The Colbert Retort

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

The Colbert Retort

The controversy of #CancelColbert misses the point because of context.

Read Full Article

I think this story is sort of why I've been so hesitant to join online movements or 'clicktivism'. Even if the movement gets going with enough tweets or posts or whatever, it can backfire. Like the Kony movement. I think the intentions were in the right place but the execution could've been handled better.

MovieBob:
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".

As 10 minutes on r/TumblrInAction will tell you, there will never be a shortage of SJW overreaction. Sometimes I almost think that all those crazy tumblr blogs are part of a bizarre right ring conspiracy to poison the general populations opinions on worthwhile social justice issues...

Also, can we please stop blaming the counter-reaction on the fact Suey Park is a woman. If you say something really stupid on the internet, then people are going to voice their opinions against you, male or female.

I have to say, the article was a bit wordy and it took roughly 3/4's of it to know Bob's opinion on this, but I'm pleasantly surprised by how it turned out. I was afraid he was gonna jump on the bandwagon of hating the Colbert Report simply because some brain donor opened up in his stupid virtual mouth on twitter and now that has to represent everything the show was, is and will be.

I was actually quite unaware of this. It's amazing how much you miss when you don't waste your time on Twitter (I don't even have an account because I have never seen anything positive happen there). 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!

I feel like it's a sad day when people jump to conclusions and get everyone wound up in a tizzy over a single line on a Twitter feed. I feel it's just as sad when idiots come out to play and basically justify half of what people are saying by making genuinely sexist and racist comments. I don't agree with the #CancelColbert idea, I don't agree with the clicktivist (I credit the comment by Andrew Siribohdi for even knowing that is a thing) BS that comes with it. But I can not agree without degrading to sexist and racist comments about the original Tweeter. I know that most of the internet is like me, reasonable thinking individuals who can make their own decisions without the need to be told something wrong was actually done. I just can't stand how people who do that kind of thing have equal access to internet. But, that is the thing about freedom of speech I guess. I can't stand the KKK, but I can't sit here and say they aren't allowed to think that or act on those thoughts so long as it's not actually hurting anyone. So, it's best to let the blowhards on both sides have their say and just ignore them.

I'm unfamiliar with most of the context, but I'll take his word for it. If Bob of all people says they overreacted, than damn, they really fucked up.

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.

I'm with you, Bob. I don't even remember the original skit but I understand enough to recognize when Steven is playing a conservative blowhard living in complete obliviousness of their own obliviousness (see Palin, Sarah) and when he's not. I also understand many of the people missing the point have a somewhat knee-jerk reaction to these kinds of things, prematurely ejaculating themselves long before context and understanding have the chance to warm up and get in the mood.

I imagine tonight we will see Steven pull something only he can--a move that not only shames those who flew off the handle for their impulsiveness, but proves what magnificent steel balls Steven and his team have.

I hope this thread doesn't just change into another SJW bashing thread.

Suey Park may have been in the wrong when she started the hashtag, but I understand the Kneejerk reaction when comparing most of the rest of Comedy Central's programming, primarily Tosh.0 and South park, the two shows that get replayed the most. South Park may have the excuse of Satire, but Tosh.0 does not; it has no important message beyond some of the most sexist, racist, and mysogynist humor on the planet. I think the only way Tosh barely gets away with it is that he intentionally uses that humor to paint himself as a terrible person and he is a terrible person because has those views, but that's a flimsy excuse at best. My point is is that both SOuth Park and Tosh.0 are two good enough reasons for somebody like Suey Park to give up Comedy Central entirely and ignore programs like the Daily Show and Colbert Report.

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.

Baresark:
I was afraid he was gonna jump on the bandwagon of hating the Colbert Report simply because some brain donor opened up in his stupid virtual mouth on twitter and now that has to represent everything the show was, is and will be.

I was actually quite unaware of this. It's amazing how much you miss when you don't waste your time on Twitter (I don't even have an account because I have never seen anything positive happen there). 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!

Now now, have a little more faith man. MovieBob tends to be pretty reasonable, and I think we can all agree that Twitter is a terrible place that often does more harm than good. Either way, if you're interested you can catch the Colbert Report (and Daily Show) for free on their respective websites, though with a data cap I can see how that could pose a problem.

OT: Well, I didn't know this was a thing, and I'm frankly disappointed in pretty much everyone. As MovieBob said, this not only stands as a gross misunderstanding of a piece of satire, but provides reasons for people to avoid future involvement in such movements even when they're much better grounded.

