Stephen Colbert as Bono...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
That would be really funny if it weren't so incredibly offensive. Not by the way it portrayed Bono (THAT was funny), but the way they portrayed debt relief.

I saw this video a few months ago, and was really surprised at this. I love both the Colbert Report and the Daily Show, but this is really a horrible and irresponsible thing to say. A lot of people who watched this had probably never even heard of the debt crisis, and got their impression of it from this show.

I'm too mad even for the madspit smily!
 
Rosebud said:
That would be really funny if it weren't so incredibly offensive. Not by the way it portrayed Bono (THAT was funny), but the way they portrayed debt relief.

I saw this video a few months ago, and was really surprised at this. I love both the Colbert Report and the Daily Show, but this is really a horrible and irresponsible thing to say. A lot of people who watched this had probably never even heard of the debt crisis, and got their impression of it from this show.

I'm too mad even for the madspit smily!

the people who haven't heard of the "debt crisis" by now are too fucking stupid to ever help that campaign anyway.

and if you're honestly offended by that, please don't ever leave your house and make sure to never turn on your tv or computer.

fuck... people get offended over everything.
 
Rosebud said:
That would be really funny if it weren't so incredibly offensive.

But that's Colbert's schtick. It's a satire of the typical right-wing ideology - especially as filtered through moron Fox news pundits. Colbert is actually a pretty compassionate man, and a devout Catholic to boot. But that's the difficulty of working with irony - sometimes it doesn't work exactly right or is snipped in youtube.

How would Jonathan Swift or Mark Twain ever survive in a youtube world?
 
Rosebud said:
That would be really funny if it weren't so incredibly offensive. Not by the way it portrayed Bono (THAT was funny), but the way they portrayed debt relief.

I saw this video a few months ago, and was really surprised at this. I love both the Colbert Report and the Daily Show, but this is really a horrible and irresponsible thing to say. A lot of people who watched this had probably never even heard of the debt crisis, and got their impression of it from this show.

I'm too mad even for the madspit smily!

Lighten up, Francis.
 
yeah

lighten up or i'll add some debt to africa's ass, yo.

and if anyone dares to take offense to that, expect the most vile explicit-laced tirade this forum has ever seen in the name of all things anti-political-correct.
 
what bugs me about this is that most of the people who watch stewart and colbert are intelligent enough to understand real news programs that would provide them with DIRECT and real information about what's occuring in the world, so that they could take personal action to make this world a better place, but they'd rather watch a program that portrays current events as entertainment, and then spend their time ridiculing the people who think they are only six layers of irony in the show, rather than seven, instead of spending that same energy to get involved in a cause to make the world a better place.
 
dr. zooeuss said:
what bugs me about this is that most of the people who watch stewart and colbert are intelligent enough to understand real news programs that would provide them with DIRECT and real information about what's occuring in the world, so that they could take personal action to make this world a better place, but they'd rather watch a program that portrays current events as entertainment, and then spend their time ridiculing the people who think they are only six layers of irony in the show, rather than seven, instead of spending that same energy to get involved in a cause to make the world a better place.

I seriously doubt that the reason they don't get involved in causes is because of those shows they watch.
 
I can't see the videos. This upsets me. How am I supposed to procrastinate now?

And is it really a big deal if people satirise African debt relief? Political satire has been around for a very long time now. Touchy subjects are not free from scrutiny. It's just the nature of political satire. Try not to take it too personally. I know I don't! As some of you may know, I was born and raised in South Africa. Last year, there was a cheesy/glitzy Christmas advert on TV telling everyone to buy (Red) Razr phones to save Africans. Ah, capitalism at its finest. My roommate turned to me with a very deadpan expression on his face and said "I'll buy you a cellphone for Christmas. You're much too thin." I couldn't stop laughing for nearly five minutes. If Africans can laugh about it, you can too! See, we know that efforts to eradicate Africa's poverty and AIDS problems are noble but ultimately futile. Want to know what South African Health Minister Dr. Manto Tshabalala-Msimang's solution for AIDS is? Everyone should eat lots of beetroot! Bugger anti-retrovirals!

