DUers! Please don't read too much into the media's coverage of Colbert

[wndycty]

When not posting on DU, I'm a marketing/PR professional (16 years and counting) and I consider myself to know a thing or two about the media. On background, I started my career in entertainment, hospitality and sports, have worked on some political campaigns and now I'm a public servant (hoping to return to entertainment, hospitality and sports by years end). Additionally, I'm an adjunct professor at a local college where I teach marketing, public relations and sports marketing. I lay out my resume so you understand where I'm coming from.

That being said PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE do not read too much into the media's coverage, or lack thereof, of Stephen Colbert's speech last night.

First and foremost last night was not the Academy Awards, Daytime Emmy's, hell it was not even the Country Music Awards it was the White House Correspondents dinner, it was on C-SPAN, not ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, E! or MTV. While the entertainment press was there, they were there for the red carpet ("who are you wearing?" "George Clooney was seen with. . ."), they can care less about anything of substance. Speaking of substance, Colbert's speech was all substance however it does not translate in to a :30 clip the same way a visual of Bush with a Bush impersonator delivering a one liner about Cheney being drunk does. Not to mention the fact that Steve Colbert is NOT A HOUSEHOLD NAME, and realistically there is absolutely nothing he could have done last night (outside of physically attacking Bush or making out with Laura) that would have earned him a significant amount of face time in the MSM. While he (Colbert) is popular on DU and with other liberals, political media junkies, bloggers and net activists the majority of Americans don't know who he is. Also to really get Colbert you have to sort of know him and his style.

Colbert will become more popular as a result of this, while the media might not give last night's performance the exposure we would like, he has put himself on their radar and watch for them to start paying attention to him thus giving him more publicity. You have to remember that most people who made a point to attend last night's event or watch on CSPAN have an interest in politics that exceeds that of your average American. Look more at where this is being talked about and worry less about how much it is talked about. And do not despair it will be talked about (I heard it was mentioned on ABC THIS WEEK, and I have seen it mentioned in some stories that have been posted on DU).

More importantly do not under estimate the impact his performance will have on those who watched it.

*Regardless of who sees it in the MSM it does not take away from the fact that Bush got punked to his face.

*Regardless of who sees it in the MSM it does not take way from the fact that the media was ridiculed for their less than admirable coverage of Bush.

*Regardless of who sees it in the MSM it does not take away from the fact Colbert made some powerful people very uncomfortable.

While the general public might not be buzzing about Colbert's performance last night, it has impacted the press corps, it has impacted the West Wing and it gave those of us who care, a very special truth to power moment we should savor for a long time.

[stray cat]

1. Colbert used it as a platform to speak the truth

to the administration and the press. I respect him for it - it even made me uncomfortable. It really wasn't meant to entertain and I'm sure they won't invite him back. The truth hurt.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

2. Thanks for your perspective. I especially like your last sentence. K &R.

MKJ

[I Have A Dream]

3. Thanks for giving your expert opinion on this, wndycty. n/t

[valerief]

4. But just because Colbert (with Thomas' help) scolded the press

corp, it doesn't mean they will change their pro-Bush policy coverage. Does it? If so, how?

[wndycty]

6. So truth to power only has an impact if it gets a ton of media coverage?

Anytime Bush and the press get called on their shit, regardless of who hears about it, its a good thing.

[valerief]

13. Well, it's fun to watch him preaching to the choir, but isn't the

action task to change the minds of voters in the Congressional races? Isn't his value as an enlightener (like a decider but smarter) to the unenlightened?

[wndycty]

16. It was speech delivered by a COMEDIAN at a dinner in with BOOZE flowing!

Last I saw Colbert was not on the payroll of the DNC. He was there to entertain. His truth to power moments were awesome, but he is not obligated to further any political agenda. HE IS A DAMN COMEDIAN!

[valerief]

17. Ouch. You're barking like Falafel boy. n/t

[bvar22]

23. Not exactly preaching to the choir last night.

He was in a very different church last night preaching to the people who need to hear it the most.
Very few attendees liked what they heard,
and about 1/2 of the political junkies who watch CSPAN were outraged.