What I can't figure out is how this person didn't know anything about Colbert. He's become something of a US institution, appearing on the cover of magazines, holding a public rally in Washington with John Stewert, presenting in front of Congress on the matter of migrant workers and raising huge sums of money for various charities. He's even listed as one of Time's 100 Most Influential People. I'm not saying it's a crime to be ignorant of such things, but even a cursory look at the man's activities should have been enough to prevent all of this. Also a slower Twitter-trigger finger...

And this is why (a) I don't have a Twitter account and never will and (b), imo, Twitter is one of the worst creations ever made by human beings. Granted, the same can be said for other forms of social media (Facebook, YouTube, etc.), but there has been some good to come out of those areas (Ben "Yahtzee" Crowshaw has a job here because of YouTube). With Twitter, its condensing human thought into a too quick and too brief sentence that can give off the wrong message; either intentionally or unintentionally. And, to be perfectly honest, I cannot sum up my thoughts in 140 characters or less and no one should ever have to do the same. It needs time, effort, research, and actual thinking to put them out. The phrase "Think before you speak" is a rule that needs to be carved in stone in the realm of the Internet.

This right here is the problem: "influential/heavily-followed ... social-media activist" since all it is is a person that says "I dont like it so you shouldnt like it either" to its followers.

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.

MovieBob:
The Colbert Retort

The controversy of #CancelColbert misses the point because of context.

Read Full Article

When I first read the article below, I could see Ms. Park's point of view, but I lost all respect for this woman and her cause when she responded to people telling her it was a joke with "Dear White People".

..... Really? Really.

The BBC article on the subject, with links to said Twitter post

UPDATE: Apparently the link wasn't working, so I have fixed it....hopefully.

Alorxico:

MovieBob:
The Colbert Retort

The controversy of #CancelColbert misses the point because of context.

Read Full Article

I lost all respect for this woman and her cause when she responded to people telling her it was a joke with "Dear White People".

..... Really? Really.

The BBC article on the subject, with links to said Twitter post

How progressive of her to make assumptions about a group of people and their race. This sort of over-the-top reactionism to anything someone might find offensive feeds into the biases of the people who claim to hate racial stereotypes. Just as it is quite popular on the conservative side to play "who's the most batshit in their idealism" the same exists for the left. I'm not accusing Park of this, but she's not making herself look any better by engaging in baseless assumptions herself.

I have to admit, that "Ching-Chong" thing got a giggle out of me at first (geez, I don't think I said that in decades and i'm in my 20s. Honestly, where does that come from?)
Anyway, not much I can add other than this type whole exchanged is getting all the more embarrassing for both sides.

This is just one of the hundreds of reasons that Twitter (and Facebook, etc.,) are absolutely worthless and should be ignored.

The whole fallout was doubly problematic immediately. First, it undermined the original aim of the joke itself: Calling out the Redskins management for their intractability regarding the creepy and insensitive team name. Ironically, this is a goal one might safely assume Park would support, given her feelings on cultural representation and appropriation.

This is what gets me. Colbert and Park are clearly, obviously, allies in their overall goals. He wouldn't have turned his attention to the Washington team at all if they didn't at least broadly agree with each other. Which makes the whole thing a People's Front of Judea problem, one of the most maddening impulses of activists everywhere.

Don't eat your own, people. It's not productive.

Speaking as a Brit who has never watched the Colbert Report (I know him only as "that guy who kinda pretends to be a fox news anchor") and has never heard that there was a team called the "Washington Redskins" I understood the joke right away and it's fairly obviously not anti-asian.

It's mocking racial insensitivity and very flimsy "some of my best friends are black" style dismissals of said insensitivity. That's fairly clear even outside the context (although I am aware that I generally give the benefit of the doubt more than most people)

As someone from eastern Europe that watches Colbert on occasion, I got the joke. How a scandal like this started, in the country of origin of the show, where I'm guessing it has more cultural reach than on the other side of the world, is beyond me.

So we're looking at another 'Donglegate' here?

Great.

MovieBob:
The Colbert Retort

The controversy of #CancelColbert misses the point because of context.

Read Full Article

I'm confused about something, what exactly does this have to do with video games? I mean its one thing for a individual person to post a thread in the forums but why is a staff member publishing something that seem to have nothing to do with the theme of this website? It seems as out of place to put it here on the websites main page.

