The Colbert Retort

[Azure23]

I remember watching this the other day and wondering if this would come up. I didn't think the gag was over the line but I did think it was unnecessary, having Colbert say a bunch of stereotypical things really quickly when the real issue was about a racial slur did sort of overshadow the point when I watched it. I walked away remembering feeling conflicted about the gag more than the real issue.

Additionally, while the tweet by CC was stupid and out of context, the show didn't properly give context to the origin of the character Colbert was doing, it just showed the old clip of him doing this character. I hadn't seen the old episode so I thought it was Colbert satirizing his earlier episodes, like maybe he too had done something stupid in the past and was mocking it, reading this article and now knowing that the character had a point back then makes me think it was short-sighted to bring up this old character without giving his origin proper context. They could have simply done the same gag of him starting a foundation with a racial slur in it and I felt it would have had a better effect since I was so conflicted with Colbert doing the whole stereotype thing.

Picking blame between CC/Colbert and CC's twitter/Colbert's twitter seems like a silly distraction, I can personally see how someone might get offended even with context by the gag Colbert made. I think focusing on explaining the context and then apologizing if people were offended given context would have been better and might have calmed this story down. However, overall, if you want to get a TV show cancelled, you shouldn't use Twitter because Twitter is often part of the problem with racial insensitivity, exampled by the fact that it was used to attack/insult this person who might have had a legitimate complaint about the gag. Also, a hashtag shouldn't be a key term to a complaint, you are putting your movement for sensitivity among the likes of FML and YOLO and that doesn't help your case.

Sure he could have chosen his words better, but his message was extremely clear I thought; "When you say redskins, it actually sounds as bad as saying (colbert's quote)." Like sure it's a football team name so we've all gotten use to it, but it actually sounds really bad when you take a second. Whoever was running that twitter account is a goddamn idiot for thinking that that particular snippet would be a funny thing to post without context. People are overreacting massively on both sides, but ultimately Suey Park's heart is in the right place, it's unfortunate that she chose this to excercise her considerable influence on twitter. It's a stupid and pointless crusade that isn't going anywhere. She should be focusing her ire on Dan Snyder instead and maybe she'd get something done about an instance of actual and continuing racism.

 

[Zealous]

Snip.

I can't understand why anyone would criticise her. I mean, she "helped trend #notyourmascot". She's practically Mandela, Gandhi and MLK Jr all rolled into one!

Don't forget, she's a writer. She knows all about satire...

Snip.

Oh my god, I about lost it with laughter at three and a half minutes in when, several times, she says, and I quote, "...especially as a white man, I don't expect you to understand..."

Just...wow. She's bitching about Colbert making a "racist" joke while she's actively displaying racism herself.

That's fucking gold.

She also uses the term "people of colour" which I find hilarious.

Of course, as a white cis gendered male I do not have the right to have an opinion on racial topics, so all of this is irrelevant. Oh you Park, oh you.

 

[DrunkenElfMage]

Also, lets not gloss over the actual racist tweets that Park received because of this hashtag. I saw some of the most disgusting things tweeted at this woman in "defense" of Stephen Colbert, it really made me question my initial opinion that Park was wrong, that even off handedly using racism ironically to villify and contextuallize actual racism still isn't okay because it can be interpreted as Pro Racism by the right audience.

Ultimately, I still disagree with Park, but I won't act as if there isn't a problem with the world to start with.

I don't know that I can agree with you. The idea that one should not satirize racism because someone might not get that it's satire seems more than a little like an over reaction. It's no more surprising that actual racists didn't understand the context of what's going on when not even the SJW herself seemed to. I agree with that that Park is in the wrong here, but one should not construe a bunch of people acting like racists as the fault of the original satire, their words and deeds are their own.

My point is is that despite the Colbert's original intent, his words were still used to promote racism. You and I both know that that wasn't the point of the joke, but that doesn't change that it happened. Colbert unintentionally provided a platform for racists to stand on, and I have a feeling that that is (in part) what Park hates about the joke in the first place.

Keep in mind that I ultimately disagree with her, after all when someone shoots someone with a gun, we don't get mad at the person who handed out the bullets. But I can UNDERSTAND why she would feel that way. Its just that if we got rid of everything that could be taken out of context and used in a racist (or sexist) way, than all we would have on TV would be white static.

 

[Robert Marrs]

There is a great video that really calls out this bs for what it is.