The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[stray cat]

24. If that was the choir they were awfully uncomfortable

He was speaking to the press corps and government and they got the point loud and clear.

[valerief]

26. Yeah, but they know they're whores already, so it's not like he's

telling them anything they don't already know. They're the choir, the tone-deaf voices. I guess I just want EVERYONE who needs to hear his truth see and appreciate Colbert the way I did.

[leesa]

31. But no one says it to them OUT LOUD on teevee, in front of the Dufus

[valerief]

33. True. It was great fun to watch. n/t

[FredStembottom]

47. This is soooooooo untrue, I'm guessing.

When entire groups are complicit in collusion it almost always survives on an ocean of self deceiving lies and half truths.

I am sure that every White House correspondent soothes him/herself with all kinds of ego saving rationalizations for his/her cringing, crawling behavior!

They do _not_ know that they are whores. Not right up front. Not right out loud. That's what makes this event so significant. FINALLY.....it's RIGHT OUT LOUD. And entire sand-castles of self deception were probably washed away in the tide of Colbert's satire.


:bounce:

[valerief]

66. Maybe you're right. I have difficulty understanding that kind of

self-deception. I guess I prefer to think most people share the same reality.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

80. mirrors can be painful items. They show all. The MSM did not like looking

at themselves, because the truth hurts.

[Oversea Visitor]

5. Haha

The double bush really rub the media face in the dirt.
And they all cheer while bush gave their face a rub with his turd.

[0007]

7. Thank you for the big picture. And I'm more than sure Colbert

will be heard by all very soon. His performance was not only awesome it was refreshing to hear the truth blasted in the face's of this gangster administration.

Wake up call number one.

[peekaloo]

8. After his spanking of Kristol on Thursday and now the WH dinner

I'll be curious to see if there's a freeze out (on the guests part) regarding any right wingers asked to appear on his show.

Either they're with him or against him. }(

[Gregorian]

9. Yes. And he can handle himself.

No one is taking Colbert down. He's king. I'm not the slightest bit worried. He puts half the people in that room to shame. Don't ask me how. He's one in a brazillion. They only make so many Colberts.
It actually doesn't matter at all what the corporate media tries to do with him. The fact is, he aired. And Bush likes darkness.

[JDPriestly]

40. You can only take someone down who places himself above you.

Colbert's humor lies in the fact that he places himself beneath the target of his humor. He can't be brought down. His style of humor is humble and honest -- and true. There is no denying the truth when it is stated without pretension -- and that's how Colbert states it. Colbert lays bare the unspoken presumptions upon which the neo-cons and pseudoChristians base their ideology -- and suddenly you realize that those presumptions are hateful, crude and base. Colbert is building on the tradition of Moliere -- reveal the hypocrisy and falseness of the holier-than-thou middle class hypocrite. He is a classic, and his work will survive a long time. If there still is a world 300 years from now, people will look to Colbert to see find out what was really going on. Colbert is a cultural pioneer. The lies he is revealing will soon be reviled by the majority of Americans. That's how humor works. People really do seek the truth, but they need to hear it in a form that they can understand.

Colbert and Neil Young's new album are just the beginning in a new cultural wave. The times they are a'changin . . . finally. Read history, and live long enough, and you will recognize that this is just the beginning.

[Gregorian]

57. I'm almost happy right now.

Yep, you are so right. The sad part is how long it takes to get movement. It really hurts to be as vigilant and highly sensitive as we are. The day Bush stood for his inauguration, my father (who is 82) said, "Here comes the war". It's sick that it took this many years before enough people woke up. "Four dead in Ohio". Once again there is death and destruction. Darfur has to wait while we wake up. So sad. I've nearly self destructed over this. God help us all. We had better overcome this. I'm so afraid there is something worse coming. I'm sorry to say that. I want to be wrong. In the meantime, thanks to Colbert and those like him, and us, we are on our way to something less evil.

[goclark]

10. Just gave vote 5 for the greatest page!

Thank you for calming us down. :)

Sometimes we go off the beam when we see the MSM not doing their job.

But , you are right.

As I think about it, it may be better that they don't replay his part.

They would cut and paste and slam him and Joe Average would think he was being mean to the nice Resident.


