Get an alternative -- but don't get too excited:  You should certainly keep working on the net-based progressive media structure, and I would argue it's already here.   But radio didn't replace the papers, TV didn't replace radio, and the Net didn't replace TV.  And in our lifetimes, there ain't no way that the major media will ever be completely supplanted by the alternative media.  Keep building it, but as an addition, not an alternative.  
        •  Searching yahoo news, (0+ / 0-)

          I couldn't find a single headline that was not about Bush's little skit. There wasn't a single one that mentioned Colbert. Outside of the news stories they carry, though, Editor & Publisher has a couple good ones.

          I did my google clicking, too.

          Speech in this country is free, you hack!

          -5.88, -6.82

          by Debby on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 07:43:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Telling passage from WaPo (20+ / 0-)

      article on the dinner:

      The featured entertainer was Stephen Colbert, whose Comedy Central show "The Colbert Report" often lampoons the Washington establishment.

      "I believe that the government that governs best is a government that governs least, and by these standards we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq," Colbert said in a typical zinger.

      He also paid mock tribute to Bush as a man who "believes Wednesday what he believed Monday, despite what happened Tuesday."

      Yet it's the Who's Who of power and celebrity in the audience invited by media organizations to their dinner tables that draws much of the attention.

      Joining ABC were former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame, the CIA officer at the heart of a leak investigation that has reached deep into the White House.

      Others on the guest list included rapper-actor Ludacris; James Denton, the hunky plumber on ABC's "Desperate Housewives"; "Dancing With the Stars" winner Drew Lachey; New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin; tennis player Anna Kournikova; and Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger.

      Fucking tv personalities and athletes.  That's who was drawing the attention.  Not an incredibly brave and incisive public upbraiding of the one of the most destructive political figures in recent history.  

      As soon as the government approves it, its no longer immoral.

      by lapin on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:10:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The references to the dinner that I've seen... (14+ / 0-)

      only have Bush in the routine with the Bush impersonator. No mention of Colbert.

      It's like he was never there.

      Cowardice on this monumental scale is frightening.

    •  Call to ACTION! (13+ / 0-)

      As I just posted in another thread:

      Since we have already seen the AP reports and we can not count on the RWCM to spread the message of Truthiness that Stephen spoke it will be up to us to keep his message alive. Email the video links to your friends, burn some DVDs, share the videotape at your next house party. Most Americans have such short attention spans the dangerousness of this administration needs to be spread far and wide and if comedy/satire is way to get through to others then we must do it.

      Yes, it sucks that we have to do the media's job for them, but we can either whine about it or use our technical know how to get the message out.

      Besides who amongst us wouldn't mind watching that performance over and over?

    •  No Kidding! (6+ / 0-)

      I encourage everyone to go to various media websites and express your OUTRAGE over the milk-toast coverage of this earth-shattering performance.

      Also, make sure you go to CBS News's 60 Minutes website and tell them they better be editing their segment airing this evening on Stephen Colbert. And BE SURE TO WATCH 60 MINUTES TONIGHT!!!

    •  If media can't see Cobert (11+ / 0-)

      doesn't it make you wonder what they are

      not seeing in Iraq????

    •  If Colbert wanted coverage... (13+ / 0-)
      ...he should have exposed a breast.  That seems to be the only thing that gets coverage anymore.

      shame he doesn't have any.

      Join The Americare Project. Help design a national healthcare program for Americans by Americans.

      by DawnG on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 01:03:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Like the GOP and DC Dems, big media (5+ / 0-)

        WILL NOT change, or do the right thing, on its own. Its completely entrenched in its position of either supporting Bush and the right outright, or else effectively doing so by taking it very easy on them. They do not want to change, they do not have to change, and they will not change, just because we want them to, or call them out on it.

        The only way to get them to change is to forcefully pressure them to change, by shaming them, boycotting them, holding protests against them, and most of all, competing with them, via developing alternate ways of getting the word out.

        We're slowly getting DC Dems to change by running progressives against them. Harman, Lieberman, Cuellar, etc., are all feeling the heat. Even Hillary, I've got to believe, is starting to get the message.

        So why not do the same with big media? If they won't do their jobs right, we need to do it for them, by developing viable alternate media outlets, in print, on radio, tv, the internet, etc. If we do this effectively, we could force them to change. Or, better yet, put them out of business entirely. Yes, I really do believe this can happen.

        "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

        by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 01:13:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  yes, he's been flat-chested all (0+ / 0-)

        his life.  No need to rub it in.


        Meet the New Pharisees, same as the Old Pharisees.

        by AlyoshaKaramazov on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 06:04:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Wow, what a thought... (0+ / 0-)

        Colbert with boobs. And I thought I couldn't enjoy his show any more than I do now!

        We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace -6.63, -6.97

        by amRadioHed on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 11:51:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, it's their own asses... (7+ / 0-)

      ...that the media is covering, because Colbert clearly showed them out to be the useless regurgitators they are (Collectively, because I know there are individuals who would love to report truth to us, but get the same coverage as Colbert is.)

      By reporting only on how Bush was, they can continue pretending they aren't part of the problem. That's America's gutless media for you. Just as Jon Stewart called them out on Crossfire, which CNN intentionally didn't get, because they cancelled the show to pretend they were responding to what Mr. Stewart said.

      Our media and Bush are the same. The entire entity should be referred to under the new press secretaries code name, Snowjob; Rhymes with...

    •  One More Reason (0+ / 0-)

      to not watch the MSM, and MSM can't understand why viewers are leaving their sphere.  Now the Net Nutrality stuff is comming over the horizon. Won't be to long before I am selling Berkely Barbs on the streets again, to get the word out. Post Modern InterNet Style

      It takes a bucket of blood for a barrel of oil.

      by Encriptical Envelopments on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 06:48:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  i guess (0+ / 0-)

      they did not get a white house press release to transcribe.

      REALITY IS NOT ALWAYS PROBABLE,OR LIKELY. JORGE LUIS BORGES

      by AltruisticSkeptic on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 08:07:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I feel like vomiting on these people (6+ / 0-)

    Buckets and buckets worth.

    I'm 6'3" and abou 200 lbs.  I know I haven't the capacity in my system to produce enough vomit to drench them all.

    But then... I know, somehow, that once I stood over them and once I started spewing, that righteous fluid would cover them all.  They would drown in it.

  •  Conservatives talkin about funny (16+ / 0-)

    Is like the character in "Good Morning Vietnam" telling Robin Williams how to do his show.

    And as for the comments a Free Republic about him bombing cause no one was laughing, well the butts of jokes usually don't LOL.  

    Impeach Gary Bettman

    by Edanger6 on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:00:41 PM PDT

    •  The demeaning kind of oblivion (8+ / 0-)

      I jumped over to FR to read their comments last night, too. Their humor is about demeaning people or running someone down, humor at the expense of others is the main process - and that's not humor, that's self-important, self-indulgent demonization of others, a self-imposed obliviousness.

      The comments about Hellen Thomas alone reveal their shallow and juvenile need to pump themselves up and directly reveals their own personal insecurities. The louder the laughter, the deeper the insecurity. They're children with adult faces, banded together in ferral packs to hide their cowardly hearts.

      They don't get it. They didn't get it in the 60s and they don't get it now. Most of these appear to be PT Barnum's suckers and fools who will never grow up. Really, it's so sad...

      •  But there's so god-damned many of them (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        xerico, rjo

        "Rapturists. Suicide bombers. What's the diff?" Plato

        by steelman on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 04:10:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, there are (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Rita in DC

          but we ain't chickenfeed either. They have mouths, but we have megaphones with amplifiers like the net and are capable of reaching many people, not just here, but in all our respective communities. They disrespect, we respect (as a general rule). They repeat - we think, create, interact and network and inform as well as confront.

          In political terms, we don't need to convince that many of them at all - our area of work is with the independents, that 25% of swing voters. And even that 15% or so within our party who are reluctant to tag the administration with all the hits they are due. Any others we can chisel away is gravy.

          And last, those who constitute that group want to belong. Right here in a mostly rural situation, the switch to the republican side came about due to social situations (read: minorities in many cases, social access in others) and re-inforcing misinformation. Candidates are fed the party line and can't deviate much at all or the money is withdrawn. One local who wanted to run for state senator was told he had to buy in with $300K, then the repubs would open the floodgates. With their info locked into the deal. He declined. He's a populist at heart and, while Republican, is wavering at the moment. I plan to reel him in because he's open to the truth. There's lots of officials like that now. Listen well and help develop that chasm.

          The truth to draw from PT Barnum's crowd is that they can't stand alone and they know it, even if it is irrational and stupid, but there are others more self-aware and looking for options. Give them one.

        •  i have to say in my opinion there looks like a (0+ / 0-)

          lot of them. but i think they get on their blogs because they want company. being scared is a lonely business. for example, i look at the yahoo blogs just to get an idea of how the wind blows. there was one time there were numerous con posters, and some even had a wee bit of intelligence. now that is no longer true. there are very few and their comments consist of lying in a way that would make bagdad bob proud or making "butt" jokes. what i am trying to say is the number of shrinking more and more everyday.

      •  absolutely... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Edanger6

        They.Are.Not.It-getters.

        "Computer. End holographic program...Computer? Computer?"

        by kredwyn on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 04:36:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Bush was not the only one slammed (65+ / 0-)

    While I enjoyed Bush getting mocked thoroughly, I found it much more pertinent to the event that Colbert ripped the media a new one.  I think this may explain their lukewarm response - if he had just mocked the president, that may have been semi-acceptable (though I doubt it).  But he basically told the people in the room how pathetic they were, and it was such a joy to watch.  The irony was thick, and he clearly could give a rat's ass about what the majority of the helper monkeys in that room thought.  ROCK ON COLBERT!!!

  •  Stephen Colbert has the biggest balls in show biz (83+ / 0-)

    I worked with Stephen a couple of times, and just in case he sees this, I want him to know that's what I think. I never saw anything like it in comedy in my life, and I've seen a lot of comedy.
    Just unbelievable courage. There was a moment when Bush turned against him, I could feel it, watching live. The audience, good  courtiers all, turned against Stephen with him, but Colbert wasn't fazed a bit. What nerve! What a beautiful piece of comedy. Cheers!

    We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. Aesop (620 - 560 BC)

    by AWhitneyBrown on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:02:26 PM PDT

  •  How can we combat this? (17+ / 0-)

    The transformation of news into entertainment over the last 25 years or so is a bad, bad sign.  How can this be reversed?  Is there a way?  Having a "Free Press" also means having the freedom to sell out your duty to report the news in favor of profits, I guess.

    Our founders assured that we COULD have a free press, not that we MUST have a free press, and obviously the press itself has decided they don't WANT to be a free press anymore.

    A pessimist sees a glass half empty. I see a paper cup with holes punched in it.

    by Paper Cup on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:02:28 PM PDT

    •  Your're on it right now. (17+ / 0-)

      That's why they feel threatened by the "blogosphere" or whatever they call it.

      •  Bingo! (10+ / 0-)

        That's the beauty of blogs and the internet.  Colbert's performance is THE TALK of the town and it's happening without the corporate media.  Through sites that host the video, bit-torrent exchange, etc. (and broadband connections) people can see this amazing performance for themselves.  I've already sent links to plenty of people.  The word is out.

        It must be particularly distressing to the media centers because Sunday is supposed to be their day, with all of their "insight" shows providing the talking points.  The big discussion at the water coolers on Monday, however, is going to be about Colbert.  The funny thing is, that by avoiding the discussion, the corporate media is actually proving one of the points that Stephen was trying to make.

        Welcome to the new "Freedom of the Press"! :)

    •  blogger in the press corps (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TampaProgressive

      Might spice things up. Okay, fine - have a right blogger and a left blogger, if you must.

    •  the media really deserves our primary focus (5+ / 0-)

      i recently posted in another diary comment (http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/4/30/92922/6097/157?mode=alone;showrate=1#157) my hope that we realize just how important it is that we as activists and citizens understand our mission to guarantee a press for the people and by the people.

    •  How can this be reversed? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peacemom, turquoise

      FREE PRESS

      (Free Press is a nonpartisan organization working to involve the public in media policymaking and to craft policies for more democratic media.)

      Let's honor Stephen Colbert's brave and brilliant skewering of the mainstream media last night by not just blogging about him, but by learning what we might do to help the movement for media reform.  

      I hope you'll check it out!  :-)

    •  Only one way to combat it (7+ / 0-)

      Which is by offering a compelling alternative to it. Direct competition is still the most effective means of trumping mediocrity, let alone undeniable trash.

      Older media delivery technologies such as broadcast, cable and radio, are simply too dominated by big media and megacorporations at this point--reinforced by unbelievably supportive legislation and courts--to be within our grasp. There is virtually NO WAY we're going to get much progressive content on them at this point. Comedy Central, Countdown, 60 Minutes and Now are about as close as we're ever going to get to real balance on them.

      We need to exploit newer and emerging technologies to restore balance and directly compete with big media. Blogs are a good start, but they'll never have mainstream reach because most people are too lazy, suspicious and ignorant to bother with them. Nor are web sites such as Media Matters or Raw Story likely to have much impact, because, again, most Americans are simply too lazy, suspicious and ignorant to bother with them.

      Instead, I think we need to develop online audio and video programs that present a more professional and genuinely balanced delivery of the news, as well as progressive audio and video shows to match the ones in the corporate media.

      We can start right now with streaming audio and video sites (with downloadable podcasts) like Air America. But this won't be likely to really take off until an upcoming technology (I think it's called Internet TV) becomes widely available.

      From what I understand about it, it's not like current streaming internet TV, in which you need to open up a browser or steaming client like RealPlayer to view it. Instead, it would be TV content delivered straight to your TV via a set-top box, that was fed by an internet feed like a cable or DSL modem, whose content cable companies cannot legally control, as opposed to a direct cable feed (be it analog or digital), which they can control (and which is why, I assume, they want to have greater control over the internet via the legislation up before congress right now).

      Think of it as streaming video (and audio, I assume) for dummies, in which you don't need to know how to use a computer, or even have a computer, to watch it. It would work exactly like a normal TV and cable box, except instead of several hundred cable channels (which you're forced to choose from in buckets), you'd literally have an unlimited number of channels, millions and millions of them, which you can choose from a la carte, and not pay a cent more for (unless they're subscription-based, of course).

      We're still several years away from this, but when it happens it'll be the perfect medium on which to finally restore some balance to media. With funding by people like George Soros, I'm sure that it could compete with big media like CNN and Faux. In the meantime, we should be developing streaming versions of such channels using existing technology. I'm surprised that no one's doing this yet, on a large scale.

      "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

      by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:41:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  A news wire service (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Creosote, stodghie, Benito

        The ultimate way to break into the media would be to create an alternative syndicated news wire service, in multiple formats.  For example, a progressive AP.

        It's doable too.  I really believe that.

        •  Good idea (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Creosote, joanneleon

          There are all sorts of things we progressives (of all stripes) can do to change the media environment for the better. I wonder if there are web sites that allow people to their own reporting, with the ability to post not only text, but photos, audio and video. I.e. grassroots journalism.

          Not all of it will be very good (and if successful it would certainly be trolled to death), but like blogs the cream will eventually rise to the surface (along with the scum, which can be skimmed off and discarded as needed).

