Stewart & Colbert: Scabavision

So, despite never belonging to a union myself, I'm sympathetic to unions because I was a direct beneficiary of the labor movement, which included every person who ever got their head cracked, and those who cracked a few heads in kind, to secure the kinds of rights and protections that my family did not take for granted.
While raising a little hell at A Tiny Revolution in the comments subsequent to Bernard Chazelle's post about Thomas Friedman working on his next sure-to-be-vapid book, I raised the subject of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert announcing their intent to resume The Daily Show and The Colbert Report on January 7 with or without writers. After noting that Stewart & Colbert would be standing by to help Friedman, a celebrated tool of the oligarchy, sell a few books, I posted:
Word is Stewart & Colbert are returning to work on January 7th sans writers.
Mr. Stewart, host of “The Daily Show,” and Mr. Colbert, host of “The Colbert Report,” will have to improvise their monologues and interviews without the help of their writing staffs.They're both WGA members, so, yeah, they're scabs in my book. So, too, are the late night weenies, who really don't give a shit about weakening the union so long as they fare okay. No doubt, the highly principled liberal hordes will do whatever it takes to justify and promptly forgive the scabbery since, you know, we're talking about folks who don't have much of a problem voting for stalwart supporters of The Surveillance State, kleptocracy, mass murder and ethnic cleansing, Unitary Executive rule and whatever policy du jour prevents citizens of The United States and other countries from having a voice in political affairs.
But Stewart and Colbert are such cards, and, hey, people gotta have their entertainment. Besides, in the words of an ancient Faith No More song, they
CARE A LOT -
ABOUT YOU PEOPLE...
The next commenter asked if I had entertained the possibility that the two liberal icons were returning to do a terrible job so as to emphasize the how rotten their shows are without talented writers, to which I replied:
There is zero doubt in my mind that's exactly what their M.O. will be. Their lip service to the strike will provide the necessary justification for their fans to watch and laugh and ignore the fact that what these guys are doing by returning to the air is weakening the union, period.Phoenix Woman wrote:Where writers are involved, silence speaks volumes. The suits at Comedy Central and other other networks don't give a damn what happens as long as they can run fresh shows to support a fresh barrage of commercials. That does not help writers. It all but eliminates the sanctions which are absolutely fundamental to assuring writers to get a fair shake. Money talks and bullshit walks, and these two guys - by returning to work without a resolution - are making sure the fat cats get their money. But, then, they're fat cats themselves, so this shouldn't be surprising. It is, however, disappointing.
I long ago tired of Stewart yukking it up with any old fascist selling a book. He's an obsequious toady, and, although the material on The Daily Show (especially the correspondent segments) is good, Stewart himself is neither funny nor insightful.
Sadly, I will miss Colbert, as his humor has a caustic bite to it. But if he chooses to be a big money scab and undermine the people largely responsible for his good fortune, all I can say is see ya. I know how to hold a grudge, and will.
Actually, Stewart and Colbert are being forced by Comedy Central to go back to work. Click this petition to tell CC to cut the crap and negotiate:That really got under my skin. I replied:
http://action.firedoglake.com/page/petition/truthiness
It's the accountability, Stupid.So, let me get this straight, Phoenix Woman: Stewart and Colbert are prepared to cross the picket line, but Comedy Central gets the petition.
That is rich.
So rich that if I had a dollar for every person who signs that petition and subsequently watches four hours of Comedy Central's scabfest each week, I could buy a pair of one-way tickets to New Zealand and put the rest in a Turks and Caicos account.
Meanwhile, Glenn Greenwald will continue generating a thousand letters each week from Democratic voters who can't understand why their political representatives betray them at every turn.
And liberal treachery remains an artificial construct
of the[reserved for] Nader-loving spoilers responsible for George W. Bush.There's something wrong with this picture, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Maybe it'll become more clear after the whiskey and eggnog fade.
To the extent there is leverage to apply, it should be applied first and foremost to the person or persons committing the betrayal. Those who respect the picket line enforce the picket line. Comedy Central is doing what management is expected to do. As union members, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are not doing what union members must do - which is respect the fucking picket line.
This is all very anachronistic and quaint to those who have either never known or, in many cases, conveniently chosen to forget that supporting labor is something one does by their actions, not by issuing hollow platitudes like a guest on Meet The Press.
I write this not because there's anything particularly magnificent about The Daily Show or The Colbert Report, but because it serves as such a fine example of why The Liberal Tribe is such an ineffective one. Progressives who fail to comprehend the primary betrayal in this situation are the same ones who vilify the admittedly villainous Republicans while supporting, begrudgingly or enthusiastically, a Democratic Party which is not only scornful of its constituency, but actively complicit in the crimes blamed almost exclusively on Bush and his neocon cronies.
