Guest Cooper Posted February 16, 2009 Posted February 16, 2009 SNL which is well know for it's skits ridiculing politicians is coming under severe criticism for it's recent portrayal of NYS Governor David Paterson's disability. The governor is legally blind and is speaking out against recent skits that make fun of his disability. Youtube has pulled the SNL skits citing it's "in poor taste". Is this just sick humor or should censorship be applied to curtail criticism of someone due to his/her handicap or disability? What do you think? Attached is a report aired by CNN regarding the Governor's objection. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir5Cwc_TSlo...feature=related Quote
caeron Posted February 16, 2009 Posted February 16, 2009 I think if you make the blindness off limits, you're dehumanizing those who are worse than making jokes about it. Like it's so horrible that it should only be spoken of in hushed whispers and with looks of pity. When it becomes the fodder for jokes, then it's just another thing about you, like ex Illinois governor Blago's hair. The jokes might have been tacky or crass, but I don't see how making the subject off-limits is doing the blind any favors. Quote
Members TampaYankee Posted February 16, 2009 Members Posted February 16, 2009 The short answer is yes -- many times counting from the earliest days. Their tenure has been marked by the irreverent and plain bad taste often as well as some very funny humor occasionally. Nothing new here really. Neither is the outrage. It's all in the eye of the beholder. Is this just sick humor or should censorship be applied to curtail criticism of someone due to his/her handicap or disability? What do you think? Yes, it is sick humor. Some people love it others don't. I'll let the show and the network police itself, when I'm not. After all I have an off switch and channel selector. They get plenty of heat from viewers and sponsors. Last thing we need is a third party nanny saying what is funny and what isn't and what is acceptable and what isn't. If the show doesn't attract viewers and sponsors it won't be around long. That's one view anyway. Quote
Members KYTOP Posted February 16, 2009 Members Posted February 16, 2009 SNL which is well know for it's skits ridiculing politicians is coming under severe criticism for it's recent portrayal of NYS Governor David Paterson's disability. The governor is legally blind and is speaking out against recent skits that make fun of his disability. Youtube has pulled the SNL skits citing it's "in poor taste". Is this just sick humor or should censorship be applied to curtail criticism of someone due to his/her handicap or disability? What do you think? Attached is a report aired by CNN regarding the Governor's objection. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir5Cwc_TSlo...feature=related I found it to be extremely offensive. But I am not a fan of censorship. Where does one draw the line? It is an expression of free speech, even though in poor taste. Yes Sick humor. But, people have many times objected to ethnic jokes, though they may many still giggle even if not in open. Sick humor is not a reason for censorship. As for Youtube, if they have rules, which I am sure they do, they have the right to pull anything they want, just like other private websites. This sort brings up another question. At what point do private websites become considered like the mainstay media (i.e. newspaper, TV news, etc...) and what responsibilitites do they have to the general public? Quote
Members lookin Posted February 17, 2009 Members Posted February 17, 2009 The first time I saw the Paterson skit, I thought it was funny. I like Fred Armeson, and his bumbling in front of the camera as he tried to get off stage was pretty good physical comedy. At the same time, I felt his one closed eye and one crossed eye was a bit much and might be offensive to those who have been personally touched by blindness. Most of us have the ability to laugh at the misfortunes of others, just as most of us have the ability to empathize and feel compassion. My understanding is that the Governor can and does laugh about his own blindness, but he doesn't laugh about the blindness of others. In fact, he's concerned about the inability of many blind people to get jobs that they are qualified to get. So he empathizes and takes their problems seriously, at the same time he jokes about his problems. I think the SNL Paterson skit gives us a chance to take a look at the balance between our schadenfreude and our compassion, and see how it changes as we have different life experiences and gain additional insights. In my opinion, that personal and public introspection is a good thing, so I wouldn't like to see the skit censored. But I could also see a more balanced skit with Jason Sudekis' Blagojevich giving Fred Armeson's Paterson tips on how get the most out of being governor: Now David, you always want to work with cash, so you're going to have to have somebody under the desk counting it for you. Someone you can trust. Someone like me. But Rod, I don't take bribes. Perfect! But you have to look the judge in the eye when you say that. At least with the good eye. But really Rod, I make enough as governor to live a very comfortable life. Why would I need to sell off a Senate seat? What would I spend all that money on? David, look at me. Who does your hair? Quote
