What is Digg?136 Comments
- BloodyPath, on 10/12/2007, -7/+40It was dry and straight-faced. That was the real beauty of it. He didn't crack up, plus he only fubbed a single line in the entire monologue. It was a little bitter, it was a little angry, and it was eloquent as hell in it's sarcasm. It wasn't safely prerecorded and edited in a studio a thousand miles away, but live and practically face to face with both the president and a large portion of the nation. I can't think of any instance which compares to this.. Dana Carvey doing a good Bush impression on SNL in the 90's was the height of presidential humor other than the guy who does the George W impressions now..
Jon Stewart created a small revolution with the Daily Show; there were many similar before it on comedy central (Short Attention Span Theater etc) but the Daily Show was the one that stuck. For Colbert to come out of Jon Stewarts shadow (and that is a vast friggin shadow indeed) and dead-pan one liners to Bush and the nation about how "The guy who shoots people in the face (Cheney) isn't here tonight" and the whole "We don't think with our minds, we think with our guts, and our guts don't read books" was amazing to watch.
In a world filled with fake "reality" tv shows, I find it insanely ironic that Comedy Central of all channels seems to be producing the most reliably honest commentators. - wicked6, on 10/12/2007, -8/+32@ theone3: I do suggest you watch the Bush skit as well as the Colbert speech and decide for yourself which you enjoy. That being said, what Colbert did was, imo extraordinary and, for the first time since I was a child, I found myself admiring and truly respecting a total stranger.
If you are a fan of satire then you will appreciate what Colbert did and will see the truth in the humor.
Cheers :) - Dan_2gngCrew, on 10/12/2007, -7/+30Maybe the comments being modded down have less to do with a "liberal conspiracy" and more to do with polls that say that almost 70% disagree with Bush. I also find it sad that it seems these days the only way anyone can criticize the president is in parody. It's like the administration is a sixth grade bully and the entire press core is his fourth grade victim eager to give up it's lunch money.
"Only in the world of the anti-Bushbot"
That is becoming a much broader world than you oblviously realize. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21Man, there is so much ***** stupid in this comment section.
1. CSPAN isn't a government-funded entity. The channel is a non-profit which receives its operating funds from cable companies and associated operators.
2. Public material, like congressional sessions, are instantly public domain. Private material, like the Correspondent's Dinner, is not public domain.
3. Google asked permission. CSPAN said that it wanted the thing uploaded in its entirety with appropriate copyright information. Google agreed. CSPAN agreed. The video is up for free.
4. YouTube never asked permission. They were told to remove it. End of story, really. - mehtajr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Did I miss something that establishes that YouTube didn't just pull the video on their own with no complaints from C-Span?
Also, the Google video appears to have been uploaded *BY* C-Span, so it's explicitly authorized. - nogami, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20I don't think you quite understand what you were watching - the people not laughing were exactly those people that Colbert was roasting in his speech. Of course they were uncomfortable - the truth hurts...
He went after Bush for doing a lousy (bordering on criminally negligent) job, he went after the military for being incompetant with both their planning and execution of the war in Iraq, he went after journalists and correspondants for being too gutless to stand up to the administration and expose their lies.
Of course they felt ackward... They were being called on the carpet in front of the country - and everyone knew it - it wasn't a comedy routine, it was the honest truth (presented in a humorous fashion)...
N. - supert0ad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17according to boingboing, C-SPAN asked youtube to remove the clip, and posted it to google video because cspan didn't want the video cut up into peices to comply with youtubes stupid max time limit
- theone3, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21That's it. I'm so sick of hearing about this damn Colbert thing that i'm actually going to download it AND watch it.
Grr.. - kilps, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17but of a contradiction there? iPod sized high quality video ;)
- paolonorte, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Stephen Colbert is a frickin genius.
CSPAN content should be public domain. At least that's my kneejerk reaction, it's a public network covering government events and public presentations. Do they own anything? Do they really spend anything on production, besides a simple floating eyeball on government? I don't see why they would have content concerns in the same way Disney or Time Warner would.
You can watch it on comedycentral.com, they must have licensed it as well.
I got it thru a torrent, so bollocks to the control freaks. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16
http://www.mininova.org/tor/297273 - BadassCheese, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14because on that page is an advertisement to buy the DVD (its a link in the description)
- dignon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17Geterix, the fact that this monumental moment wasn't reported by the "mainstream" media, really just proves the true leanings of American media. Despite all the whining on those news outlets about the so-called "liberal bias" in media, there is a very clear bias in favour of big business and this administration. Fox, in particular, should not even be able to use the word "news" as they have absolutely no journalistic integrity and are essentially the Republican propaganda channel - repeating word-for-word the Bush Administration "talking points" on an endless daily repeat. Of course, its hard to notice this when your submerged in it, but if you make the effort to watch news from outside the USA (the BBC or CBC, for example), it becomes clear how much the national news services gloss over or don't report at all.
Comparing what Colbert did to Carson or Bob Hope is entirely wrong as those men, as you correctly stated, were entertainers but what Colbert is providing political commentary. True its wrapped in humour so as to hold the attention of todays flighty minds. But Carson and Hope knew better than to risk their careers by criticising god or country. Colbert's path is certainly riskier, but its so necessary in today's America.
Colbert's speech is not a simple commedy skit, although some right-wing nutjobs might discount it as so. It is a significant event that should be compared Paul Revere, not Bob Hope. Perhaps democracy can be saved in America afterall. - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Good God, the Apple fanatics even found an excuse to spam this article!
- ryancowardin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Reply I got from CSPAN yesterday regarding this whole issue:
May 5, 2006
Thank you for your comments about C-SPAN's coverage of this year's
White House Correspondents Dinner featuring remarks by the President and by
Stephen Colbert. That coverage is available for free of charge viewing at
C-SPAN's website (www.c-span.org ) along with a vast
amount of other public affairs information. Our coverage of the dinner is
also available on Google Video (www.video.google.com
) by special arrangement with us.
C-SPAN's coverage of this dinner received a lot of attention after
we asked several websites to stop hosting the video of our coverage. Many
of our viewers and Internet users complained that C-SPAN did not have the
right to prevent others from using the coverage of this event.
We want our audience and others to understand that C-SPAN public
affairs programming is protected by copyright in the same way that the video
news coverage of any other network is protected. [An important exception is
the Congressionally-produced video of the Senate and House floor proceedings
which C-SPAN distributes - the video of the legislative chambers is in the
public domain.] As would any other network, we assert our copyrights when
third parties improperly use our video, in part to maintain our editorial
integrity and to protect our business. While some people understand that
C-SPAN is a non-profit organization, they don't always understand that it is
also a private business that relies on selling its product to cable systems
and satellite services to remain in business. C-SPAN does not rely on
taxpayer funds, and never has.
Our business allows us to provide thousands of hours of public
affairs video and other information to millions of American households by
means of C-SPAN, C-SPAN2, C-SPAN3, C-SPAN Radio, and several websites
including www.c-span.org. When we stop others from using our video, we
don't do it to limit access to public affairs information. On the contrary,
we believe our job is to make as much information about government available
to the public as possible. As we serve that mission, we must also respect
the business that allows it.
In the meantime, our coverage of the White House Correspondents
Dinner remains widely and freely available from us and from Google, and is
introducing many people to C-SPAN and our public affairs offerings for the
first time. We welcome the attention because it allows us to do a better
job for more people.
Thank you for your interest in the C-SPAN Networks. - warrenfalk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10probably because it's so long...
You were probably rejected because of the word "Hard" and "Gay" next to each other in the title. - blackjack75, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Or you can pay a visit to mininova...
- deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14"Here is a tip: If you want to get people to agree with you're views, offer an ALTERNATIVE. "Bush is a retard" rants have never won Democrats a single national election."