If writers are still on strike when Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert return to work for Comedy Central on January 7, progressives who tune in for any reason are effectively crossing the picket line themselves. Which makes them scabs-by-proxy.
Management or Labor. Tune in and support the scabs of Comedy Central or tune out and support the writers primarily responsible for their success. These are mutually exclusive options. Prog-bloggers who refuse to comprehend the necessity of choosing sides in a simple labor dispute are most assuredly unqualified to provide any valuable insights into the sociopolitical morass of life in post-Constitutional America, much less propose any measures to challenge the status quo (not that there's a lot of that anyway).














12 Comments:
Amen to that, brother!
Two quick things:
- I don't know what means are being or could be used to "force" Stewart and Colbert back on the air. IF they have independent production contracts with Comedy Central, they could be threatened with a breach of contract suit. Still, no one said solidarity need be risk-free.
- You say "liberal treachery remains an artificial construct of the Nader-loving spoilers responsible for George W. Bush." That sounds like you're blaming Nader for Bush but it comes in the same post where you also say the "primary betrayal" here comes from those who "vilify" GOPpers while supporting the Democrats, who are "actively complicit in the crimes" committed by the Shrub gang. So I'm not... quite... sure... what you mean....
I'm certain the prospect of litigation loomed large for Stewart & Colbert. I'm equally certain they have something Comedy Central doesn't have, and that is the ability to martial public sentiment in their favor. They have enough PR capital to practice solidarity with the writers union to which they belong. Whether they're willing to part with a portion of their royalties to give the writers a fair deal remains to be seen.
The liberal treachery comment was sarcasm (it was a late night) referring to the sizable contingent of Democratic voters who think nothing of equating Nader and Nader voters of nearly eight years ago with betrayal while making lame-ass excuses for the gross failure of House & Senate Democrats since Day One of GWB's reign. Everything from they don't have the votes to the media would crucify them to that wouldn't be not smart politics. I'll have to throw some brackets up there to indicate as much.
Re S&C: I agree they could and should be much more vocal in support of the stike, but when it comes down to it, I suppose the real issue is how much of a risk they're willing to take for the sake of what we presume to be their sympathies.
Re Nader quote: That's pretty much what I figured but I think you can understand why I wasn't sure.
Oh, hell yeah, Larry. I mangled that paragraph and appreciate having it brought to my attention. That's a hazard of replicating comments, but I wasn't up for a full-blown essay. Hopefully, the bandage helps clarify my meaning.
I never made any assumptions regarding Stewart & Colbert's respective opinions regarding the strike. Whatever they may be, they're largely irrelevant. Vocal or not, supportive or dismissive, what matters is whether they cross the picket line staked out by the union to which they belong. If they don't respect the line, social sanctions are in order - even if all I can do is throw virtual eggs from afar and avoid Comedy Central like the plague.
Arvin,
The Guys from Area 51 have officially joined the boycott. We are featuring your fantastic image in our sidebar.
Neato torpedo.
Maybe it'll spread like herpes at spring break.
Regarding a producing side-deal-- it seems to me that this could well be a legal grey area. If so, this would mean that if either Stewart or Colbert sought out a judge to give them an opinion affirming their right to stand with their union they would've
a.covered their ass,
and
b. helped strengthen the generally very tenuous rights of unions in the US.
Given how important the larger issues are revolving around the WGA strike, I don't think it would've been that hard to find a judge willing to offer an opinion, and obviously if the judge gave them a negative opinion then that would color their crossing the picket line a little differently.
The reason I'm guessing it's a grey area is because the Letterman show struck a provisional side deal with their writers, and if it was already established case law that producers who belonged to the WGA didn't have to honor the strike, then Letterman might've not bothered. But needless to say I'm just taking semi-educated guesses like your average semi-educated blogger.
Dude, I never knew you were so much into supporting intellectual property (IP).
Glad to see another WTO/GATT supporter in the ranks. Microsoft can use all the help it can get. :-)
Or maybe I misunderstood the position of the strikers? You know, conceptually, I really do believe that any time someone, somewhere plays a Ted Nugent song, Ted's grandchildren, long after Ted is dead, should get a slice of that goodness just for being Ted's grandchildren.
Sorry, but I think IP blows. I support the unions, but when the argument is for me to support the union so that they can jam poison down my throat, I get substantially less enthusiastic about their plight.