Where can we sign up for the Make African Politicians History campaign?
 
GibsonGirl said:


And is it really a big deal if people satirise African debt relief? Political satire has been around for a very long time now. Touchy subjects are not free from scrutiny. It's just the nature of political satire. Try not to take it too personally. I know I don't! As some of you may know, I was born and raised in South Africa. Last year, there was a cheesy/glitzy Christmas advert on TV telling everyone to buy (Red) Razr phones to save Africans. Ah, capitalism at its finest. My roommate turned to me with a very deadpan expression on his face and said "I'll buy you a cellphone for Christmas. You're much too thin." I couldn't stop laughing for nearly five minutes. If Africans can laugh about it, you can too!

Haha, yeah, of course humor is important and has it's place, but when applied to serious topics it brings with it an unprecedented opportunity to be misunderstood. between two friends who know one another it's very different than broadcast on a show where (in my opinon, admittedly) the line between fact and comedy is already blurred. the goal of good satire is to elevate the level of discussion surrounding an issue, to point out it's weaknesses.

If i knew that stewart and colbert were otherwise engaged in helping to solve the problem, OR explaining why Bono's work is NOT a solution and helping to tease out alternative solutions, I could laugh at this, but as far as I'm aware, they're not. If i'm mistaken, please let me know, I want to know that. :wink:

To me it comes off as a half-baked cheap shot that is not funny. imo, it fits in the same category as that thread- "five reasons why i hate Bono." ...it doesn't resonate with the truth. it misrepresents the campaign to relieve third world debt, it misses the point, it's not really making fun of what it's trying to make fun of. it's punch line relies on people knowing the history of U2's music (the rattle and hum reference) rather than people understanding the realities of the issue of third world debt, and the humor relies on people believing that the goal of third world debt is for third world countries to take advantage of rich nations (colbert taking the $40 from stewart)- rather than getting themselves on an economic footing where they're not paying interest on the interest to rich ntions and getting futher and further behind economically every year in a way that keeps them from getting to a point where they can educate themselves and determine their own futures as they wish.

If I'm wrong about colbert and stewart, and//or about the humor of this skit, please tell me how and why.

Gisbongirl, why is solving these problems futile? Please don't take this as a personal attack, it is not meant as one, but a post stating 1) Don't take this sort of comedy too seriously, and then 2) Solving this problem is ultimately futile, is exactly the sort of association that bothers me.

thanks for taking the time to read.
 
dr. zooeuss said:


If I'm wrong about colbert and stewart, and//or about the humor of this skit, please tell me how and why.

Gisbongirl, why is solving these problems futile? Please don't take this as a personal attack, it is not meant as one, but a post stating 1) Don't take this sort of comedy too seriously, and then 2) Solving this problem is ultimately futile, is exactly the sort of association that bothers me.

Admittedly, I haven't seen the skit so I don't know what kind of message Stephen Colbert and John Stewart were trying to transmit there. If I can actually see it, I'll get back to you.

As for it being futile...here's my take on it. When I was a young child, I first saw the squatter camp just minutes outside of Cape Town's airport. It's the largest squatter camp in Cape Town. Seeing it was absolutely horrible and the image has been with me my entire life. That squatter camp had been there long before I was born. The ANC came into power in 1994, promising a prompt end to South Africa's hardships and inequalities. Many people in South Africa believed in these promises, including my family. It has been almost sixteen years since I first saw that squatter camp. It's still there. What's more, it's even bigger now. 16 years, and not a damn thing has been done about it. The main problem, in my view, is not that first world nations aren't doing enough to eradicate debt (although it is part of it). The larger issue here is the government. Unemployment is high, wages are low, crime is high...do you know what Charles Nqakula, Minister for Safety and Security, suggests South Africans should do if they're concerned about crime in the country? They should "simply leave". Yes, perfect strategy, Mr. Nqakula! If everyone who is opposed to crime leaves, then only the criminals will be left! Problem solved! Jacob Zuma, the favourite to take over from Thabo Mbeki, has been charged with rape, amongst other things. These are the people who are in charge of the country. How can they be expected to handle poverty, even if debt is erased? And believe me, South African politicians are tame in comparison to what some other African nations have to deal with. Zimbabwe was a prosperous nation before Robert Mugabe took over. Now unemployment is sitting at roughly 80%. Zimbabweans fall into deeper poverty and despair while he rides around in his Mercedes Benz. And you know what...some people in Zimbabwe admire him. Despite the fact that his actions violate basic human rights, people admire him.