EDIT: Video does have some NSFW language.


She is making controversy where there is none and is using this to promote herself. Really anyone with a brain would just say "oh sorry didn't realize the context" but she is a social justice warrior by profession. Like a journalist drumming up a story on nothing just to get in an article, she is using the frail, insecure and internet active serial complainers to carry a self serving campaign that gets her attention.

 

[Shadowkire]

Also, lets not gloss over the actual racist tweets that Park received because of this hashtag. I saw some of the most disgusting things tweeted at this woman in "defense" of Stephen Colbert, it really made me question my initial opinion that Park was wrong, that even off handedly using racism ironically to villify and contextuallize actual racism still isn't okay because it can be interpreted as Pro Racism by the right audience.

Ultimately, I still disagree with Park, but I won't act as if there isn't a problem with the world to start with.

I don't know that I can agree with you. The idea that one should not satirize racism because someone might not get that it's satire seems more than a little like an over reaction. It's no more surprising that actual racists didn't understand the context of what's going on when not even the SJW herself seemed to. I agree with that that Park is in the wrong here, but one should not construe a bunch of people acting like racists as the fault of the original satire, their words and deeds are their own.

My point is is that despite the Colbert's original intent, his words were still used to promote racism. You and I both know that that wasn't the point of the joke, but that doesn't change that it happened. Colbert unintentionally provided a platform for racists to stand on, and I have a feeling that that is (in part) what Park hates about the joke in the first place.

Keep in mind that I ultimately disagree with her, after all when someone shoots someone with a gun, we don't get mad at the person who handed out the bullets. But I can UNDERSTAND why she would feel that way. Its just that if we got rid of everything that could be taken out of context and used in a racist (or sexist) way, than all we would have on TV would be white static.

Except it isn't Colbert's words the racists are backing, it is the words of Park they are attacking. The racists don't care about defending Colbert, who would probably make fun of them, they care about opposing people like Park. This misunderstanding just gave both sides an excuse to do what they do best: yell.

 

[lostlevel]

Edit: For anyone like me that thought this was born out of a misunderstanding on Park's part, here's a video for you (I know, I know, HuffPost):

I can't understand why anyone would criticise her. I mean, she "helped trend #notyourmascot". She's practically Mandela, Gandhi and MLK Jr all rolled into one!

snip

Oh my god, I about lost it with laughter at three and a half minutes in when, several times, she says, and I quote, "...especially as a white man, I don't expect you to understand..."

Just...wow. She's bitching about Colbert making a "racist" joke while she's actively displaying racism herself.

That's fucking gold.

Maybe she's just trolling for hits rather than genuinely trying to generate a discussion or promote change.

It seems "SJW" is going to become an ever more prevalent pejorative term due to knee-jerk outrage before research.
I think Bob is right but she wouldn't value his opinion based on him being a white male... Sometimes the internet depresses me, I have a different ethnicity but the fact I have watched Colbert without outrage probably means some SJWs would hate me too.

Some interesting points here too:
http://theabsolutemag.com/538/longreads/why-social-internet-advocacy-is-not-actual-social-justice/

 

[DoorsBane]

But the real ugliness came in the aftermath. The original "Ching-Chong" sketch resonated because hack comedians trotting out old-school racist caricatures (see: Dunham, Jeff) in the guise of defying Political Correctness ("Don't censor meeeeeeeee!!!!!") are a real continuing issue for the comedy scene. As are the legions of White Guy Defense Force types who leap to their aid in the name of their Self-Evident Constitutional Right... to be an entitled douchebag. And in the ultimate sad irony (in a situation already drowning in it) of the day, this particular horde of miscreants quickly wound up overwhelming and co-opting the "defense" of Colbert, hijacking the conversation in order to make Park the latest subject of The Internet's favorite pastime: Beating Up Girls For Having Opinions.

I think this portion, you might have lost me, Bob. I did not see this effect, so if you could post a link, that would be helpful.

I am still having a hard time finding a directing cause and effect link that doing "A" will result in "B".

I second the motion.

No, really. I think it was in that moment that his own beliefs and biases - his ideology, I guess - overcame the mostly objective argument he had been building.

 

[Shadowkire]

". . .hijacking the conversation in order to make Park the latest subject of The Internet's favorite pastime: Beating Up Girls For Having Opinions."

