Commentators throughout the blogosphere have commented on the virtual blackout of coverage for Stephen Colbert's scathing critique of the Bush administration.
Peter Daou calls the media's ignoring of Colbert "a small taste of the media's power to choose the news."
Harry Taylor was the man who challenged the President during a town hall meeting about, among other things, the domestic spying program. The media extensively covered Taylor's moment; they replayed clips of it over and over again. When Colbert issued, in my opinion, a much more effective and accessible critique of the Bush administration, the media's response has been silence.
To be sure, these two rare moments where the President has faced an unabashed criticism about his abuse of power are quite different in their context. With Taylor, the President presumably didn't know he would be put on the defensive about his policies, whereas with Colbert, Bush was well aware of the tongue-lashing that was to ensue.
However, the context of Colbert's critique should not be minimized because of the environment in which it was delivered. Like Taylor, Colbert demonstrated an extraordinary amount of courage when he bluntly voiced dissent while standing just feet away from the Leader of the Free World. Like Taylor, Colbert was faced with a largely unsympathetic crowd (where Taylor received boos, Colbert's critique was met with the scattered, nervous laughter of a audience uncomfortable with a clear exposition of the truth). So why did the Harry Taylor moment get more media play?
The answer perhaps can be found in the President's response. The clips of Taylor included the President's jokes which minimized the importance of Taylor's dissent. They also included the President's "tough guy" response to Taylor--"I'm not going to apologize for what I did on the terrorist surveillance program...[Y]ou said, would I apologize for that? The answer -- answer is, absolutely not." The media line then was that Taylor challenged the President, who responsed with a tough defense of his policy. Taylor: 1, Bush: 1, no net gain. It's safe to report on a wash for the President.
But the President's response to Colbert was nothing more than pursed lips, red face, and a cold shoulder goodbye. The result was that Colbert's painfully truthful analysis of the Bush administration had none of that faux balance the media loves to employ as a substitute for actual journalism. Add to the mix that the critique included attacks on the media establishment as well, and it's not surprising that Colbert's Harry Taylor moment has been brushed off as the shtick of a comedian rather than the dissent of an American citizen.
No amount of calls to MSNBC or CNN or the AP will result in giving Colbert's critique the coverage it deserved; the news is already in a new cycle, and while the rhetorical wounds inflicted by Colbert's speech are still fresh, his wordsmithing is old news for the media.
Where the media fails, the citizens step up. The Colbert critique has gone viral, with internet users rapidly emailing it to thousands online (I've received three forwards of it already). So go ahead, give life to Colbert's Harry Taylor moment. Email the video to your friends, your family, Republican, Independent, and Democrat alike. I have, and in doing so, I know that Stephen Colbert speaks for me.
Comments are closed on this story.