Loads of POWER was right there in that room and he was brave last night.


Let's keep it under the radar and of course let him know by email how much he was appreciated.

I bet Scalia was drunk and MAD last night ~ good!

Laura was drunk and mad, so was George, the press and all the Phony Op people in attendance.

Bet the Wilson family is jumping for joy this AM and that is great! Just that makes it all worth it! :bounce:

[wndycty]

12. Scalia walked up to him and shook his hand afterward. . .

...I saw it when I played it back on TiVO

[baldguy]

15. Scalia knew he was on camera.

[goclark]

20. You are kidding!

Maybe that was the Mafia handshake.


I can't believe that Scalia did that --my,my.

[SupplyConcerns]

62. Say what you will about him, Scalia seems to have a sense of humor

[Olney Blue]

71. The exchange between Colbert and Scalia made me laugh out loud.

As much as I loathe everything Scalia stands for, he was a good sport.

[msongs]

11. "deck chairs on the hindenburg" comment is on CBS radio news

at the top of the hour (network feed to local stations)... as well as Rush being busted.

Msongs
www.msongs.com
batik & digital art
mugs and shirts

[rodeodance]

21. that was a great one!

[goclark]

37. Yea! Yea STICKIES getting out, that is the ticket!

Keep saying it..."RepubliCONS(always call them Cons for CON Artists) are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!"

:bounce:


For more Stickies Ideas read my Journal Post....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1000650

[rasputin1952]

14. I haven't seen the clip yet...if I'd have known it was on C-SPAN

last night, I would have watched...:(

I will get to see it eventually, but I'm not sure that seeing the press being snubbed is a "bad thing". No matter how one looks at something, it is important to understand how the press will take this. Lately we've seen some pretty good brass out there, and a kick was all that was needed to start the Press Corps to get rolling. Maybe, this will embolden more, especially the MSM to start calling this little bastard out for what he is, nothing more than smoke and mirrors in a fun house. bush is so reprehensible I'm surprised he hasn't been tarred and feathered yet!

Perception is EVERYTHING. The bushista's know this, and it is about time we started to push the perception line as well; the truth will bring this bastard down. He's already perceived as the worst president this nation has ever had, (and that is not just perception, but fact as well). Now is the time to hammer this home!

I figure that they buffaloed the citizenry into believing this cretin was some kind of heroic figure, it was perception; we all know bush was a coward and a dumb one at that. Now the perception, (based on reality), that this administration is nothing more than a bunch of morons is taking hold. Colbert did us a favor by making sure that people will have to face reality. They may skirt that reality, but they will have to face it...:)

[NJCher]

22. Colbert only snubs the press

Bush wants to jail them!

Hi Rasputin! :toast:




Cher

[rasputin1952]

32. That's the truth!...I'm surprised I haven't been jailed yet for writing

about how much I despise this creep! I've had a lot of LTTE's published against bush in my local RW paper. I get hate mail from locals, but lately, people who know me, and are very RW, come up to me and tell me I am right, I was always right about bush. They are understanding now, (a tad too late), that bush is destroying our nation. They perceived him as tough after 9-11...now the perception is that bush is an out of control megalomaniac.

bush wants to be Emperor of the World. He's a narcisistic little man w/o a moral compass; he is danger; he is evil. People are finally starting to realize this.

The bright spot of all of this, is that he should take the neo-con vision of this nation straight into hell w/him. God, the '06 mid-term can't get here fast enough.

:hug:

[IndyOp]

18. Agreed with one very, very serious reservation -

Your post helpfully explains why the Colbert statement has not made a bigger splash -- by putting in the context of 'how the media works' -- why they would chose a more visual clip for their 30-second spot.

THE PROBLEM remains: Not all news is made by familiar personalities and not all opinions and issues can be done justice in 30-seconds. The overall state of our media is sick, sick, sick. Only 'known' faces can appear, only 'known' and 'popular' opinions can be covered, only opinions that can be boiled down to 30-seconds will be televisted. You can't boil Chomsky - any Chomsky - down to 30-seconds and we should not have to.