That's incredibly sexist. To think that, if you disagree with a woman, you are beating her up, is pretty condescending. Alas, most people just think Suey Park is wrong and they disagree with her strongly. I bet that they would have done the same if she was a man. But then that victim card wouldn't be valid.

Edit - Also, Suey Park is a freakin' racist. Just because it's against white folks doesn't make it okay.

I think Bob is referring to the people who are probably not Colbert fans but have attacked Park and CancelColbert with actual sexist and racist comments.

[edit]- I agree that she seems pretty racist.

 

[Callate]

And if there's one place where the current left-wing culture (with which I generally identify) goes overboard, it's in the rush to presume that something it doesn't like is harmful.

Which is not at all like right-wing culture, which often seeks to outlaw things they don't like (gay marriage, video games, religious freedom, etc.) or paint them as threats that will doom society?

Seeing as such traits are exhibited across the whole political spectrum, do you think that it might just be something to do with people in general, rather than a specific political culture?

That's a reasonable point. I think it galls me more in left-wing culture because inclusion and tolerance are supposed to be something the left-leaning internalize in their philosophy; the right-leaning seem more likely to say that they never claimed to be looking out for anyone outside of their tribe, or trying to develop or change their traditions. If someone sees only red and blue, it's not surprising when they describe things thus. If someone seems to share all the same colors in your visual spectrum, it's that much more disconcerting to discover they don't see orange.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

I, regrettably, also got rid of my cable a while ago so I haven't seen the Colbert Report in a long long time. It's sad!

There's full episodes available online the day after they air over at [link]thecolbertreport.cc.com/full-episodes/[/link] .

Annnnd on topic: This entire thing is bad and it should feel bad. Way to overreact, again, twitter/tumblr warriors.

I'm not sure I ever really want to meet someone who frequents those sites as a means of "battling oppression" in person either. Unless they're an arab during the spring, of course, in which case they've got some ground to stand on and could provide some meaningful dialogue outside of "Patriarchy!" and "Feminazislolz."

 

[Coakle]

HuffPost

Oh wow, that was uncomfortable to watch. The way he conducted that interview defending Colbert is what Colbert satirizes interviewers for doing. The loaded questions, talking over the person he's interviewing, I kinda hoped he would have asked "why she hates fun?"

What was going on? There needs to be a word to describe the people who defend satirists while acting like the target that's being satirized.

OT:


Suey Park is kinda throwing stones in glass houses.

She doesn't think that Colbert's comedy routine helps people of color. That people watching Colbert care more about the jokes, laughing at people who are more racist than them, than the self-reflection that satire is suppose to encourage. People are more interested in one-upmanship.

Unfortunately, social media has built a reputation for engaging in the same kind of one-upmanship. In spite of that, Suey Park still thinks social media can still be an effective tool to help people of color. Calling out the Colbert Report seems counterproductive. She's using the passive viewing audience of The Colbert Report as a way to attack the show's material, which is the same tactic people use to dismiss social media.

I don't think she's a hypocrite, she may think that The Colbert Report and social media should be held to different standards. That's not an indefensible position. I'm not going anywhere with this. I didn't expect Suey Park to come at it from that angle.

 

[Charli]

Y'know I half expect to talk to Americans on the internet and offend them somehow just through the virtue of being a breathing individual.

How about toughen the fuck up. I see the need for movements involving fair treatment and especially when violence and actions are being taken, but you're taking offence to something someone said to new fantastical heights of which there is nothing gained.

Not a whole group, not someone important in your life. A THING. THAT SOMEONE...[sub]that you've never met[/sub] SAID.

Please just piss off because you're seriously not strong enough of a person to hang around me.

If you go down that path you will eventually reach a hypocritical singularity that you've dug yourself into. I guarantee it. So how about go the different path of turning the other cheek. Or call them a dick. That usually works.

 

[Abyss]

I do find it surprising that only this one statement is singled out of many satirical statements Colbert and his writers made to reflect many of the brain dead statements said by many a right-wing television commentator. It sucks when the underdog mistakes a satirical comment that's supposed to be in their favor into an attack on themselves. It's always been like that in our culture. We are a society of reactionaries, and even the best of critics and scholars have made this mistake. Roger Ebert once thought A Clockwork Orange was right-wing fantasy. Some critics thought Devo was fascist. Some scholars thought that "The Prioress's Tale," a really sinister ironic satire of anti-semitism, reflected Chaucher's beliefs even though he portrays the Prioress in a negative and hypocritical light. Usually, the best form of satire is one which reflects the targets very well, and that is what Colbert excels at. Of course, Colbert and company makes his satirical caricature of the Fox News reporter more interesting by making him an open harcore Tolkien fan; someone who's willing to interview bands like Tinarawen, Pussy Riot, and Devo; and a inept reporter who accidentally second guesses himself or undermines his own arguments.