Ok... Bush is a retard -and- the reason his administration has failed so often is because he's a foreign policy amateur and has surrounded himself with yes-men to delude himself into thinking that he's worth more than constituent chemical elements he's made of. He believes that he is an agent of the apocalypse when in reality, he's just a burned out coke-head that bases his entire mental framework on faith and obedience, which is symbolic of his presidency. He took the international good will of the days after post 9/11 and burned most of our diplomatic bridges and polarized the world against itself in ways only an imperialistic nuclear superpower could.
He's dangerous, incompetent, and, yes, a retard.
"Listen to hard-core conservatives and you will see that's exactly what its based on."
I live an hour from the southern border. I know what's going on, but thanks for the suggesstion. - BloodyPath, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13"I can guarantee you that other than the trolls that keep bringing this subject up on Digg, NO ONE is celebrating his "performance". He lacks the skill of a Carson, Will Rogers, and Bob Hope."
I actually watched the CSPAN coverage as it aired, sitting in a Holiday Inn Express with a beer in my hand and no computer in sight. I realise it's stupid to argue against your point as I won't change your opinion, but I just wanted to point out that there are actually people out here who have lives outside that 19 inch LCD you call home.. If no one were celebrating his performance, you wouldn't be reading this.
And I won't even comment on the comparison to Bob Hope o_O - 4tygames, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11@ Gentrix
Please learn how to use "Quotation Marks".
Your comments are unreadable. - deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13@geterix
It taks a lot more courage and energy to criticize the most powerful man in the world than it does to sit in your Hummer and waste gas. Believing he's a good president when almost every empirical piece of data shows this administration has been disasterous for the country is a lot more sad than 'left wingers' appreciating patriotism.
"What you dont seem to get is that Bush's low poll numbers have nothing to do with the laundry list of BS that your typical leftish barks out on the Colbert report. It is almost totally due to the lack of inforcement of of our southren border"
This is a purely subjective assertion. - molecool, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I watched Bush's skit as well and at first found it humorous, but then I had to remind myself how much damage this monkey has inflicted on our nation and actually got quite angry. LOOK - he can poke fun at himself - how cuuuute!!! People, this is simply a publicity stunt - in the White House the same guy has surrounded himself with yes-men and does not condone any challenge to his POV. And the fact that our president cannot even pronounce the English language as well as I do (and it's not my native language) wasn't ever funny in the first place. Let's not be the boiling frogs that laugh themselves to death while the temperature reaches the simmering point. Anyway, I probably get modded down for this but I've got karma to burn.
- Daniel591992, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8They did remove the download link on the google page. But, any 2 year old would know how to download it anyways =D
- smartssa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Did anybody notice that C-SPAN actually uses google video, and as such google is licensed to show the stuff, where as a YouTube upload by a random user is a copyright violation?
It has nothing to do with C-SPAN being 'afraid'.
The Google video has links to c-span.org as well as c-span's online shop to buy this video (why would you?) - blackjack75, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I fully agree. Although, sorry for the nitpicking but .... it's more the truthiness of humor :-)
- dignon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Don't forget to thank stephen colbert :
http://thankyoustephencolbert.org/wordpress/archives/3 - oceanplexian, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Well, I support Bush, and thought that Colbert did a great job.
- BloodyPath, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11For the sake of simplicity, I'm going to nail your entire, soon-to-be-buried comment in one line:
"Colbert came across as shrill, and obnoxious."
Kinda like Bill O'Reilly, only speaking the honest painful truth slowly and clearly, so nothing like Bill at all.
This truely has degraded into a pointless debate.. I never wanted to change anyone's mind on anything, just point out that Colbert did something unique (for now) and also that people who think Bob FRICKING Hope eclipsed the political comedy spectrum may want to take a long hard look at what generation they grew up in, the sociological impacts of subsequent generations, and this whole thing called "The 60's" and "Vietnam" which you seem to have missed. - BloodyPath, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6You're right. You actually called me a "flaming moonbat", which denotes some hint of homophobia and a dozen other diseases commonly associated with being a republican =) (that's a joke people, JOOOOOKKKKKEEEE)
You don't have any answers. Other than Bob Hope. Or Carson (you do realise that 70% of the people who read the Carson you wrote will think Carson Daily or some crap don't you? No, I suppose you wouldn't.) You're defending a website no one's attacking, an article that hit the front page and as far as I know hasn't been removed; you don't run *****.