          One way or another, we need to get away from the current top-down big media model of journalism, and come up with an "open source" version that's actually run by, and for, we the people, not crooked and dishonest politicians, greedy and megalomaniacal media conglomerates, and incompetent careerist "journalists".

          I'm convinced that this could absolutely revolutionize the way journalism is conducted, delivered and received, and thus the impact that it has on politics and life.

          "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

          by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 01:21:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Isn't this what Public Access TV (0+ / 0-)

            was supposed to supply to the community?  A vehicle for independent programming?  Wouldn't public access channels be a good place to put up local news stories?  It would certainly be a place for would-be videojournalists to cut their teeth.

            (-5.25, -7.95) "Self-respect is a question of recognizing that anything worth having has a price." - Joan Didion

            by SueDe on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 06:31:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Good point, but as far as I know (0+ / 0-)

              they're local access only. It would take some serious effort to coordinate them nationally--without which this wouldn't be nearly effective enough to compete with big media. Plus, there are probably be FCC rules that prohibit such coordination, or even their use for political purposes. And even if not, big media would mount a massive legal attack on any such attempts that could tie it up for years. This is why they now want to control content on the internet as well. Not that this wouldn't be worth the effort, but it would be a very daunting undertaking. And, perhaps, a necessary one.

              "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

              by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 08:43:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Most people have never heard of it (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Creosote

            nor will they, and of those who have, most probably view it as some radical crunchy-chewy tree-hugging left-wing relic of the 60's, staffed by ex-hippies and assorted socialist freaks who hate America and aren't living in the real world.

            I'm not saying that any of this is true, just that it's what most people would probably view it as. This is not going to play well with the soccer and security mom crowd, let alone the NASCAR dad and deer hunting crowd.

            Plus, I'd rather that outfits like Pacifica remain on the margins somewhat, as it keeps them from succumbing to the inevitable corruption that comes from mainstream acceptance and "legitimacy". I see them as the people whose job it is to inform people like us, whose job it is to keep big media honest, and to help set up viable alternative mainstream media outlets.

            We need another news network or two, modeled on the original CNN, but with the production values of the old news divisions of the 3 networks, before they were forced to become profitable, with serious, experienced journalists, superb news managers, an ample budget, a range of advertisers, and a genuine dedication to doing the job right--i.e. telling the important news of the day, in detail and truthfully, and no missing white woman stories.

            I think it can be done. I have no idea how, but I'm sure that there are people who've worked in the business who can come up with ideas and get something going here. We need this BADLY.

            "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

            by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 09:08:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Kovie you really need to start a separate (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Creosote

        thread on this. You have great ideas and insights which are getting lost because of the high energy Colbert stuff.

        "Culture is propaganda! Can you handle that?" by sravaka DailyKos

        by Carbide Bit on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 08:28:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thinking about diarying it, but you'll have to (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Creosote

          wait a while. I've pretty much given up on quickie diaries written in 30-60 minutes. There are too many of those as it is and more than enough really good diaries written by people who obviously know what they're talking about and who've spent the time to do it right, to compete with them at this point.

          Plus, we're way past the point where it's enough to just vent about or expose the latest Bush scandal. We all have to start spending our time and effort coming up with real, tangible, substantial ideas for turning things about.

          And since I'm incredibly slow when it comes to turning general ideas into tangible results, it's going to take me a while to do this right. And I want to do it right.

          But thanks for the encouragement. Stay tuned...

          "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

          by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 09:13:37 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Know what you mean. I did the 30 minute (0+ / 0-)

            thing today - it bombed. Good idea, too much passion, not enough light.

            But your idea could generate a major expansion of the whole concept of blogging.

            "Culture is propaganda! Can you handle that?" by sravaka DailyKos

            by Carbide Bit on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 09:22:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I've got tons of ideas but not enough discipline (0+ / 0-)

              and patience to write them up properly (as, alas, we all do). It makes all the difference between a great idea, and a great idea that gets taken seriously.

              I'm at the point where I want to help make things happen, and not just participate in the collective Bush bashing. Not that there's anything wrong with the latter, and in fact it's important to be able to keep doing this. But we all need to move to the next level in terms of changing the way things are, and not just noticing and complaining about them.

              As my father always liked to tell me when I complained about this or that while growing up, what specific constructive suggestions did I have to help him do things better? That always shut me up for a while (and got me thinking productively)!

              Time to hole up for a while and turn ideas into plans, I guess...

              "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

              by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 09:51:24 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Well, the obvious response (0+ / 0-)

      is to transform entertainment into news.

      Looks like that's the soup du jour.

  •  Colbert's got balls (6+ / 0-)

    And he finally got the chance to prove it.

    Reality has a well-known liberal bias. - Stephen Colbert

    by Unusual Suspect on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:02:31 PM PDT

  •  You know what.... (14+ / 0-)

    the "media" can fail all they want...

    there's a NEW media in town...and we're MORE fabulous and MORE honest and MORE informed!

    I refuse to participate in the mainstream moronic media anymore....unless I'm writing an LTE in which case I'm usually writing about something they haven't even mentioned in their papers because they're so fucking ignorant.

    Now...if we can just inform every other American that the media has been giving the Republican party fellatio for the last 6-7 years....we might actually get somewhere.

    Bravo Colbert! Bravo!

    •  Yes... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      m00nchild, Elise, trashablanca

      we are. All that and more and as more video blogging comes online and more "folks" get cable and tune in to the "internets" we are going to take back the media for the people.

      And we are going to tell them the truth about what is happening in their country.

      "Such is the irresistible nature of truth that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing."

      by Nestor Makhnow on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:15:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not with the repeal of Net Neutrality (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Creosote, ebbak, rjo, ladybug53
        When that happens (it is happening now in the House), the internet will become more of a broadcast medium, which is to the Fuehrer's liking. No more ill-tempered proles organizing and sharing. Only the owners (and their minions) of the Great American Tenant Farm (aka the Traditional Media) will have to right to free speech. Remember, the Supreme Court equated having the money to pay for advertisements as the equivalent of free speech. If you want free speech, pay for it, but submit a Free Speech Ration Card with that purchase. FEMA will get around to printing some Free Speech Ration Cards real soon now.


        -7.25/-6.41 Service [to others] is the rent we pay for the space we occupy. -Rev. M. L. King, Jr.

        by sravaka on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 02:31:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Worst Press Ever (12+ / 0-)

    Good night and good luck, indeed.

    But *you* get it. And you come from a long line of it-getters.

    by RepublicanTaliban on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:03:30 PM PDT

  •  The press is in collusion with this regime. (19+ / 0-)

    Bought and paid for with corporate dollars/tax cuts.  They have no impetus to ridicule their fearless "decider."  In a fascist state such as ours, freedom of the press is archaic and dangerous.  Our current regime let's us believe there's a free press, but it's the same ruse we believed about our last "election."  If anyone here doubts that, take a look at today's LA TIMES and NEW YORK TIMES.  Not one single word about the massive anti-war demonstration through Manhattan yesterday.  Not one single word.  That's not a free press, folks.  That's a carefully controlled message machine for the masses.  Our democracy is imploding right in front of us and most of us know nothing about it.  Which is exactly what this regime wants.  Ignorant people are much easier to control.  Stephen Colbert threw some dirt in their faces last night, but the general public won't hear anything about it.

  •  It's pathetic (16+ / 0-)

    that it's taking comedians to tell the truth in this country.  First it was Jon Stewart taking to that idiot in the bow tie... and now Colbert.

    Yes, the media want to ignore it, because (in both cases) the media come off as fools.