Naaah, I just hate scabs.
Besides, it's impossible to poke even the most rotten concept in the eye with a sharp stick.
Nobody's forcing any poison down your throat, Ted. You're gobbling it down like the warm, salty nuts you get with your occasional Business Class upgrades. Just like the rest of us.
Still, I'd be happy to craft you - in perfectly good faith - a nifty graphic to convey a Down With Intellectual Property message. As usual, I'm way behind on my commitments these days, so it might take a while.
A thousand years ago - the mid-to-late eighties - I was in New Jersey on a business trip with a small group of fresh-faced young execs (see? I've always been a fraud) and we decided to go to NYC, which none of us had ever visited. I haven't been back since. After taking in the WTC, one person in the group suggested a tour of Radio City Music Hall. When we got there, a picket line was out front. I don't recall who was doing the striking, but even then, it didn't matter. What mattered was the line. Not for a second did anyone consider crossing it, and it wasn't because of fear or intimidation.
Idealism is so unfashionable, but, like Frank said: You Are What You Is. What I is is someone who believes the picket line is sacred. It represents something greater than the bone being picked.
What can I say, Ted. Life's a bowl of contradictions. Binge and purge. Bon Appétit. Or starve to death.
I'm glad I finally find someone who shares my opinions on this. And great graphic.
Ted said : "Or maybe I misunderstood the position of the strikers? "
I would agree that IP sucks and since it is used as a means to throw people in prison or give them multi-thousand dollar fines, i don't see how anyone could see it otherwise. Or maybe some guy who has thousands of dollars to spare each month.
However I don't think this battle has that much to do with IP. The strikers aren't fighting the downloads, they're asking to get paid by their boss on...internet advertisement revenues.
Nobody's paying to watch Comedy Central's shows on the internet. They're free in a sense, free with ads.
On the other hand, that is not exactly perfect, since ads are making those who use them depend on the advertisers. That's 'freedom' for the viewer, if that viewer can withstand a barrage of ads all the time, and slavery for the producer. This is especially devastating for the press.
I'm French so I can tell you about paper industrials launching free newspapers here, with lots of ads in them, no real investigation, lots of pandering to advertisers, and especially pandering to a specific segment of the population. You know you get real journalism when editors worry exclusively about how much their readers will love their stories and opinions.
Of course, it's a little easy to pick on these idiots. But we should not forget that just about everyone does exactly this. Target a segment, and wonder what might interest them. It's especially true of news shows.
And hey, i've seen AT&T advertise on the Daily Show's website. Wonder when we're going to see a segment on illegal spying again...
Welcome to The Carnival of Horror, littlehorn.
Your mention of papers pandering to specific audiences reminds me of a discussion I had earlier tonight about the triumph of marketing - the fragmentation of macro-society into bunches of separate consumer demographics. A more efficient democracide would be hard to formulate.
Our free newspapers are mostly "alternative weekly" publications. Although their content leans toward arts & entertainment, they do sometimes feature interesting investigative journalism the "real" [daily] newspapers wouldn't touch. The ratio of ads to content doesn't seem much different between the "alternative weekly" and the traditional daily paper. But I think the fifty cents charged for the latter gives people a false sense of being the customer, which, of course, they aren't, as anyone who has sold or purchased retail advertising will attest.
Which is why, when I can, I try to provide some form of support - meager and infrequent, though it tends to be - to the citizen-journalists, essayists and rabble-rousers who do something other than regurgitate conventional wisdom. The best ones of the lot are the least self-conscious about endearing themselves to a regular audience.
Although I'm a diarist who uses this site as a means of expression rather than education (luckily, quite by accident, there is occasionally some overlap between the two), I can appreciate how easy it is to fall into the trap of currying favor with returning readers. I'm very glad my income is not derived from doing this kind of thing; meaning, of course, my prostitution simply takes another toxic form: marketing. Fortunately, I'm not a very good prostitute. If Karma doesn't get me, Conscience does. What a team.
I've received a fair amount of hits from France in the last couple of years, but I believe you're the first to post a comment. Synchronicity being what it is, as I write this, I'm listening to Charlotte Gainsbourg, AF607105, on Sirius Radio. She makes me want to smoke cigarettes, learn French and disappear in The Côtes du Rhône to grow Syrah and discreet patches of blueberry cannabis. I don't think my wife will stand for it.
Happy New Year.
Oh, and good catch on the AT&T ad. Proactive public relations. Smart investment. Cheap, too.
Post a Comment
<< Home