WE NEED A MEDIA REVOLUTION so that what IS televised on the NEWS is Chomsky and Colbert, not comedy, not fluff, not the media equivalent of 'comfort food' -->

:grr:

It will impact the media - Good! I want more. Lots more.

[wndycty]

25. I agree with you, with one caveat

Colbert is a comedian and he was not speaking at the White House, he was speaking at the White House correspondents dinner, that alone knocks it down a few notches on the relevance scale. Hell if he had attended a White House town hall meeting and made the same statements it would have gotten more coverage.

A true media revolution would not result in his speech getting more coverage, a true media revolution would result in the media performing in a manner that would not make them a target of Colbert's ridicule.

[IndyOp]

36. Your thoughtful reply is most appreciated, and...

> Colbert is a comedian and he was not speaking at the White House, he was
> speaking at the White House correspondents dinner, that alone knocks it
> down a few notches on the relevance scale.

You win that point hands down. It is pretty sad day when I am seeking media leadership from Steven Colbert and Jon Stewart -- who both stress the fact that they are comedians. :-)

> A true media revolution would not result in his speech getting more
> coverage, a true media revolution would result in the media performing in > a manner that would not make them a target of Colbert's ridicule.

I am not so sure about this point -- bias always sneaks in, it is a citizen's job to be ever vigilant.

--------------------------------------------------

How could a seemingly nice person like you go into career of PR/marketing? Journalism is about defending the people. PR/marketing is about defending the powerful. PR is all about making lies and spin and unreality the truth. Marketing is about making people irrational, fearful, greedy, and self-absorbed. And, now, as Chomsky says, we hardly have a democratic system of government anymore now that candidates are being sold to us in the same way we are sold our toothpaste and beer. ;-)

Advertising and Commercials: Using Fear and Scare Tactics to Sell

About advertising and commercials and how they play on consumers basic fears, a possible solution to the problem is offered.

In April, 1973, CBS News, in a most heretical but heroic program entitled "You and the Commercial," broadcast the most eloquent statement on the manipulative aspects of advertising. The accuracy of the program was clearly demonstrated when the fulsome kingpins of unfairness and deception, the advertising industry, attacked the program as being unfair and deceptive. The commentary of Dr. Erich Fromm particularly raised the hackles of the admen. In noting the use of fear as an important selling tool, Dr. Fromm said: "This is very apparent in all the deodorant ads; fear of body odor and all that. But in a more subtle way, the general fear of not being loved and then to be able, by some product, to be loved. That's a subtle fear pervading most people, and the ads speculate on that and show, in more or less drastic ways, here are the things which will make you loved. All that is sought to these unconscious fears."

Dr. Fromm quickly cut through the illusionary devices of the advertisers, and came up with a comment on the junkie syndrome so prevalent in much of advertising today. He said, "The 2nd thing which struck me was the concept of the miracle. The miracle drugs. Something, some type of miracle, will happen with the consumption of the product."

Conspicuous consumption did not evade Dr. Fromm's perceptive eye either. He noted, "The general theme is: Love is dependent on a gadget. And this is a very potent theme in our whole modern life: the expectation that not human power, human effort, not being, but gadgets create the good life and that there is no limit to what a gadget can do."

Dr. Fromm also noted Dr. Shainess's 1st and 3rd guideposts in these comments. "I would say that our ads, by and large, tend to misinform the reader and not to make him think rationally, but irrationally. . . . Advertising tends to make a person greedy, to create the man who wants more and more instead of trying to be more and more. Thinking--rational thinking, critical thinking, independent thinking--is undermined."

[wndycty]

45. I'm sorry you have so a low view of my profession. . .

. . .obviously us marketing/pr people need to do a better job of marketing ourselves.

I love the industries in which I work. I started out as a field publicist for a number of movie studios. From 1990-1996 I was one of handful of people responsible for making sure Chicago based critics (which included Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel) saw movies, had access to talent for interviews, etc. I worked on promotional campaigns, etc. I also represented and then went to work for a major celebrity themed restuarant which was the "flavor of the month" from 1993-1999. I did not realize I was defending the powerful, I AM A POP CULTURE ADDICT and I was promoting an industry that I loved and still love. Everybody needs PR/Marketing including progressives, so as I shifted to politics and public service I have done PR and marketing for what I feel to be worthy causes (drafting a former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO to run for president and then leading his grassroots efforts in my state, access to affordable prescription drugs from foreign countries, healthcare for every kid in my home state).