OT: The whole thing comes off like something you hear about in high school- a petty dispute between two teenagers which involves making mountains out of mole hills.

DrunkenElfMage:
I hope this thread doesn't just change into another SJW bashing thread.

"Bashing"? Its hardly "bashing" to point out how overly hostile, bigoted, and sensitive SJW behave on places like tumblr.

DrunkenElfMage:

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

The fact that the world isn't perfect is irrelevant to Park's behavior.

Well all I see here is one cishet white male condescending to whitesplain and mansplain why what another cishet white male said isn't hateful and bigoted. Maybe they both just need to check their privilege and stop whining about their first world problems.

I can't believe the guy that told me about the unconventional racism of Halo, just how awful it is to make a media product aimed at teenage boys, South Park as a gated community, and other similar gems is getting cold feet all of sudden.

Seriously though, #CancelColbert and #IStandWithSuey. I can't think of justice more poetic than for a white male minstrel show to be hoist on its own politically correct petard.

Ed130 The Vanguard:
So we're looking at another 'Donglegate' here?

Great.

Oh it's the new coke!

I'm amazed no one pointed out the HuffPo interview. Where Park intentionally kept putting herself down as less than human in front of the host constantly referring herself as a person of color and kept calling the host a white male that is superior.

In the end it is just someone who is a fanatical zealot that thinks she is actually doing the world some good by just being outraged instead of actually taking action by trying to change the laws to make people equal. Just another 23 year old person who is apparently able to make a living not by actually making a difference but just make people angry at each other for no good reason.

I feel quite strongly that disliking something, even disliking something strongly, is not reason enough for that thing to cease to exist.

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. It isn't that a joke makes you feel bad; it perpetuates a stereotype that enables violence. It isn't that watching someone play a video game distrubs you; it's that it causes children to be aggressive. All too frequently this is wrapped up with a bow of "common sense", enabling the claims to be made with little or no relation to proven cause and effect.

(You aren't against common sense, are you? That would mean you're irrational, and that's one more reason to immediately dismiss anything else you have to say.)

What's really frustrating is that it ought to be enough to start a discussion that something makes people feel bad. We're capable of empathy, right? We don't want people to feel bad, right? We're capable of being that promised, idealized culture of inclusion that recognizes people are different without leaping to the conclusion that their "outsider" nature makes them somehow dangerous, right...?

(You know, much like jumping to the conclusion that that thing which makes you feel bad must also be dangerous...?)

...But no, we have to jump in with both guns blazing. Middle ground? What's that? Respect? Not due to the enemy! You have to come from a position of strength, and you never come to the table with anything less than a thundering, denunciatory how dare you?!

Park misused her power. I'm not going to call her some derogatory term for being female or Asian, but I'm not going to couch things with "there are a lot of rotten people 'defending' Colbert" or the presumption that she's usually right and righteous. In this case, she's multiple layers of wrong. She jumped to conclusions without bothering to gain context, she assumed it was her right to destroy the thing that made her uncomfortable, she's apparently stuck to defending a wrong-headed conclusion, and she's hollowed out her own side's ability to rally the next time there's something actually dangerous that needs to be addressed.

To my mind, she doesn't deserve excuses for her actions, regardless of how sickening some of her attackers may be. She needs to have that stick she's lashing out with wildly taken away and given to someone responsible.

The zealots for a cause, however righteous, are capable of doing far more damage to that cause than its detractors. We need to stop making excuses for people who are on our side badly. We need to stop being glad for their additional numbers, their rousing fury, their fire.

If you want to burn books, I don't care with what brand of martyrdom you choose to paint yourself. I don't want you on my side.

This post isn't really meant to pick on you or anything, but you've used a term that I've wanted to respond to and discuss for a while.

T_ConX:
As 10 minutes on r/TumblrInAction will tell you, there will never be a shortage of SJW overreaction.

and as 30 minutes on r/TumblrInAction can tell you, if one doesn't take care when opposing "SJW"s, it's easy for assholes to invade the discussion because the term "SJW" lacks a solid definition, which gives assholes a code to dress up their beliefs even if they believe all feminists are crazy.

Whenever discussions opposing "SJWs" comes up, assholes can easily blend into the discussion because the terms used to label the misguided saps in question are vague and many assholes use the terms interchangeably with terms used to describe people who aren't the standard blend of misguided, misinformed, and vocal; though they may say SJW, they mean and interpret it as those lesser terms, like feminist, and then recieve encouragement for those ideals from others who use it with the definition created around tumblr.txt.