  •  well done; the pres and the press took a hit (5+ / 0-)

    the press realized it before Bush did. Not the friendly audience that Colbert usually faces.

    Bush gives pubic hair a bad name.

    by seesdifferent on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:04:58 PM PDT

  •  My family just got through (7+ / 0-)

    watching the whole thing on C-SPAN, thanks to a heads-up here. We already loved Colbert, and now we admire him even more. What he did took courage.

    It also models admirable behavior to my daughters. May they be inspired to always speak their minds.

    The fav line was about the Hindenberg. Priceless!

    As for the MSM, I long ago gave up on looking to them for most of my news. A news aggregator and search engine like Google provides a faster, more accurate view of current affairs. Along with my daily dose of KOS.

  •  Even more than the frontal attacks on Bush,... (28+ / 0-)

    I enjoyed the way Colbert shoved it up the media's ass:

    But, listen, let’s review the rules. Here’s how it works. The President makes decisions, he’s the decider. The Press Secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Put them through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know, fiction.

  •  But really, what could they say? (17+ / 0-)

    If they report it accurately, they have to admit that Colbert called them out on their lazy, cozy relationship with the White House. The only thing they CAN do is ignore it and hope it fades into oblivion.

    The whole idea of the correspondents and the president getting together once a year for good natured fun is repugnant to me. The guests' smugness about being in the inner circle (you know, the marshmellow center) was obvious from the moment CSPAN started recording the event.

    Appalling, really.

    ***Every pig has his Saturday***

    by TampaProgressive on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:06:48 PM PDT

  •  The LSM shows that it truly is Lame! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TampaProgressive, Elise

    Wow! Who'd a thunk it.

    Expecting these millionaires, everybody you see on the little screen is ya know, to do anything but pander to The Chimp is futile.

    The American people have figured it out though. In spite of blow-dried robots mouthing absolute bullshit they know. They can see the face of evil. They know what President Death has in store for them a nice slot in Corporate Slave State.

    And no matter what Katy Couric, Bill O'Leilly, Tweety and all the rest of the mainstream liars say...

    They are never gonna like The Chimp again. They've tagged him as a psychopathic asshole.

    Because that's what he is.

    "Such is the irresistible nature of truth that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing."

    by Nestor Makhnow on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:09:27 PM PDT

  •  I was hoping the press wasn't laughing (4+ / 0-)

    because they finally got it that bush ain't funny.

    "It's the Government, we're hear to help you."

    by Friend of the court on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:10:19 PM PDT

  •  shill and shrill? (8+ / 0-)

    not with Colbert.  he was so right on i was crying and laughing while watching the video on Crooks and Liars.

    that a comedian would have to dress down the press establishment in such a fashion is as sad contextually as it is funny in its particular moment of delivery.

    and all the silence that he apparently received is far less a sign of his having "bombed" as frequently reported in the corporate media.  and more a sign of his having hit the nail so hard he took all of the oxygen out of the room in one stroke.

    i've tied this to a larger request for action on battling the corporate media in this comment thread here: http://www.dailykos.com/...

  •  Court Jester (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TampaProgressive

    I read somewhere that Bush's Twin bit was eerily like the "court jester" to Bush's "king george"

    ...the media has no sense of humor when all they find funny after 6 years are jokes about Bush's mispronoucing words...

    seriously what do they think is going to happen if they LAUGH?!?! They're going to get kidnaped in the middle of the night and thrown in some "fake jail" somewhere in Russia....I mean come on people please!!

    It's not easy being a Floridian.

    by lawstudent922 on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:14:01 PM PDT

  •  Bush: Bring It On (11+ / 0-)

    Dub said, "Bring it on".  It got brought and he could not handle it.  

  •  La Marseillaise (13+ / 0-)

    If the RWNM had been covering the scene in Casablanca where everyone stands up and sings La Marseillaise, they would have commented on what a gala night out the German officers were having and how their lighthearted attitude wowed the crowd. What a bunch of maroons.

  •  Clown Puncher (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ladybug53

    A final thought: Bush's clownish banter with reporters - which is on constant display during press conferences - stands in such stark contrast to his administration's destructive policies and to the gravity of the bloodbath in Iraq that it is deeply unsettling to watch.

    I think Bush is, yet again, attempting to communicate a message to America here, in his own inverted way.

    The AP's first stab at it - and pieces from Reuters and the Chicago Tribune - tell us everything we need to know:

    Please do...by all means...

    I just returned from Disney World (again). I have to go unpack my suitcase now.

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    Open that suitcase with caution.

    It's a small world, after all.

  •  Was it even mentioned (7+ / 0-)

    on the sacred Sunday morning news shows?  Seems to me that the main topic was the price of gas.  Maybe the shows had been taped already before the press dinner, I don't know.

    I didn't see the news shows this morning, save for a few snippets, but I didn't hear a word about Colbert's speech.

    Then again, I knew last night that the media would bury it.  After all, they were the main target, along with the whole press secretary and WH press corps infrastructure.  And it wasn't aimed at any one part of the media, except for some special mentions of Fox News.  So they couldn't even go after each other.  Best to just pretend it never happened.  [eyes closed, hands over ears] "La la la la la la la."  The problem is that they read the blogs now, so they know Colbert's point wasn't missed and it won't go away.

    Cowards.  Myopic cowards.  They're not even very good at navel gazing when it doesn't suit them.

  •  What does the media have to do with (0+ / 0-)

    Bush being the Worst President in the history of the United States? Even if there was no media he would still be the WPOTUS.

    "The Truth is far more powerful than any weapon of mass destruction." -Gandhi

    by Chamonix on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:23:00 PM PDT

    •  Yes but if reporters did their jobs (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pharoah, rjo, MarketTrustee

      the emperor's nakedness would have been obvious long ago

      ***Every pig has his Saturday***

      by TampaProgressive on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:27:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yup (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TampaProgressive, Carbide Bit

        Bush was a screwed-up overgrown frat boy who enjoyed blowing up frogs long before he became President.  The Press Corpse has had SEVEN YEARS to tell it like it really his about the Boy King, and they've refused to do their job and their patriotic duty.

        Yes, Bush his responsibility for his own crimes, but the Press Corpse is responsibility for allowing the harm that he has done to this nation and the world.

        "I hear the voices" -- George Walker "Son Of Sam" Bush
        Darcy Burner for WA-08

        by FaithAndReason on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:39:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          donnas

          Right after 9-11 the media could have gone several routes with covering Bush.

          A. Show Bush is an incompetent fuckup cant complete a sentence let alone defend the country

          or

          B. Show that Bush is a strong resolute turrist fighter who only speaks in Lincoln-esque and Churchillian speeches.

          For the most part, the media chose B.

          Only the dissatisfied can make change

          by pharoah on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:47:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Sorry for the rant...... (8+ / 0-)

    The entire night was telling.

    The display of the self-importance of the media establishment last night was stunning. The fact is now the members of our media have become celebrities of part of the story. Bloated salaries and bloated egos.

    There was the segment of the evening where they showed the deterioating WH press room and cramped press offices. First, I didnt even know that the networks and news companies had offices in the White House. I find that a little strange. How do they keep their independence like that? I just always assumed they went from their network offices to the White House, not that they actually had offices in the White House. I was also put off by the bitching and complaints that the reporters did complaining about cramped and uncomfortable offices. I guess it was supposed to be a light moment of jokes, but I dont think they were joking.

    Second, the night personified the deteriation of the media just like right now the celbrtity staus Katie Coric has now. She gets paid tens of millions of dollars to ask vapid questions and make delicious spinich salads. The night showed how our reporters have become celebrities among other celebrities in attendance(actors,athletes,rappers, etc.)