As a teacher a hope to train others to love this very worthwhile profession and to do so in an ethical manner.

I'm sorry you have such a low view of my profession, but I take pride in what I do.

[IndyOp]

48. If you can live & teach advert and PR with no fear; while telling truth..

then you are doing a great good in our world. IMO, you are an exception in the world of advertising and PR.

I certainly appreciate the fact that you worked for Wes Clark's campaign in past. Clark & Dean were, IMO, 'peoples' candidates as opposed to some others who were handed to us by the DCCC or DLC. I want candidates to be recommended by and selected by the people -- grassroots, netroots...

I will remain cautious about anyone/everyone in advert/PR who uses 'peripheral means of persuasion' in place of presenting information for logical analysis of content (the central route).

The more often we 'sell' products/services/candidates by manipulating emotion (pairing them with people/objects/words that elicit automatic positive emotional responses) -- the more we reinforce people's lazy desire to not think.

The more often we use heuristics (big numbers, big words, celebrities, authorities) to make a point, instead of making it with painstakingly collected and communicated facts and cogent arguments, the more we reinforce people's lazy desire to not think.

I would like to see us, progressives, "change the frame." If we use the same peripheral methods of persuasion that 'they' do to advertize candidates, then 'they' can exploit citizens who are used to those methods. Example: Language: A Key Mechanism of Control - Newt Gingrich's 1996 GOPAC memo.

I don't want to play their game better than them, I want a different game.

[wndycty]

49. How am I an exception?

Over the years tons of PR and marketing people have promoted worthwhile candidates and causes. You show mesomeone who has any kind of following I will show you someone who is packaged by a PR and marketing person. Some are better than others at hiding the packaging but you don't run a statewide or nationwide campaign without it. What do you think Joe Trippi did with Howard Dean. This is not a Dean bash but reality, if you look at what he did in Vermont Dean did not govern as progressively as he ran as a candidate. He was not even anti-War, he supported the Biden-Lugar resolution.

Everything is marketed and packaged.

Look at Christine Cegelis v. Tammy Duckworth, there was a lot of misrepresentation of Duckworth and that did not come from the sky it was carried out by Cegelis spin doctors AKA her PR and marketing people.

This is not to disillusion you are knock down Cegelis or Dean its just an example of the role that PR and Marketing people play in all facets of the political game, including the grassroots.

[IndyOp]

58. I will do my best to clarify...

And, please note, I am commenting on my frustration with campaigns, packaging, and PR in general...

If the 'message' is
- honest instead of a lie (eschewing deceptive techniques)
- factual instead of emotionally manipulative
- directly related to the way in which the candidate will perform in office
- the same from one audience to the next

Then 'the messenger' is fine with me - whatever you call them 'candidate'; 'citizens'; PR person...


If the 'message'
- is a straight out lie or 'selective truth'
- is emotionally manipulative instead of factual
- is designed to make the candidate 'yer bud' or 'good Dad' or 'good Christian'
- differs from one audience to the next

Then 'the messenger' and I disagree on what is in the long-term interest for a Democracy. The above are attempts to manipulate emotion and short-circuit rationality and I do my best to recognize and reject them instead of falling prey to lazy thinking.


My point is: The process we allow determines the product we get. The following analogy is *really broad* -

When India was working to break free of UK colonial control, some of Gandhi's advisors advocated using violence to hurry along the process of gaining independence. Gandhi refused because the people who led the violent actions that got results would inevitably be lauded by the people and would become leaders after independence, and who wants leaders who would try to get their way by violence of any type? The process we allow determines the product we get.

If we elect candidates who straight out lie or tell only the selective truth; who are more often emotionally manipulative instead of factual; who stay popular by being 'yer bud' or 'good Dad' or 'good Christian' instead of by providing good governing policy; and who differ from one audience to the next -- aren't we just going to keep getting stuck with the same brand of 'slick politician' in office who we despise now? The process we allow determines the product we get.


