• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Stephen Colbert - Racist

IDB87 said:
Have you watched the whole interview?
Click to expand...

Yes. The entire interview was terrible.

ETA: This isn't like that time Katie Couric interviewed Sarah Palin, and Palin fell apart under a few softball questions. The interviewer here was obviously hostile and condescending, and Suey Park simply returned his nasty attitude back to him.
 
Last edited:
Everyone keeps saying the joke on Twitter needed context.

No. It. Didn't.

It was funny all on its own.

It is a classic humor construction of absurd dichotomy.

If I tweet out "I'm founding the Belgians Are Thieves Foundation For Cultural Tolerance And Acceptance" that is a self contained joke.

Am I to believe that Suey Park and her ilk would really think I hold the view that the Belgians are nothing but a bunch of robbers?
 
Travis said:
Am I to believe that Suey Park and her ilk would really think I hold the view that the Belgians are nothing but a bunch of robbers?
Click to expand...


My off-the-cuff guess: they would think that regardless of whether or not you hold that belief, and regardless of whether the joke has any actual possibility of encouraging others to adopt that belief, it's still Not Okay because it promotes the concept of making jokes that link a negative action or trait with a certain group of people. In some people's mind that is universally verboten, no matter how absurd the link or how trivial the negative action is. Basically any joke that takes the same format as any genuinely offensive joke is offensive by association. You might think you're making a wholly innocent and even nonsensical joke about a not-particularly-oppressed group of people and a random thing that has never actually been associated with them, but in reality, whether you realize it or not, you're actually joking about lazy Mexicans, overly-emotional women, and hubcap-stealing black people.

Yes, I too wish that was an exaggeration...
 
Yes, well how are you to bring attention to hypocrisy regarding racism through humor without a tool such as this?


In other words: how does Suey Park think concerned people should be tackling the "Redskins" issue? What is her road map to cultural awareness and change on this issue?
 
Mumbles said:
Yes. The entire interview was terrible.

ETA: This isn't like that time Katie Couric interviewed Sarah Palin, and Palin fell apart under a few softball questions. The interviewer here was obviously hostile and condescending, and Suey Park simply returned his nasty attitude back to him.
Click to expand...

I disagree with the idea of "simply returning". Feels like a cop out and shifting responsibility.

Yes, he was clearly antagonistic, but she wasn't forced to give such terrible answers. They are clearly her strongly held beliefs.
 
Now he's taking over for Letterman. Colbert's a nice guy and a quick wit. I saw an article the other day saying O'Reilly was upset about something on the Colbert Report, and laid into him along the lines "his audience is small, but he has influence among progressives." Well, Bill, now his audience will be much larger.

I'm guessing he's not going to do the show in character, so it will be interesting to see how that plays out.
 
Cain said:
...
I'm guessing he's not going to do the show in character, so it will be interesting to see how that plays out.
Click to expand...
He's not going to be his Colbert Report character. I can't wait to see him as himself. I wonder if he'll keep the t in his name silent or not.

He's going to be tough competition for Jimmy Fallon.
 
Quinn said:
That at least gives us a good idea about how to interpret her other claims. For instance, when she says "he stared at me with palpable hostility," I will take that to mean "he briefly gave me an incredulous look." Likewise, I assume "his mood had visibly soured" actually means "he appeared mildly displeased for up to several seconds."
Click to expand...

It seems that she asked a hostile and silly question when he was taking part in a free Q&A session before the show, he responded with the courtesy that the question deserved and the rest of it took place entirely in her own imagination. I interpreted the phrase "He turned to his desk and scrawled a couple notes; he took a question about the set design, but his mood had visibly soured." as meaning that he continued as though nothing had happened.

Mumbles said:
Yes, I agree - and saying, basically "you don't understand because you're white" is profoundly weak. If someone goes on a show in order to explain their position, then they need to *explain their position*. In other words, if whiteness creates ignorance (it doesn't, but let's just concede that point and move on for the sake of argument), then when you agree to an interview, you should be ready to fully explain and educate. And I feel that Park completely failed from that perspective.
Click to expand...

I think the interviewer met hostility with hostility. Ms Park came across like somebody unused to being challenged on her opinion and her reaction was to be passive-aggressive.
 
Travis said:
Everyone keeps saying the joke on Twitter needed context.

No. It. Didn't.

It was funny all on its own.

It is a classic humor construction of absurd dichotomy.

If I tweet out "I'm founding the Belgians Are Thieves Foundation For Cultural Tolerance And Acceptance" that is a self contained joke.

Am I to believe that Suey Park and her ilk would really think I hold the view that the Belgians are nothing but a bunch of robbers?
Click to expand...

I think a better one is "The Anti-Defamation of Belgian Paedos League", because it fits better with the stereotype of Belgians being paedophiles.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
I disagree with the idea of "simply returning". Feels like a cop out and shifting responsibility.

Yes, he was clearly antagonistic, but she wasn't forced to give such terrible answers. They are clearly her strongly held beliefs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and it's not unusual.

But I think that in an interview, both parties have some responsibility. The person conducting the interview should absolutely avoid lobbing insults. And the person being interviewed has a responsibility to answer all questions to the best of their ability, so long as they're relevant.

And that's where Park fell apart. It's fine to say "I don't have to talk to you" when it's some random person jumping in on your twitter feed. It's not okay to do so, when you agree to be interviewed on the subject in question.
 
Mumbles said:
Again, why bother defending it, when Colbert himself said that the joke needs context?
Click to expand...

Because the PC police like Suey Park are attempting to stifle comedy. Yes, the joke is funnier in context, but the fact that Colbert is a comedian and that this was obvious comedy is more than enough context.
 
ThunderChunky said:
More from the great intellectual civil rights activist of out time Suey Park:

http://time.com/58743/cancelcolbert-activists-we-will-protest-this-until-it-ends/

Apparently, the fact that she made herself look like an idiot actually proves her point. Fascinating world view.
Click to expand...

From the link:
"The entertainment industry has perfected the development of white, cis, straight, male characters."

What does "cis" mean in that sentence? Her code words are sometimes hard to parse.
 
The comments are great. She's going to be an outstanding Tiger Mom someday.
 
ThunderChunky said:
More from the great intellectual civil rights activist of out time Suey Park:

http://time.com/58743/cancelcolbert-activists-we-will-protest-this-until-it-ends/

Apparently, the fact that she made herself look like an idiot actually proves her point. Fascinating world view.
Click to expand...
They gave this woman the status of a columnist at Time?:eek: Her POV is very immature, and she is not that articulate.

Statements like this: "The marginalization of other voices is now complete," are just ignorant.

"We are not the problem. Your stereotypes and narrow roles for us are the problem." No, the problem is confusing satire meant to illustrate that stereotype with actual discrimination. Colbert is on your side, Suey.:rolleyes:

"Some Asian Americans were quick to protect the myth of our being a model minority. They disowned us and said we do not speak for them." Or they disowned you because you are ignorant.


It's sad. Women like this are the ones that give feminism a bad name, and Time is doing nothing more than selling controversy and scandal elevating this tripe instead of doing something to bring light to the difference between satire and actual discrimination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom