Quote:
Originally Posted by KSigkid
Well, I guess it never hurts to get in a shot against the other side, right?
|
Then forget the whole part about the Colbert Report. I was just saying that there was a story about right-wing ppl who really thought he was being serious. And that it was silly to think a parody was actually true.
If it bothers you that much I'll edit that part out.
Sheesh.
Quote:
Again, I think you're overstating things, at least for the purposes of this thread. No one here is saying that Palin would have been VP if the SNL stuff didn't happen, or if the (perceived) media issues weren't there. They are just saying it was a factor.
That's not really all that extreme of a concept - people have been talking about the effect of the media on campaigns for years, back to the Grover Cleveland illegitimate child scandal in the late 19th century, and before that. So, for people to claim that media coverage had an effect on the campaign isn't surprising, or all that unique.
|
I don't believe SNL was really a factor - which is what HC was implying. If you think the American public actually took that Palin interview parody into consideration when they were standing at the polls, then more power to you.
Even if they did, SNL wasn't that far off base from her real life interviews anyway.
HC said,
Quote:
Originally Posted by honeychile View Post
If Tina Fey hadn't looked so much like her that people misquoted Sarah by using Tina's words, the whole tone would have been much different.
|
The "whole tone" wouldn't have been different. If the SNL skits never happened, the media STILL would have covered Palin's missteps in her interviews. Palin still would have looked like a big nerd for not knowing her stuff and not answering questions in a coherent way.
Threaded Mode