Guest zachary Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 i cringed when i saw the first one, and the repeated joke about being in front of the camera, saying 50 apples or tickets, whatever, playing off poulter's method of buying pot in an earlier segment. but it was incredibly funny, and i think it's only fair to skewer all of the politicians; he is legally blind, he does use it to his advantage when he can (if that's not an oxymoron, blind advantage), but he does. plus, he's a dick, he's been proved to be a liar in my opinion re the kennedy leaks, admitted renting cheesy hotel rooms with a state employee while lt governor, and clearly clueless on governing. he's in the public eye, end of story. they've trashed others, this is nothing more, and it was funny to boot. in the first skit, patterson was looking for someone unqualified for the post in the senate, preferably from upstate with some small disadvantage, like a gamey arm. in bad taste, yes, but so was the wii skit with alec baldwin, true of a lot of what they do. some works, some doesn't. and my personal opinion, they had to find a democrat to pick on to appear "fair and balanced" in the best Fox tradition. bullshit to both. Quote
Guest Cooper Posted February 19, 2009 Posted February 19, 2009 NY Governor Paterson, who's been rapidly falling in the polls, won't give up on his quest to attack SNL from making fun of his disability... Attached is a recent AP release... GOV. PATERSON BLASTS SNL 'BLIND' SKIT From: AP February 12, 2009 MORRISVILLE, N.Y. - Legally blind New York Gov. David Paterson is comparing "Saturday Night Live" to a bunch of third graders making fun of disabled people. The Democrat says the show's second skit featuring him as a clueless blind man with a checkered past of youthful drug use and womanizing promotes insensitivity against the disabled. The segment last week featured cast member Fred Armisen - with one eye closed most of the time, the other focused on his own nose - unable to see the host or a prop. Answering a reporter's question Thursday, Paterson said the show's continued parodies hurt disabled people not in a position to fight back. He blames the portrayal for a critical sign he saw this week before one of his budget presentations. It read: The blind leading the blind. Quote
Members BigK Posted February 19, 2009 Members Posted February 19, 2009 NY Governor Paterson, who's been rapidly falling in the polls, won't give up on his quest to attack SNL from making fun of his disability... Attached is a recent AP release...GOV. PATERSON BLASTS SNL 'BLIND' SKIT From: AP February 12, 2009 MORRISVILLE, N.Y. - Legally blind New York Gov. David Paterson is comparing "Saturday Night Live" to a bunch of third graders making fun of disabled people. The Democrat says the show's second skit featuring him as a clueless blind man with a checkered past of youthful drug use and womanizing promotes insensitivity against the disabled. The segment last week featured cast member Fred Armisen - with one eye closed most of the time, the other focused on his own nose - unable to see the host or a prop. Answering a reporter's question Thursday, Paterson said the show's continued parodies hurt disabled people not in a position to fight back. He blames the portrayal for a critical sign he saw this week before one of his budget presentations. It read: The blind leading the blind. I think Paterson needs to get a sense of humor. Quote
Guest zachary Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 well, he sure makes it easy to make fun of, gov gets a leg up. http://www.nypost.com/seven/03032009/news/...g_up_157767.htm Quote
Guest zachary Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 well, he sure makes it easy to make fun of, gov gets a leg up. http://www.nypost.com/seven/03032009/news/...g_up_157767.htm tried to attach the pic, but get prompy that i am not permitted to upload "this type of file", you figure. Quote
Members BigK Posted March 4, 2009 Members Posted March 4, 2009 well, he sure makes it easy to make fun of, gov gets a leg up. http://www.nypost.com/seven/03032009/news/...g_up_157767.htm Thanks Zachary for this update. He certainly does open himself up more ridicule. But I think the article's reference to his "knobby knees" was a little unfair. It would be easier to take him more seriously if he was doing a better job/had better job approval ratings. Quote