    And now the reporters have become self important celebs who become part of the stories. A crazy example of this was Russert in the Plame affair. Russert who has some involvement in the case refused to or barelydid talk about the matter on his Meet the Press show because he was involved. Now why didnt he just talk a few weeks off or a month off and let another host talk about case who wasnt involved? Because, Russert is the host and must always host. If its Sunday, his viewers depend on Russert and only Russert to put up troubling soundbites and quotes that show that politicians are hypocrities. Noone else can do that but Russert. The same with the celeb staus we put on network anchors. Its become truly silly at this point to see the self importance of out reporters.

    Now the WH correspondence has become a big deal black tie affair of dual self congraluation between politicians the media. It used to show that politicians are really good sports about the covereage they receive from the media. But in the past, it really mattered because the press used to be critical of the president. And not just when its safe and easy to when he's below 40%.

    Only the dissatisfied can make change

    by pharoah on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:25:09 PM PDT

    •  courics installation (0+ / 0-)
      at cbs EPITOMIZEs the white house press kit. this is why she must be TAREGETED for dkos and alternative source news feed. forget snow.

      this is one cow needing a diet. whether she wants it or not -- the nations poultry and pork stock don't get that kinda sensitivity training on death and environment. why should she be exempt?

      she takes over cbs evenig end of may.

      P.S. i've been watching and paying for good night, and good luck all month. call me crazy -- speaking of celebrities, i had nothing but contempt for clooney.  NOW i'm buying murrow direct. 2 years later, big up georgie.

      Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

      by MarketTrustee on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:42:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Most of the MSM won't cover it... (10+ / 0-)

    but I'll bet you dollars to donuts that Bush's abuse at the hands of Colbert will be the lead story on Countdown on Monday. This is too delicious for Keith to pass up...so unless another sex scandal breaks or Karl Rove gets indicted, I image we'll see a good sampling of Colbert's smackdown on MSNBC tomorrow.

    Hillary Clinton is the Yoko Ono of the Democratic Party.

    by HighSticking on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:28:58 PM PDT

  •  I'm just happy that Bush had to (6+ / 0-)

    sit there and take it. It's a cummupence that he deserves more than any living human. Thank you Mr. Colbert!

    It's the stupid, stupid!

    by kitebro on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:32:21 PM PDT

  •  Stephen Colbert on 60 Minutes TONIGHT!!! (9+ / 0-)

    I posted this buried in some of the other comments, but I wanted to make it more obvious.

    Stephen Colbert is profiled on 60 Minutes tonight! Watch and see how they cover his performance last night. If they don't cover it, there is truly no hope for the American media establishment.

  •  'The last third is usually backwash.' (16+ / 0-)

    zoooom!—outta the park!

    "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." – H.L. Mencken

    by subtropolis on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:33:04 PM PDT

  •  I missed it--anyone know if it will be repeated? (0+ / 0-)

    Was offline this weekend till now. Anyone know if C-SPAN will run it yet again? I'd love to record it.

  •  Wapo's Dan Froomkin will write tomorrow... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    trashablanca

    Wapo's Dan Froomkin will find it interesting!
    I know he will write about it tomorrow.  

  •  ... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    odaiwai, jfadden, ladybug53, trashablanca

    This is the worst presidency in the history of the country. And it happened in large part because we have the worst, laziest, and most irresponsible media since the bad old days of yellow journalism

    .

    This is the worst presidency in the history of the country. And it happened in large part because we have the dumbest, laziest and most uninvolved voting populace since the good old days of the Reagan "who's your daddy" administration...

    Outside of a dog a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read ~Groucho Marx

    by bic momma on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:52:34 PM PDT

  •  A bit funny, not hilarious, but mostly scary (7+ / 0-)

    Scary, because here you have gathered the top political elite of the last remaining superpower, and Colbert threw into their very faces their own corruption, cupidity, dishonesty, incompetence and arrogance, and no one, not a single one of the elites, had a comeback or any other idea of what to do. That they sat there in stunned discomfort highlights both the accuracy of Colbert's venom, and the elites' inability to respond.

    What I'm feeling and thinking must have been what Rome's citizens felt and thought while they watched the insanity of Caligula and Nero bring the Empire to a lurching end. Utter and complete disgust and despair that my country has reached so low a nadir.

    How can a entire elite political class be replaced in time to save our republic?

    I fear the worst.

    If you're tired of being screwed by them, in November is your chance to tell Republicans to go screw themselves.

    by NBBooks on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 12:53:56 PM PDT

    •  I know, same thoughts here (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      turquoise

      All the people sitting in that room need to go.

      Perhaps if we're lucky an earthquake will swallow Washington.

      Sponge Bob, Mandrake, Cartoons. That's how your hard-core islamahomocommienazis work.

      by Benito on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 01:35:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I was thinking of a line... (0+ / 0-)

        ... from the song 'The Fletcher Memorial Home'.

        "Safe in the permanent gaze of a cold glass eye
        their favourite toy
        They'll be good girls and boys
        In the Fletcher Memorial Home for colonial Wasters of life and limb.

        Is everyone in?
        Are you having a nice time?
        Now the final solution can be applied."

        "It is only for the sake of those without hope that hope is given to us." -- Walter Benjamin

        by quaderni on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 04:28:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  HI Res vid link incase you missed it.... (0+ / 0-)
  •  Bill Kristol was just a warm-up act (3+ / 0-)

    Colbert kicked everyone's ass.

  •  Colbert (8+ / 0-)

    I watched Colbert live and in the first repeat. He was amazing and dead on target.

    I am shocked that all I've heard about today is Bush and his evil twin routine and not one single word about Colbert.

    Colbert gave the media gold with his words. He laid the opportunity at the feet of the media to pick up on what he said and really talk about the destruction, manipulation, outright lies, and perception vs. truth of this administration. Instead, they're all laughing with Bush again today as if he was anything other than pathetic last night.

    I've written to every news show I've watched to let them know how wrong they are to show Bush's bit and not acknowledge Colbert's superior segment.

    Thankfully, we'll have Olbermann, Stewart and Colbert who will give it the time it deserves on their shows tomorrow.

  •  Most important (6+ / 0-)
    aspect of his routine, I thought, except for his remarks about turning every disaster into a Presidential photo-op, was his critique of the media.

    If there are historians left, one of the most important stories of this era will be the story of media corruption.

  •  This just goes to show (6+ / 0-)

    how far we have yet to go.  The press corps is, as advertized, a bunch of craven stenographers, and it will take a good many more "Colberts" to change the dominant paradigm, especially the one inside the Beltway.  Do not fret, we're goning to be gaining on them.

    AND NOW, today's White House press gaggle, with more Snow and Les Kinsolving.

    by GOTV on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 01:13:26 PM PDT

    •  Craven stenographers (0+ / 0-)

      What a perfect phrase. Stephen's castigation of the media was the proverbial cherry on top of his breathtaking, truthinista, guerilla disembowelment of the entire establishment.

      A line from the epilogue of Romeo and Juliet comes to mind:

      All Are Punish-ed!

  •  BEARS ! (10+ / 0-)

    You know, I've been thinking about how we could send Colbert some love.  Other comments I've seen since last night have expressed the same desire to do so.

    Do they still have those companies that send teddy bears and teddy-grams?

    I was thinking that if he received a whole slew of bears, he could even work them into his show if he wanted to.  He could say that the damned liberal media was attacking him with... what else... the thing he fears most... BEARS!

    All the while, he'd know it was a show of support from his true fans.

    What do you think?  Should I start to organize something like this?  Ideas and thoughts would be welcome.