Of course, it may have been unnecessary for Bob to write an editorial on this silly misunderstanding, but I myself am glad he did write it. It filled me on the history of the Colbert Report that I missed or forgot, and I like Bob's style of writing about the things he's interested in.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Perhaps this is rare, but in addition to the opinion you would expect me to have (Suey should have done some research before a kneejerk reaction, the twitter isn't even Colbert himself, etc.), I don't even think the joke is that big of a deal. It's not racist because it's poking fun at racism, but even if it wasn't, it would be nothing to start a bowel social movement over or cancel the show.

 

[Shadowkire]

Every social justice warrior cause pivots on the fact that hating white men is entirely acceptable. No matter what your cause, if it somehow eventually pointing out just how awful white men are, then it's a good thing... as far as these people are concerned

[footnote]Bolded the racist part in case you didn't catch it. The entire comment strongly implies a white people vs non-white people mentality, ergo, implied racism, and then ends it with "these people".[/footnote]

These are just four out of twenty comments on that video, but a ratio of 20% of respondants being complete fucking dickheads isn't negligible. I haven't seen anybody here on this site say anything particularly negative towards Suey other than "she's wrong", which really shouldn't be a negative thing to say, or accusations that she's a racist because, well, she said "as a white man I wouldn't expect you to understand", which is, well, kind of a racist thing to say. Just because its not happening here, doesn't mean its not happening elsewhere, and its not okay to pretend that it isn't happening elsewhere.

I completely agree with you except on your interpretation of that last quote, it is entirely possible that poster meant the "social justice warriors" when s/he used the phrase "these people".

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

I went through a SJW phase when I was a teenager... I once tried to have a custom Warcraft 3 map pulled from a download site because it was 'racist' because the npcs you killed for experience were obviously inferred to be Aboriginals. Then I got my comeuppance when someone of Aboriginal descent chimed in that he didn't give a shit about the map but found my claiming to be offended on his behalf actually offensive because it was belittling. Lesson learned!

People won't grow out of it anymore because Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook have evolved into echo-chambers where they can get their view passively reinforced with retweets, hashtags etc and ignore any criticism by dismissing it as 'trolling'.

The sad thing is that they give ammunition to people who want to be legitimately racist by claiming it as an example of 'political correctness gone mad'.

 

[Grabehn]

Hang on... American people getting offended? WHAT? YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME!

Now really, I barely know what the Colbert Report is, or even the character/guy for that matter, but I read CHING CHONG DING DONG and already knew it had to be a joke, since given the way that people refer to Colbert, him making an actually racist comment seems weird.

Also, I just can't really stand these "OMG DEFEND EVERYONE" movement that started some time ago, I get what's kind of the point of it, but I just think most of the time it gets borderline stupid with the amout of mislead "social warriors" yelling "everyone's special so F*CK YOU!", which is kind of mind-boggling.

 

[Living_Brain]

All you needed to know to not get offended by this is that the whole show's satire. These people make me sad for the future of humanity.

 

[SeeDarkly_Xero]

From the Colbert Report website:
"Tonight: Twitter Co-Founder Biz Stone stops by, and Stephen gets free technical help"
Perfect! Pretty sure all this is going to do is skyrocket his ratings.

OH and this is an interesting quote from the article MovieBob linked to about Park:
"Suey is not Park?s real first name. It's an online pseudonym playing off the name of the Chinese dish."
Describing herself as particularly tortured by a lifetime of such jokes... yet she makes herself into one?
Odd choice given her complaint... though I could see the name as "satire" on her part, if I believed she understood its use.


In most regards, I'm sure she is well-intentioned. But she is also more than a bit ignorant on the specific matter at hand and clearly out of her depth in terms of responding intelligently to the debate.

 

[V8 Ninja]

...So basically this is another incident where everything can be summed up as "Twitter Is Bad For Communication"?

Well, looks like I gotta expand my "Why I Don't Use Twitter" list.