IMHO, the best PR anyone will ever get is to tell the truth, act with integrity, and represent the people! Paul Wellstone, Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, Russ Feingold - must have (had) some PR help - but my guess is that they don't have as much as many other politicians because, for one thing, they spend HUGE amounts of time talking directly with the citizens they represent (hence less need for a go-between) and because they are consistent in their thoughts and actions over time.

============================================

I teach IntroPsych at a university and this semester when I taught the material on attitudes and persuasion we looked at emotionally manipulative campaign images and messages - modern and historic.

Images evoking warm emotions and beliefs in candidate as a 'good father,' 'a family values man'...








Messages that connect candidate to God, Godliness, Humility, prayer...

Baron Hill (D): "...and every night I get down on my knees and pray!"

George W. Bush (R): Richard Land, of the Southern Baptist Convention, recalls Bush once saying, "I believe God wants me to be president." After Sept. 11, Michael Duffy wrote in Time magazine, the president spoke of "being chosen by the grace of God to lead at that moment."

Adolf Hitler: "As a Christian I have no duty to allow my self to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice… And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows . For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people."


When the method of persuasion is peripheral -- when it is about strategy and packaging, sometimes the people pick someone who turns out to be a real lemon. (Understatement of the year).

[garthranzz]

74. Professions are also tools...

Few things in this world are inherently good or inherently evil. It's what we do with them that makes them so. I teach rhetoric, and you echo here the classic debate. But the power to persuade can be a most powerful force for good.

[rucky]

52. Even Heifer International has a PR department. n/t

[kevinmc]

19. He Chewed out the President AND the Press......

I doubted they would give him any coverage. I didn't think he was that funny .... but I sure liked him.

Plus I am sick of that dinner anyway. Watching people Suck up to power makes me vomit.

:)

[leesa]

34. He also honored those press members who have been asking tough questions

recently in his video montage when he broke all the buttons on his podium before he ran out of the room. He slapped them down, but also gave some kudos to those that had found their testicles and ovaries. I think it hurt the press some, but it may have given them a little nudge to go further. It will empower the ones capable of being empowered.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

39. I'm so glad you pointed this out..he paid sly tribute to a few in the

WH press corps.

MKJ

[immoderate]

27. Good points, wndycty

We are a self selecting special group. The exposure of events like that dinner is measured in hundredths of a percent. Colbert dropped a big stone, but it was in an immense ocean. The effects are subtle and won't be obvious.

--IMM

[wndycty]

28. Put it this way. . .

. . .you know that at all the parties afterward it was a topic of discussion, which is a good thing. You don't think Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson walked into a party and people didn't rush up to them and ask them what they thought of Colbert? You don't think Helen Thomas probably didn't get applause from some colleagues when she showed up at a party afterwards.

AND YOU KNOW THEY WILL BE BUZZING ABOUT THIS IN THE PRESS ROOM IN THE WEST WING TOMORROW!

Thanks for getting it.

[immoderate]

54. Ref: the Butterfly Effect

It goes: If a butterfly flaps its wings in South America, it leads to a typhoon a month later in the Indian Ocean. (Or some variation. It's a tenet of Chaos Theory.)

--IMM

[The Backlash Cometh]

29. This is so true.

On one of the first White House Correspondents Dinners, George Bush showed pictures of Daddy Bush in the bathtub with all his kids and they were all naked. He also showed a picture of Jeb Bush as a child, nekkid. And you know what? Not a peep of those pictures have turned up in the mainstream since. Do you think the piccies have been classified?

[babylonsister]

30. Excellent post, wndycty. Thank you!

:hi:

[gristy]

35. Well said. Colbert gave a performance that is going to ignite a slow burn

both under Bush and under his own career. Colbert will have to wave down to Bush as he passes him on the way up. It will take a while, and it will be oh so not apparent any impact that last night has on Bush. But it is going to have an impact. Colbert has legs.