This wouldn't be a problem if SJW had a more solid definition, but it's definition is at best "crazy social justice advocate" in practice, which becomes a problem among those who think all or most feminists are crazy. Because of the subjectivity of crazy here, one cannot really disagree with those people on their usage of the term; it's based on an external description of the behavior of these people rather than any specific subset of beliefs or the name of an any actual group of people anymore(though it may have been originally). In a way, it's a worse term than "privilege"; if someone misuses that term to hide the weakness in their arguments there is at least a concrete rebuttal to their positions based on the actual definition and proper usage of the term, but there can be no such rebuttal for almost entirely subjective terms like SJW.

It's really unfortunate too; the existence of SJWs as originally defined is a real problem that deserves discussion, but whenever discussions happen they almost always devolve into either racism and sexism or a massive circlejerk(or both) for the above reasons.

Also, can we please stop blaming the counter-reaction on the fact Suey Park is a woman. If you say something really stupid on the internet, then people are going to voice their opinions against you, male or female.

If you are talking about the existence of criticism, no one here did that to my knowledge, not even the article itself. If you are including racist, sexist, etc. comments as the counter-reaction in this case, then you can't really describe those as an acceptable, predictable reaction, especially given how those people can drive the discussion given what I've discussed above.

Mr. Q:
And this is why (a) I don't have a Twitter account and never will and (b), imo, Twitter is one of the worst creations ever made by human beings. Granted, the same can be said for other forms of social media (Facebook, YouTube, etc.), but there has been some good to come out of those areas (Ben "Yahtzee" Crowshaw has a job here because of YouTube). With Twitter, its condensing human thought into a too quick and too brief sentence that can give off the wrong message; either intentionally or unintentionally. And, to be perfectly honest, I cannot sum up my thoughts in 140 characters or less and no one should ever have to do the same. It needs time, effort, research, and actual thinking to put them out. The phrase "Think before you speak" is a rule that needs to be carved in stone in the realm of the Internet.

I think Twitter, or at least the general idea of twitter, is a wonderful thing and I'm leaning towards holding the actions of it's users separate from the technology involved. I just see Twitter as one step closer to a platform where we can have important discussions on a national level quickly and effectively. Unfortunately we're seeing mob mentality at times, when people decide they agree with the general sentiment of a message and they have the ability to immediately push that message to other people, without any constraints that would normally require a person to "sleep on it" or research the facts behind the opinion they just adopted. You're %100 correct in saying "Think before you speak is a rule that needs to be carved in stone in the realm of the Internet." Any new technology that lets us communicate at a world wide level will never see its full potential and will be plagued with bullshit if people don't take the time to look into the full story before adding their reactionary two cents.

I guess a perfect system will never be possible though. Either everyone can express their opinions = lots of bullshit, or Tweets are moderated to remove bullshit = not everyone can express their opinion. Maybe we could hold a referendum which would establish what constitutes an internet act of ass-hat-ery and those who violate the new law are forced to use dial-up.

Yal:

The whole fallout was doubly problematic immediately. First, it undermined the original aim of the joke itself: Calling out the Redskins management for their intractability regarding the creepy and insensitive team name. Ironically, this is a goal one might safely assume Park would support, given her feelings on cultural representation and appropriation.

This is what gets me. Colbert and Park are clearly, obviously, allies in their overall goals. He wouldn't have turned his attention to the Washington team at all if they didn't at least broadly agree with each other. Which makes the whole thing a People's Front of Judea problem, one of the most maddening impulses of activists everywhere.

Don't eat your own, people. It's not productive.

This is one of the big problems of internet activism. Internet activism is built on the backs of the hordes of well meaning but ignorant online activists. They want to eliminate racism/sexism/other bad things, but they don't want to/can't put in the time to actually understand the issues or any more effort than a tweet or post takes. They want to be pointed at a target which they can then shout into submission, because that is simple and easy and black and white. It is so much easier than actually understanding the issue and requires so little effort. They may not feel that they can change the world, but this is something they can do.

This is not necessarily bad. While the ideal is obviously people actually understanding the issue, sometimes what you really need to get something done is not quality but quantity. If the leaders stay informed, point these people in the right direction and tell them the right things this horde can be a great force for good.