  •  Appearing 'presidential' (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    turquoise

    I can't believe this guy (Bush) is still getting away with the frat-boy act. I remember, early in his presidency, probably before 9/11, media would mention, with curiosity, Bush's penchant for giving odd nicknames to everyone -- reporter, world leader, whoever. At that time, I thought about how the media used to mention presidents appearing "presidential" or not. When was that -- Reagan era, Clinton? Why is it that nobody in the media ever, to my knowledge, has mentioned whether Bush acts "presidential"? Why has nobody called this guy on the clown act? Especially juxtaposed with all the death and destruction he has caused and continues to cause.

  •  If this is already posted, but I just... (6+ / 0-)

    saw the latest Editor and Publisher piece. About two hours old, it's a little more comprehensive than this morning's.

    It made me realize, not to get all narcissistic, but it seems Colbert did this for us, those of us who would understand and appreciate every single word, every inuendo, every brief image (like the Gannon button.)

    Now, I feel obligated to have the same kind of courage he had. I'm going to stop avoiding the subject with my redder friends. So they get angry. They'll get over it. I'm going to think hard about a job I'm up for, which will enforce a kind of public neutrality that I'm not sure I want. I'm going to DO more; and (divine-power-of-your-choice forbid) blog less.

  •  It was good. Certainly brave. Not earthshaking. (5+ / 0-)

    I hate it when I end up being less into the celebration than the group average, but I don't think that this was the watershed moment than many seem to believe.

    Colbert's jokes were mostly good, sometimes great, and sometimes only fair.  (I can go through the transcript line by line when I have more time.)  They were, as AP noted, mostly "zingers" -- not qualitatively different from what politicians and press have seen before on Letterman and Weekend Update.  (They were also mild by the standards of contemporary comedy roasts.)  And the "Helen as Terminator" bit at the end dragged.  I think that one thing the filmed bit showed, as it displayed the press in relatively good light, was that Colbert had not in fact come to the party simply to shit in the punch bowl.  While it's pretty clear that the audience was uncomfortable, and didn't laugh as much as I did at home, they did laugh more in a lot of places where the jokes were best.  I didn't get the sense that the audience was filled with people seething so much as not getting all the jokes or finding them as funny as we do.

    This was an act of lese majeste, which is why it gives us glee to think that Bush had to put up with it.  And, as such, it's notable.  It was without question brave.  But that a comedian committed an artful act of lese majeste to the President is not a much greater story than the general reporting of what the President does on public occasions.  (I wish that it were, in this case, but I recognize that those are partisan political feelings on my part.)  What the President does in public is, rightly or wrongly, considered news; that's not a rule that was newly generated for this occasion, and it's not one that has applied only to Republicans.

    I think that ignoring Colbert in a 150-word story is a bad editorial choice, but that President's being subjected to pointed barbs simply doesn't warrant the sort of coverage that would be appropriate if, say, Colbert had literally spit in Bush's face.  It was nice to see, but it was not the storming of the Bastille, and press coverage shouldn't be slammed for reflecting that.  Nevertheless, a tip of the hat to Colbert, and a wag of the finger to those who don't report on his part in the banquet at all.

    My apologies to students who took my U.S. Government class in the 90s: evidently the Constitution doesn't limit Presidential power after all. Who knew?

    by Major Danby on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 01:29:10 PM PDT

    •  This was not a performance it was a demonstration (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shotput8

      Do we really think that a Corporation subverts other countries any differently than it subverts Washington DC or America?

      by Carbide Bit on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 02:33:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, I get it: Homey the Clown! (0+ / 0-)

        You're saying it's like Damon Wayons's old routine where he gets into the room and hits The Man with a rubber chicken.  Look, if someone hits Bush with a rubber chicken (at least metaphorically, so they don't get shot by the Secret Service), I'm happy.  But unlike Homey the Clown I don't pretend that it is somehow going to spark a revolution.

        My apologies to students who took my U.S. Government class in the 90s: evidently the Constitution doesn't limit Presidential power after all. Who knew?

        by Major Danby on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 03:33:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not a revolution, an attitude, an approach (0+ / 0-)

          on how to deal with the powerful in the remaining 32%.

          Colbert made manifest what is wrong and he provided a demonstration of how to deal with it. A modern version of Passive Resistance is the way I see it. He stood in front of the Tank, he didn't blow it up.

          "Culture is propaganda! Can you handle that?" by sravaka DailyKos

          by Carbide Bit on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 04:05:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yellow Journalism (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ladybug53, Carbide Bit

          I understand you didn't think it was as funny as many people here. I thought it was very good and the fact that some seriously non main-stream humor got into that room and made the godfather and his lackeys uncomfortable is beautiful. There is a strange feeling of ignoring the elephant in the room that has been happening for at least four years. Of course it's not storming the Bastille but it's more than we've seen in quite a while. The press virtually ignoring it is very telling. They do deserve what he gave them and a whole lot more. There have been some disgusting moments of ass kissing by these people.

  •  Amazing (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stodghie, ladybug53

    Steve Colbert has more courage in his little finger then all the ass kissing supposed journalists in America, Helen excluded.

    The press looks as bad with egg on their faces here as they do in not reporting the news to America.

    PS - Thanks Steve, I needed that!
    PEACE!

  •  The press is a wholly owned subsidiary of BushCo. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Carbide Bit
    They are not lazy and irresponsible. They know exactly what they are doing. The MSM are mendacious and in collusion with our mafia-style government. As the 'fourth branch' of government, they are also Republican-controlled. Reporters, themselves, are sharecroppers on the tenant farms owned by the interlocking network of media corporations that mean us no good. Those media corporations sucker punch us with endless Rethug boilerplate to gain more mindshare for ever greater profits. Culture is propaganda! Can you handle that?

     The editors and publishers of such distinguished fishwrap are witting co-conspirators in the mauling and raping of the American polity. Seeing the reportage of the Correspondant's Dinner on TV and in the newspapers is a clear indication of how much trouble the USA is in. The most newsworthy part of that dinner (Stephen Colbert and his takedown of this criminal Presidency) is given barely a mention while the antic gyrations of our overlord and Fuehrer are fawned upon in sycophantic idolatry. Friends, we are witnessing the worship of Baal. No less an authority than Pope John Paul II was said to remark that GW Bush is the anti-Christ. Onward Christian Soldiers -- to Teheran!


    -7.25/-6.41 Service [to others] is the rent we pay for the space we occupy. -Rev. M. L. King, Jr.

    by sravaka on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 01:41:52 PM PDT

    •  Thanks for my new sig line. (0+ / 0-)

      "Culture is propaganda! Can you handle that?" by sravaka DailyKos

      by Carbide Bit on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 02:35:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're quite welcome. (0+ / 0-)
        That is the working title to a book I will probably never write on my attempt to apply a Kantian perspective to propaganda as clarified through the practice of Buddhist meditation. It's supposed to be an instruction manual on how to tell propaganda from information, a kind of cultural innoculant against newspeak and doublethink, which is today's media atmosphere.


        -7.25/-6.41 Service [to others] is the rent we pay for the space we occupy. -Rev. M. L. King, Jr.

        by sravaka on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 03:19:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Are you saying all culture is propaganda. (0+ / 0-)

          If you removed the propaganda, there would be nothing left to call 'culture'? At first I thought you were saying that our (US culture) has increasingly resorted to propaganda. This is a fairly easy idea to wrap my head around. But if you are saying more than this I find it an almost breath taking assertion. Roheim, Jung, Freud and Levi-Strauss all come to mind as sources I would have to sift through. I have read Kant and never understood a thing he had to say even Lacan is transparent compared to him (for me).

          As an aside I don't think we will truly solve any political science problems without some serious growth in our intellectual development. This chess match with the likes of Rove and Mehlman is a serious impediment to real problem solving. Some kind of meta-analysis is sorely needed.

          "Culture is propaganda! Can you handle that?" by sravaka DailyKos

          by Carbide Bit on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 03:36:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Now you're getting it. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            dirtfarmer
            Culture (culture) that supports the Reigning Spectacle (i.e., that turns participants into spectators) is propaganda. Once you are a spectator, you allow the Reigning Spectacle (viz., news media, government, experts, stars, Hollywood, the music industry) to tell you what culture is, to tell you who you are, what you are looking at, and what you can do. The first thing to do is to see what's actually happening in the moment as it happens. That is the role of meditation. The second thing to do is to experience yourself without judgment of any kind, then to experience the nature of perceiving what's happening and who exactly is perceiving this. After a while, you begin to trust yourself and appreciate this innate ability. To do this, of course, means that you would have to stop framing the information as it comes in, allow the perception itself to be the context, rather than the perceiver being the context, which is usually the case, especially the perceiver as an agent of the Reigning Spectacle. (We are our own best propagandists.) It's not so easy, but once you can do that, you begin to look around. The truth that you thought was true now appears to be relative to its context, and to the misunderstandings that perpetuate and support it. Absolute truth, on the other hand, becomes the guiding experience. Kant called this noumenon, a notion of pure concept, but he said it was not apprehendable, because it was not relational and therefore unknowable. That is not true, actually. All of this is actually a first step, but just this step is sufficient to get the point. At this point, you will have developed the tools necessary to innoculate yourself against any propaganda, cultural or political. I have staked my life on it this system. Well, I'm sure you've read enough.


            -7.25/-6.41 Service [to others] is the rent we pay for the space we occupy. -Rev. M. L. King, Jr.

            by sravaka on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 04:14:56 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Appreciate the detail in your reply - I follow it (0+ / 0-)

              although I come at this from the perspective of suspending the ego and controlling ones defense mechanisms and tendencies to project and introject when making observations. I see communication via computer as an aid in this regard, since 'the other' is basically a blank screen. Only an aid not a cure.

              It strikes me that politics which is by necessity an interaction with others, is an especially difficult field in which to master the skills you describe. Your system, if I may call it that, seems natural and logical to me. It theoretically would enable one to make more accurate assessment of situations and lead to sounder constructs of reality. But can you give me any feeling as to how it would be used to lead others and effect change?

              I sense that you see your methods as something one would use to minimize the impact of propaganda or am I mistaken?... do you see it as something that would be used to construct 'better' propaganda? (more efficient, less likely to lead to mental illness or neurotic behavior or addictions on a massive scale - might be some of the yardsticks one could use to measure "better". )

              Sorry to take you too far afield. Understand if the problem is not of interest or too far off thread to continue. My interest in the last set of questions is that I think psyop practices are possibly very advanced and the only way to detect them is to imagine their construction. There was a small thread yesterday that mentioned companies offering psyop crowd control services - I did not read it because I find the topic odios. But perhaps it is one we can not afford to be ignorant of.

              Your book would be unlike any I am aware of and quite difficult to write. The gap between how most of us function and what you describe is enormous. I guess if we were Neocons we would just say only the ruling elite needs these insights. My view is that in a democracy most of us need such knowledge and trainning. On the positive side, such knowledge could go far beyond politics - into areas of mental health and medicine, socialization, child rearing, criminal justice and many others.

              "Culture is propaganda! Can you handle that?" by sravaka DailyKos

              by Carbide Bit on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 07:34:53 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Bush's body-double bit was embarrassing. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Alumbrados, mcjoan, Far left coast

    I picked up my chin from the ground a lot during Bush's speech. This was even worse than the "searching for WMDs" speech a few years back. I don't even know why I'm writing this comment because I have no words for this.

    I don't know what they were thinking inviting Stephen Colbert to speak, but even though they may realize now that they made a huge mistake, I'm glad they did it. Besides, what's one more huge mistake to these guys?

  •  Excellent points (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stodghie, Far left coast, rjo, ladybug53

    One thing, though. The media was this way well before they smeared Gore 6 years ago. When Bush beat Gore it was the culmination of 30 years of hard work by the RWNM. The David Brock book, The Republican Noise Machine, is the most extensive well-written explanation of how the media has been dominated by the wingnuts.
    This is an interesting time in the history of journalism in America. I thank God that we do have people like Colbert, Keith Olberman, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher and Al Franken who report the truth and fight the huge juggernaut. I believe that in 25, 50, 100 years they (and the few greats that I have forgot to mention) will be hailed as the true journalists, while people like O'Lielly, Coulter, Shammity and the rest will be ridiculed and mocked.

  •  Stop saying MSM (7+ / 0-)

    There is nothing mainstream about our media. Let us reframe this. Progressives should always refer to the "right-wing corporate media".

    A corporate-controlled press is not a free press.

  •  Depressed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ebbak

    It's pretty depressing when comedians use truth as comedy. It makes a mockery of truth. Maybe that's why the press does not discuss the Colbert "performance". It is not clear if it was a performance or not.

    We must sure hope the general public votes out those who have brought us this depressing state of affairs. That, in the end, is the only real solution. Throw the bums out and you won't have depressing comedians anymore.

  •  Oh happy day! (4+ / 0-)

    What a great Sunday! Thanks a million, Steven Colbert!

    Worked all through the night from 10pm to 9am this morning. Was looking forward to sleeping all day today. Thought I would just skim through the blogs to see the latest news, first. Haven’t slept a wink yet!

    Watched Colbert’s clip 4 times! That’s the equivalent of 4 urns of strong French Roast coffee. Will have to visit the doctor to check for a busted gut! My throat is so raw from laughing so hard.

    For all the naysayers who say Colbert bombed: Fie! 68% of us laughed our asses off!

    The preznit and the press corpse did not deserve any entertainment. They deserve to have their feet held to fire every day for their incompetence, cruelty and criminality.

    I am extremely thankful for the courageous performance by Steven Colbert in the face of what he knew would be a hostile reception to his delivery of the truth. The poor sods squirmed uneasily for 30 minutes of bitch-slapping!

    Ok! So I will be a wreck tomorrow, but I will be a happy wreck!

  •  I just posted the following comment to CNN: (6+ / 0-)

    In their comment section, regarding their deliberate and obvious censorship of Colbert's skit:

    I am writing to express my extreme displeasure and disappointment in your blatantly and obviously biased coverage of Saturday night's White House Correspondents' Dinner. You covered the skit in which Bush and an impersonator poked playful fun at him, in a way that made Bush look like a regular guy who was participating in making innocent fun of himself (including having anchor Fredricka Whitfield laugh along with the segment).

    But you made absolutely no mention whatsoever of the skit that followed--even though it was the feature skit that evening--in which comedian Stephen Colbert took far more serious yet still humorous jabs at Bush and the media (of which you of course are a leading member). None. It was as if it never happened.

    Spare me the tired and transparent excuses about there not being enough time to highlight every skit during the dinner. I'm not one or Rush's moronic dittoheads and I can see deliberate and willful media bias when it happens. And your organization--along with most others in the corporate media-has obviously and undeniably made a conscious choice to censor Colbert's skit for reasons only you are privy to.

    Fear of the Bush administration? Discomfort with the truths that Colbert told about the corporate media? A desire to kiss up to the Bush administration and the GOP? Only you know for sure. But make no mistake, you have committed a clear act of censorship, and we in the reality-based community know it. Shame on you.

    John Stewart was right about CNN. You're all dicks. And whatever they're paying you, you haven't earned it.

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

    by kovie on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 03:47:31 PM PDT

  •  Don't forget the introduction... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rjo, ladybug53, Carbide Bit

    One thing no one seems to have focused on is the introduction Colbert received. The M.C. (Correspondents' President whoever from AP) mentioned how Colbert "declared war" after AP ran a story mentioning the word "truthiness" without crediting Colbert for its origin. The frantic AP staffer, feeling a lage controversy coming on, frantically called his boss and said, "We are laughing about this, aren't we?"