[dogman]

38. Based on your familiarity with PR, do you think the WH knew what was

coming with Colbert? As a way to offset the jab, might they have gone with the self-deprecating humor to deflect the hit they would be taking? A few years back I believe it would have garnered sympathy for Bushco and would have been given the Michael Moore treatment. After the WHCD in which Bushco presented the clip about searching the Oval office for WMD, I don't think he can generate much sympathy. We knew last night after the show that the MSM would play up the evil twins and ignore Colbert. Given the limitations of audience to cable fare, I think you are quite correct that they know they can ignore Colbert at this time.

[wndycty]

42. They knew he was going to do something. . .

. . .now whether or not anyone briefed the president is another thing. He shot a fair amount of video at the White House so he had to be cleared to be in the briefing room and had to be cleared to shoot in the briefing room. The control panel with Gannon's name was probably added in post production. I doubt they had access to his speech before he gave it and part of my wonders how much of it was ad libbed and yes I do think the Bush impersonator was a pre-emptive strike.

[Karenina]

65. Great post , Wyndykins!

20%. That's all it takes, according to studies I've read. 20% can install a new meme.

Colbert's real target group was NOT in the room when he did his schtick. Sometimes it only takes ONE PERSON saying it out loud to get the ball rolling and I would surely misunderestimate him to assume he is not cognizant of that. The bun is in the oven.

I ain't worried about *M$M either. As the dissonance reverberates, I find some hope in fantasizing about Amis surrounding the *corp press en masse, HQs, trucks, the whole falafel, and making it IMPOSSIBLE for *them to conduct their "*bidness as usual."

[lwcon]

41. Still...

When the media *wants* to get into a lather about some if its inside baseball, it does so in a huge way.

Remember the non-stop coverage about "who wrote 'Primary Colors,'" like anyone outside the Beltway gave a shit?

It's ridiculous for coverage to focus on the corny stunt with the Bush double and largely neglect an extraordinary dressing down of the world's most powerful man and the nation's media.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[wndycty]

43. Primary Colors was not an overnight sensation. . .

. . .it had been simmering for sometime, last night may have been anticipated but it probably caught a ton of people off guard.

[Yoda Yada]

44. Thank You. My "panic mode" is now in neutral. n/t

[FredStembottom]

46. Hooray! Nice critique and advice!

As an example: I had never heard of the guy until the other day when I watched the video interview with Bill Kristol here on DU.

I don't have cable. I work evenings. The guy was a total unknown to me.

And there are millions like me, I'm sure.:blush:

This dinner speech is the _start_ of his fame...not the peak of it.

[incapsulated]

50. Agreed!

On all points. In addition, I would never expect the media to broadcast what was a scathing commentary not only on Bush, but on themselves. This was for us, and more importantly, for a cornered rat who was forced to listen. And for the rats in the audience who have propped him up.

[zippy890]

51. thank you, good insights

:thumbsup:

[CJCRANE]

53. Good point: the dinner

is an insider's gig. Few laughed at Colbert's jokes but if you listen to the audio - straight after it finished, the hubbub is quite animated, you can tell people are shocked and surprised. Colbert definitely sent shockwaves through the "movers and shakers" of America (politicians, journalists and probably even Hollywood activists).

[Robbie Michaels]

55. We know how the mainstream media works.

If they want a story suppressed (ex: antiwar demonstrations last September), they won't mention it or report stories that should not have national coverage 24/7 for a full year (Natalee Holloway disappearance). If they want to divide the country (illegal immigration), then they will report only one side of an issue and hammer those talking points home until they're embedded in your skull.

If they want to do real reporting, forget it. You'll have to go to the internet to find that.

[wndycty]

56. This is not a real story its not being surpressed. . .

. . .it is appearing in some publications and on some talk shows, its not going to resonate with a ton of Americans. Hell some DUers admitted that they had not heard of Colbert till a few days ago. The White House Correspondents Dinner is 3 decades old, how often do any of the speakers, other than the president, get any kind of coverage?

[Armstead]

59. Maybe -- But it's frustrating as hell

Remember Don Imus's jokes about Clinton's sex life, and how that made rthe MSM rounds endlessly after that?

But a comedian delivers a sling of "truthiness" to Bush, and the press corpse ignores it.

I'm just sick of having to second-guess the press's motivations in these things. It was important for what it was, and it is disgusting to see the Presstitutes ignoring it.

[happydreams]

60. Thanks for the perspective. I was thinking that

Colbert broke trail on criticizing the White House. This could encourage others to do the same, which of course would be fantastic.

[union_maid]

61. I wouldn't expect a lot of MSM coverage

I would expect most of the clips that are played to be of the Bush clone thing. Visual humor...better for clips. Colbert's being talked about among his audience and his potential audience and there truly is no such thing as bad publicity in that context. And he's keeping the press on notice that we're out there, noticing what they haven't been doing, at least until very recently. It's sad that the free press, which is supposed to function as a watchdog, needs a watchdog, but Colbert along with a few others and sites like this one on the internets are stepping up.

[cassiepriam]

63. Interesting, there were few laughs. everyone looked uncomfortable.

The point was made. The emperor has no clothes.
And you guys forgot to mention it.

[TankLV]

72. THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES!

That is it in a nutshell.

It has been said ALOUD - TO THE EMPEROR!

THAT is the "big deal".

The next step in this progression would be like Dick Gregory's "Why should we believe anything you say now since you've been proven to lie EVERY OTHER TIME in the past?" comment to rummy during rummy's press conference - and start using the word "LIAR" out loud and in public.

[cassiepriam]

78. I agree, keep using the L word, over and over..... nt

[Neil Lisst]

64. Agreed. Colbert showed the Press corps how easy it is to stand up to Bush

I strongly believe that some of those present learned a lesson and will go back to their jobs thinking about both their duty and their ability to stand up to the president and be more demanding.

[politrix]

67. Keith Olberman WILL Cover It

Tweety will mention it in passing.


As much as I've learned to hate him, Tweety has been kicking MAJOR ASS lately.


I know, I know, he knows the ship is sinking - but, what a good little rabid dog he's becoming, he's in Bush's ass everyday, pointing out painful sit and playing old clips of lies.

And, he's inviting guest who tell the truth and rip Bush and he encourages them. I couldn't believe it, at first - but, he's been doing it for a little while now.

So, you go, you bigheaded, sellout whore.


Hey, I wonder what Jon Stewart will have to say about it? What about Leno or Letterman? Think they'll bring it up?

[Awsi Dooger]

69. Right, it will get play on the cable shows this week

You can't expect a Saturday night event to get much coverage on Sunday. The political shows are already booked and planned.

[roseBudd]

68. You said: Do not under estimate the impact his performance will have on

those who watched it.

We DUers and all members of the liberal/lefty blogosphere can make the CSPAN vidclips of Colbert's performance the most viral/contagious vidclips of the week by watching and forwarding them to everyone you know.

[politrix]

70. You Tube Is The MOST Viral Place On Earth Right Now

Put it there and it'll go global in a week.

[Greyskye]

76. It's already there - link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcIRXur61II&search=colbert%20roast

Part 1. Parts 2 and 3 can be found on that page.

[roseBudd]

82. DUers can and should help to spread this video n/t

[garthranzz]

73. From one White Sox fan to another...good post!

Can they repeat?

[wndycty]

75. Too early to tell. . .

. . .but I feel good about them right now.

[althecat]

77. Damn right... and well said...

:kick:

[sutz12]

79. Don't read too much into anything the media says. nt

[rman]

81. No surprise because Colbert punked the MSM as hard as he punked W

That's two reasons for them not to give it much air time.

[opihimoimoi]

83. Your thread swpeaks the Truth...Love it...

kick

[wndycty]

84. Thank you. I'm flattered

:kick:

[politrix]

85. Colbert Threw The First Stone

All the others who were afraid to confront Bush openly and brazenly with be emboldened.

That's why penalties for attacking cops and other protected people are so stiff and crushing. You can't let the people think they can attack you openly.

Well, Colbert beat Bush's ass to his face, in front of his bitch and the whole world. A power shift has taken place.

Just because those who enable him (media) continue to TRY to shield him, Colbert drew first blood and now there's blood in the water and the mystique has been removed and the Dark God can bleed - he's human as we are and quite attackable.

You'll see, Colbert threw the first stone and the dogpile will commence.