But you certainly talk it. Funny how that works.
And just what the hell are your arguements, not that anyone besides the two of us are reading them at this point? That this isn't tech news? Great. A whopping 3 people may have noticed. Thanks for the speech. - BloodyPath, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Wait. Were we just having a serious discussion, and you called me a "Moonbat"? MOONBAT? Before you were all cussing and annoyed; now I don't know what you're smoking, but I want some.
"It is irrational groupthink behavior--not any leftist political slant--that typifies Internet losers."
Kinda like irrational groupthink behavior like spelling own PWN? Your arguements defeat themselves. Well done. - deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8@geterex
""He's dangerous, incompetent, and, yes, a retard."
And yet you oh so holier-than-thou liberals cant beat him. I guess that makes you what then?"
You asked for more, I gave you an articulate if scathing set of reasoning, and you pulled an O'Reiley and never even defended your orignal point.
*sigh*
That makes me, and my comments, only the latest tangent you've taken in avoiding actually debating the topic at hand, but at this point, I've lowered my expectations. - zweben, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Apple should put it on the iTMS. I'd pay $2 for a high quality, iPod ready version of it.
- BloodyPath, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8ROFL.
I'm an honorably discharged former United States Marine, 2171 Electro-Optical Ordinance Repairer previously assigned to 1/8 infantry in Camp LeJeune N.C.
Hardly the norm for a leftist, eh? I could care less about the internet, but if you don't think a media personality making a splash is reason for being on Digg then you must have missed that whole Tom Cruise thing.
Oh, and for the record, "Normal people hate you *****" sounds hilarious when the position you seem to be supporting supports Bush. - goldenlake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5BTW, Srephen Colbert has made it on the TIME 100 list: The People Who Shape Our World [see www.time.com]
- beasty_dave_Mk2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6whiners always get downvoted...Its the law of teh jungle.
Either way, a massive downvote prolly means more views regardless - molecool, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7What are you talking about - maybe you might want to turn off the video game and watch BBC a bit more - they regularly have reports on debates taking place in the House of Commons. They are pretty brutal and obviously the opposition is not interested in making anyone look good. Some of the debates I've seen are full of sharp cynicism and humor, the likes I rarely see here in the US. A guy like GWB would not stand a chance in an open discussion like that - I've seen Tony Blair defend his POV several times and I'm not surprised why British politicians are a lot more articulate than Americans - most of our career politicians wouldn't survive one session in there. Anyway, just my 2 cents...
- molecool, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I just modded you down as well - shameless self promotion - stick with the subject at hand, please.
- matts0344, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network
- Sukino, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5You got it all on http://www.guba.com/general/video/search?reentrant=1&query=colbert&mt=1 + you can download it easily
- theprez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Not that it's important, but cahones??? The correct word is "cojones" FYI in Spanish which translates into something like "*****" but refers to someone's testicles, and nobody even says that anymore anyways. It sounds pretty ridiculous. Ok -digg for me for being off topic.
- Swift2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4First of all, CSpan is not public. It is a production consortium of the cable providers, to prove they're "public spirited." Brian Lamb does such a strictly neutral job, you think you're watching public tv. You aren't. If the Cable guys decided they wanted CSpan to run only government propaganda or gay porn, they could do that, too.
But the other thing I wonder is, does YouTube really want such a high-traffic item? With their monthly bandwidth costing them $1 million a month, do they want Colbert on there? - wicked6, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"Seriously, people. When you keep using that dumbass phrase "truthiness", it makes you look dumb as hell."
Yes, and when the president pronounces nuclear (noo-klee-er) as noo-q-ler, he sounds like a rhodes scholar. As an aside, we need to get over this idea that any good ole boy can be president. That's ***** of the highest order. I expect a ***** of a lot more from my leadership, only just starting with proper ***** english. - BloodyPath, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5First, what the hell is a moonbat. My fiance and I have been laughing for some hours and I'm not googling something Barney the fricken dinosaur would say to find it's origin.
I'm apathetic to your feelings of social isolation and "internet degredation" or whatever the hell. From where I sit, it seems that a lot of people here are in basic agreement about our government and what happened when Colbert hit the podium that night. It doesn't matter if you felt it or not; you were never the target audience.
It's also irrelevant how you felt about it; you've commented at great length describing your views, and the vast majority of your posts are buried. I suppose the liberal media is out to get you or something, I dunno. Or maybe people here don't want to read your *****. Interpret it as you like. It strikes me as funny that you're the kind of person who would look up my "post history", and then accuse me of suscribing to internet-groupthink psychology. Turn off the goddamn public radio stations and pick up your dick, stop jerking off on everyone else because you think the world is out to get you.
I suspect, sir, that you may just be a *****. And that's all there is to it =) - BloodyPath, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It sounds like you need some new tampons lol. Seriously, if you're going to lower yourself to the point of "***** on all you people" and calling "all you people ***** children", you're either a troll or a masochist. Or both.
For the record:
"What will happen instead is that my comments will be further buried by Team Moonbat and BloodyPath's will either go to a moderate "off-topic" level of -1 or will actually rise a few points. The reason for that is the inherent nature of online behavior, which in turn drives flawed moderation systems such as those on YouTube and Digg.
[Update: Did I tell you I'm ***** psychic? It took less than 90 seconds for that dumb-*****-dumb comment to get two upmods. You'd think this regular boost to my confidence would make me feel good, but it comes at the cost of confidence in HUMAN BEINGS.]
While it may appear that I am arguing against the wisdom of BloodyPath, I am in fact arguing against the wisdom of crowds. I am telling you why the Internet sucks and proposing that we find solutions through software."
That's probably the nicest thing anyone has ever said about me on the internet. I'm flattered that my random passing through can give you an ideological enemy to rally against. Hell, I'm damn proud =) I'm all cult-leaderly and stuff and I didn't even know =D
P.S. - Two brownie points for the phrase "dumb-*****-dumb". Nice one. Unique. You daredevil you. - TripinVA, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8The problem with Fluoride in the water is that it's dangerous! While it's good for our teeth, it's been shown to have negative affects on the rest of the body's systems. And even using too much on your teeth is bad.
There's a reason why you're not supposed to swallow toothpaste. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6http://www.mininova.org/tor/297273
- dignon, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7I watched the whole thing... and I must say that I thought that Bush's skit was actually pretty funny. Of course, it wasn't so much him as the actor portraying him that was funny, but it sure was clever of someone to think of putting Bush up there on stage beside the actor to make Bush seem a little more human. Colbert, on the other hand, was absolutely *brilliant*. As others have said, its the truthiness in the humour that really makes it tick. Every single comment he made was spot on and thank god that it was wrapped in humour to soften the blow.
- BloodyPath, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5It's amusing how you bitch about me "dodging" questions about things like Bob Hope and then respond with nothing at all.
No one cares. Except you. And your tampons, I suppose, since they have to manage your flow or whatever. Lotta crap for just one voice..
Your morbid addiction to internet behavior or whatever you call it is great; I'm glad you realise you have a problem because that's the first step in curing it. Now please, for the love of god, kill yourself. =D - david76, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It would seem odd that C-SPAN would pull something over copyright issues. They're "offered as a public service" according to their website. Granted, they have copyright over anything they produce, and they are a private, non-profit. But what interest do they have in keeping their content out of the public domain when that is their stated mission? "Our mission is to provide public access to the political process."
- JohntB, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6It's not fair use because they were copying most of a video that is owned by a company, CSPAN.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 132 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is