The problem is that the horde doesn't know which leaders are informed. This Suey Park was a bad leader - she pointed the horde at an undeserving target because she did not go to the effort of informing herself. She jumped to a conclusion and set the horde at one of their own because she was either lazy or complacent. This makes the entire idea of internet activism look bad and harms the cause. Every time we have a misfire like this the internet, the most powerful tool in the history of mankind for the spreading of ideas, becomes less useful for these worthy causes.

The really sad part of this is that Suey Park, a person who obviously cares a great deal about issues relating to race and has worked hard in her efforts to reduce racism, has probably now had a net negative effect on the cause. It probably would have been better if she had never tried.

The real problem here is twitter.

If Park had read an article summarising the episode instead of a short quote taken out of context then there would be no misunderstanding about Stephen's feelings regarding Asian-Americans.

Really hope Colbert satirises this.

Never mind that, she knew exactly what he has saying and is just a typical sjw. Jesus, why the hell do these people exist. Now I really hope Colbert rips her apart.

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):

Helmholtz Watson:
I'm confused about something, what exactly does this have to do with video games? I mean its one thing for a individual person to post a thread in the forums but why is a staff member publishing something that seem to have nothing to do with the theme of this website? It seems as out of place to put it here on the websites main page.

As far as I am aware, The Escapist isn't just about video games, but entertainment and culture in general, including TV shows and movies, etc.

SOCIALCONSTRUCT:
Well all I see here is one cishet white male condescending to whitesplain and mansplain why what another cishet white male said isn't hateful and bigoted. Maybe they both just need to check their privilege and stop whining about their first world problems.

I can't believe the guy that told me about the unconventional racism of Halo, just how awful it is make a media product aimed at teenage boys, South Park as a gated community, and other similar gems is getting cold feet all of sudden.

Seriously though, #CancelColbert and #IStandWithSuey. I can't think of justice more poetic than for a white male minstrel show to be hoist on its own politically correct petard.

Funny thing about 'all I see here'....Is that you can see what you want, or even just not all the details. It's analogous to physical sight; some eyes just don't function correctly. You may be right or justified in what you say, but who other than those who'd blindly follow your view can tell with a comment dripping with such venom, but lacking so much context (and context being either who you are, or just more details for the table).

And speaking of 'all I see here'....Curse that pink.

Seriously, please edit out that magenta.

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?

Good article, Bob. I saw somebody say that his tweet was racist, and I was going to object, but then I did that thing where right as you're about to speak with your index finger raised, you just sigh disappointedly. I didn't even know the full context, but you either have to not know anything about The Colbert Report, or just not care, to understand that the tweet was a jab at people who fall back upon the "I have a black friend" defense.

Sadly, a lot of people don't seem to understand that in comedy context is key. Context is always key. Its not "just a joke", its a worldview, or in the case of satire, criticism of that worldview. If she took five minutes to watch just about almost any clip from the show ever (except the occassional genuinely homophobic or transphobic joke) she's see that he's an actor on a satirist show, and not only that, but its a good satirical show, one that is actually fairly well-respected.

Helmholtz Watson:
I'm confused about something, what exactly does this have to do with video games? I mean its one thing for a individual person to post a thread in the forums but why is a staff member publishing something that seem to have nothing to do with the theme of this website? It seems as out of place to put it here on the websites main page.

If the fact that its not about videogames is throwing you off, you really should ignore MovieBob's other creations on this site. They're about movies, and even occassionally about comics, cartoons, and heaven forbid, personal opinions. Who would've thought that somebody who gives their personal opinion about something for a living might give their personal opinion?

I don't mean to be a jerk, but drenching that in sarcasm was the only way I could think of to effectively demonstrate that his entire job is to give his opinions about things, nearly all of which aren't directly related to videogames.

I think the funniest/worst part of all of this is all the right-wing fox news fuckwits like Michelle Malkin jumping on to the #CancelColbert bandwagon, not because they were actually upset or offended, but because they thought it might be an easy way to get rid of something they don't like.

You didn't even need to know all the context. All I needed to know going in is that 1. Someone Important had 2. started a charitable organization supporting aboriginals while 3. continuing to support the sports team name "Redskins", and 4. a tweet went up in response announcing a wildly racist other charitable organization.

You don't need to know very much to catch the satire. Urgh.

And it all could have been avoided if he just changed the team name to the Russets.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here