Even if first world nations eradicate all of the debt owed by Africa, the problem of corruption still exists. I know that one of the One Campaign's goals is to fight corruption. How? What is the One Campaign going to do to get rid of people like Robert Mugabe? What are they doing to reduce his power? I see lots of emphasis on removing debt, but not enough on getting to the base of the issue. Corruption is completely at the root of Zimbabwe's problem with poverty. I honestly wonder how much of an impact the Millenium Challenge and similar programmes are having.

Anyway, sorry for going off on a tangent. Back to Colbert... This thread is becoming unfunnier by the minute. :no:
 
GibsonGirl said:


Admittedly, I haven't seen the skit so I don't know what kind of message Stephen Colbert and John Stewart were trying to transmit there. If I can actually see it, I'll get back to you.

Yeah, thanks for the reply, and sorry about that. I realized that later and searched youtube but it's not there, presumably for copyright reasons.

GibsonGirl said:

As for it being futile...here's my take on it. When I was a young child, I first saw the squatter camp just minutes outside of Cape Town's airport. It's the largest squatter camp in Cape Town. Seeing it was absolutely horrible and the image has been with me my entire life. That squatter camp had been there long before I was born. The ANC came into power in 1994, promising a prompt end to South Africa's hardships and inequalities. Many people in South Africa believed in these promises, including my family. It has been almost sixteen years since I first saw that squatter camp. It's still there. What's more, it's even bigger now. 16 years, and not a damn thing has been done about it. The main problem, in my view, is not that first world nations aren't doing enough to eradicate debt (although it is part of it). The larger issue here is the government. Unemployment is high, wages are low, crime is high...do you know what Charles Nqakula, Minister for Safety and Security, suggests South Africans should do if they're concerned about crime in the country? They should "simply leave". Yes, perfect strategy, Mr. Nqakula! If everyone who is opposed to crime leaves, then only the criminals will be left! Problem solved! Jacob Zuma, the favourite to take over from Thabo Mbeki, has been charged with rape, amongst other things. These are the people who are in charge of the country. How can they be expected to handle poverty, even if debt is erased? And believe me, South African politicians are tame in comparison to what some other African nations have to deal with. Zimbabwe was a prosperous nation before Robert Mugabe took over. Now unemployment is sitting at roughly 80%. Zimbabweans fall into deeper poverty and despair while he rides around in his Mercedes Benz. And you know what...some people in Zimbabwe admire him. Despite the fact that his actions violate basic human rights, people admire him.

Wow, thanks for sharing all of that. We could start a real discussion of this, if you'd like to, although I think that would fare a better fate in Free Your Mind.

You obviously have some very interesting firsthand experiences with these issues, that most of us here probably do not. Thanks for what you wrote, I'd be interested to hear more.

I'm not sure I agree with all of the associations you've made between various issues, but I agree that corruption is a large, legitimate concern, and has been for many years where third world aid and debt relief are concerned.

To offer you what I do know about the ONE campaign, it promotes democracy and transparency, making them conditions upon which receipt of these breaks and aid depend. In a quick internet search I found a list of nations benefitted by the 2005 G8//IMF//WB decisions to forgive some debts, I found this listing-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavily_Indebted_Poor_Countries

You'll notice Mugabe's Zimbabwe, the example you chose (and a good one), is not on the list.

GibsonGirl said:

Even if first world nations eradicate all of the debt owed by Africa, the problem of corruption still exists. I know that one of the One Campaign's goals is to fight corruption. How? What is the One Campaign going to do to get rid of people like Robert Mugabe? What are they doing to reduce his power? I see lots of emphasis on removing debt, but not enough on getting to the base of the issue. Corruption is completely at the root of Zimbabwe's problem with poverty. I honestly wonder how much of an impact the Millenium Challenge and similar programmes are having.

Anyway, sorry for going off on a tangent. Back to Colbert... This thread is becoming unfunnier by the minute. :no:

Yeah big questions that deserve informed discussion.

Your reply reminded me to finally order Bono's book "On The Move", which I've been wanting to read for several months, but was unable to find in the store (it was sold out), so i can discuss this topic in a more informed way. (Thanks!)

If anyone else is interested, there seem to be 72 used copies available-

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_g...s=aps&field-keywords=on+the+move+bono&x=0&y=0

You can order one and get it shipped to your home for less than $6.

:wink:
 
Last edited:
O dear, I've tried to write an apology letter twice now, but both times when I'm finished, Interference has thrown me off and my post is lost. Sighhh.

Okay, let me summarize:
First, I am PROFOUNDLY sorry for creating such a fuss. Really, I am so sorry for making this into an argument. It was truly not my intention at all.
Secondly, I expressed myself positively horribly the first time, and gave off a completely wrong impression. This is all I was trying to say -- that I absolutely LOVE Colbert and Stewart (seriously, I am a total devotee), and I don't think that anyone is above a poke of fun. But I just thought it was wrong, not to criticize the idea of debt cancellation (sure I would've disagreed, but that's simply a difference of opinion), but to explain it in ways that are just basically untrue. If you're going to make fun of something, at least call it out for what it is. That's what I was upset about at the time. It wasn't that they made fun of debt releif, it was just that the things they said about it were untrue and I thought that's both a bit unfair and irresponsible when you're talking about something so important.

But honestly, I know it's just comedy, and believe me -- I think this kind of comedy is hilarious!!! I soooooo didn't mean to imply that I think Colbert and Stewart are evil or anything like that. Again, I really am sorry. It didn't come out right at all and I hope you all can understand.

:hug: :heart: :pray: :wave:
 
Rosebud said:
O dear, I've tried to write an apology letter twice now, but both times when I'm finished, Interference has thrown me off and my post is lost. Sighhh.

Okay, let me summarize:
First, I am PROFOUNDLY sorry for creating such a fuss. Really, I am so sorry for making this into an argument. It was truly not my intention at all.
Secondly, I expressed myself positively horribly the first time, and gave off a completely wrong impression. This is all I was trying to say -- that I absolutely LOVE Colbert and Stewart (seriously, I am a total devotee), and I don't think that anyone is above a poke of fun. But I just thought it was wrong, not to criticize the idea of debt cancellation (sure I would've disagreed, but that's simply a difference of opinion), but to explain it in ways that are just basically untrue. If you're going to make fun of something, at least call it out for what it is. That's what I was upset about at the time. It wasn't that they made fun of debt releif, it was just that the things they said about it were untrue and I thought that's both a bit unfair and irresponsible when you're talking about something so important.

But honestly, I know it's just comedy, and believe me -- I think this kind of comedy is hilarious!!! I soooooo didn't mean to imply that I think Colbert and Stewart are evil or anything like that. Again, I really am sorry. It didn't come out right at all and I hope you all can understand.

:hug: :heart: :pray: :wave:

this is probably predictable based on what i posted above, but in my opinion your reaction was motivated by some good instincts and you did make some good points, so i hope you aren't too apologetic. satire is a powerful form of humor and those that choose to use it are volunteering to be reverse-examined, in my opinion. if you're going to poke fun at someone for bringing attention to a serious issue, then have the clear-mindedness and decency to address the issue, and show an equal or greater level of commitment to solving the problem.

if you're in it for the entertainment value, there are thousands of other deserving topics and people to pick on.

i'm not trying to create an argument either, and have basically said all i have to say on the topic. i just hope people realize that the success of any joke depends on sharing certain understandings with the comic, and that having a sense of humor does not mean you have to find this skit enormously funny.

yeah, that's pretty much all i have to say.
 
Back
Top Bottom