    Colbert chortled in what I interpreted as eye-rolling disbelief as this was being recounted. The very notion that the mainstream media didn't know how to take him and was actually frightened served, for me, as a final sign of incompetence and indeed further justification for the guerilla assault that he was about to lay on them.

  •  Letter to Stephen (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    John L
    Dear Mr. Colbert,

    Thank you, thank you, thank you.

    So many of us are born with gifts that are never realized. Yours was banging on all cylinders at the Washington Press Corps dinner. For whatever negative fallout you may endure for it, please know that I'll be feeling fine for a long time over that one; it was a performance for the ages. A lot of us need something worth laughing over these days.

    The truth may hurt, but there are those that need a little hurting, considering what they've done to others, both those in office and in the press.

    Looking forward to more - I hope your career continues to be as rewarding to you as it is to your real audience.

    Good going, sir.

    Sincerely,
    yadda, yadda...

    "But you've got to stick to one set of postulates. You can't play Electro-magnetic Golf according to the rules of Centrifugal Bumble-puppy."

    by flaky draky on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 03:56:24 PM PDT

  •  Who else stood out in that room? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stodghie, ladybug53, Carbide Bit, John L

    I appreciate this diary.

    Along the lines of what others have said about the media here, think about this question:

    Who else in that room stood out?

    Answer:  Not many people.

    There was no Giant Cronkikian figure there to represent all that is good and true of the media, save Helen Thomas, and sure, I'll mention David Gregory for getting in Scottie's face that one time.  

    The fact that there were not Giants in the room speaks volumes and explains the timid reaction.  

    You did see Larry Fishburne, Valerie Plame and her husband, and yes, even Scalia showing the guts to laugh.  Other than that, a room full of chumps.  

    Hopefully Colbert will have emboldened some of these guys to do their jobs a little more forcefully.  

    George W Bush - Plame Duck President

    by T u g on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 04:11:42 PM PDT

  •  And did you notice Bush's attempt at snark (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ladybug53

    Did anybody else notice what I think Bush said when he shook Colbert's hand:

    "You killed them"

    I think that was Bush making the tough guy joke and trying to tell Colbert that he Bush, not Colbert, had the support of the room.  

    Too bad there were cameras, George.  

    George W Bush - Plame Duck President

    by T u g on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 04:13:32 PM PDT

  •  I know who had the most fun there (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stodghie

    It was obviously Joe Wilson. He got to hear Bush being eviscerated, he got to hear a line about Karl's problems. He got to show off his beautiful wife and walk in public with her.

    As far as I can tell, Wilson probably had one of the best nights of his life, hearing Colbert taking everyone apart. And the Valerie Plame 'bit' was priceless.

    "Rapturists. Suicide bombers. What's the diff?" Plato

    by steelman on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 04:22:34 PM PDT

  •  What the Freepers Think (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stodghie
    (if you can call what they do "thinking")
    Check out
    http://www.freerepublic.com/...
    which is titled "Valerie Plame Expected for White House Correspondents Dinner (Secret Squirrel is Coming to Dinner!)":
    The focus of the freeper blog is on the fact that Plame and Wilson will be attending the WHCA dinner; the text uses an excerpt fron an Editor and Publisher.
    Interestingly, the E&P article reveals that incoming WHCA president Steve Scully of C-SPAN is the person who got Colbert to do the gig.
    The funny part is, of course, the freepers' hatred of Plame/Wilson, but don't miss the comments about Colbert, and be sure to view the replies! They really don't get Colbert!!!!
    Here's the freeper creep "Ann Archy":
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Stephen Colbert!! Be still my heart!!!! The funniest man on TV and the quickest wit!!! Hugh Hewitt is going to be on The Colbert Report on Monday I think.....can't wait!!!

    If you don't watch The Colbert Report every night, you are missing something!!! He is unique!!
    4 posted on 04/19/2006 4:54:00 PM PDT by Ann Archy (Abortion: The Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience. T)

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Here's the reply on the freeper blog (mwa hahaha!):
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    To: Ann Archy

    Do you mean it? I know he's humorous, but I just can't like it much when points of view to which I am sympathetic are ridiculed.
    21 posted on 04/19/2006 10:04:27 PM PDT by NutCrackerBoy

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Are the freepers really this stupid? I never read any of their s--t before, but they are dumb!!!!

  •  It is clear that the neocons now have.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dirtfarmer, Carbide Bit

    near total control of much of the traditional media. Whether it be reporting (Miller, Gordon, Nagourney, Woodward, et al), editorial (Keller, Schulzberger, Brady, et al) or ownership, the neocons have managed to place key players in almost every major traditional media outlet in this nation.

    And for the record, I am not talking about Jewish neocons, because as anyone with a brain knows, neocons come in all flavors, sizes, clors, and religious beliefs.

    Similarly, they have set up and operate a plethora of so-called "think tanks" that serve to funnel money to their favored adherents, who then provide an echo chamber for their ideology, and a ready source of quotes and phony studies for the media to use.

    All of this is financed with hundreds of millions of dollars, some coming from corporatists, some from political idealists, and some from the web of corruption they have set up from Iraq, to Israel, to London, to D.C.

    Until the people of this planet realize who these people are, and what they are trying to do, we stand little chance. First things first  though..... 06' beckons, and if we can make that a starting point, then we may be able to make some progress. That said, many of these people are evil, and are going to do everything in their power ....to keep power.

    -7.00/-4.77 "Without full Public Campaign Financing for every election, and media reform, we're wasting our time here." - Hornito

    by Hornito on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 06:07:50 PM PDT

  •  In case you didn't see: Hi Res vid here.... (0+ / 0-)
  •  If not comedy certainly conscience (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jlukes

    Was he brave? Was he misguided? Did he bomb? These are questions asked by people wanting to avoid the hard reality of Stephen Colbert's performance. He told the truth. This is something which is in short supply in our society. Should he have made people laugh? Doesn't matter. Should he have been more engaging? Doesn't matter. Great, brilliant relevant comedy afflicts the comfortable and comforts the afflicted. I am sure everyone in the dinner and at home squirmed, regardless of their political stripe. They should have because it was painful to watch a roomful of our nation's political, economic and cultural elites be lashed with a rhetorical cat o' nine tails. Despite what the administration thinks, watching someone being tortured is never comfortable. Regardless it was necessary. Sometimes we can't cop out with the easy laugh. That's the coward's way out. If you are going to tell someone the hard truth look them in the eye and speak clearly. Don't scratch when you don't itch or smile when nothing's funny. This was brilliant. Think Richard Pryor performing before white liberals. This was brave. Though no one will be dragging Colbert from his bed at 3 in the morning to be beaten, think Eartha Kitt in LBJ's receiving line. This was painful. Think a mote being removed from one's eye. Anyone infuriated by the performance is someone angry that Stephen Colbert silenced the few hundred people in this country whose voices are listened to and found credible. Anyone who thinks that the performance wasn't funny is someone that does not understand that comedy is not always about laughter.

  •  I couldn't agree more (0+ / 0-)

    As far as I'm concerned, the problem with the media is larger than any other. If the media were doing it's job adequately, Bush would not be President. If the media were doing it's job properly, we would not be in Iraq. Given proper information, the people do a pretty good job of making the right decisions, but the media doesn't care about properly informing people.

    There's a lot of talk currently about how the media has changed it's tune, but I don't buy it. The increase in criticism of Bush probably has nothing to do with the media "waking up", but with new goals set after the election instead.

    Democrats -- Progress for the Working Class

    by rogun on Mon May 01, 2006 at 09:57:53 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site