Diversity

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

There are certainly thin-skinned people in every generation. I have a very self-effacing sense of humor as does my wife and my daughter, but my son, less so. This seems to be more nature than nurture as far as my wife and I can see. Along those lines, however, I don't believe that today there are suddenly dramatically more people who are thin-skinned and pre-disposed to sensitivity. Instead I see the circumstances being a social moment where minorities finally feel empowered to speak up and say they don't like these type of comments or this type of humor. Sammy likely didn't speak up about his dislike of these racial jokes because just a decade or so earlier, and during his childhood, doing so could have had tragic consequences. "Uppity" black folk, to use Reef Monkey's sadly too accurate term, often found themselves hanging from a tree. I believe the same is true of other minority groups, not just racial minorities. In the past, speaking out against these bigoted comments carried with it very real consequences. A significant part of this perceived "politically correct" behavior (or overly politically correct according to some) is simply the new-found voice to speak up without serious consequence. People aren't suddenly more sensative to hurtful racial jokes, they are simply more likely to speak out against them than they were in the past.

I understand what you mean when you say "uppity" but that was in the past. Certainly no one is going to hang anyone on a tree today for being "uppity" so all this talk about tolerance and respect today rings a bit hollow with me. As you said, people are no longer afraid to speak out but that doesn't mean we should automatically change something because someone is speaking out. Someone will always speak out. But you'll never be able to please everyone. Ultimately we need to preserve our sanity and use some common sense when it comes to these matters. Can't always have a knee-jerk reaction and start changing things because someone is complaining. Let them complain. They have that right. No one will hang them for it. Meanwhile we need to use common sense in deciding whether or not it's a valid complaint. Like folks who get offended by a Christmas display. You will NEVER convince me that that's a valid complaint. NEVER! Imagine if I moved to a Middle Eastern country and started complaining about a Muslim display. Really??

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

I still think the problem is more with the thin-skinned individual. A comedian's job is to make people laugh and the audience respond by laughing. If the individual is uncomfortable then he can just choose not to watch or choose not to participate. Or in Sammy's case even come right out and talk to Frank in private. It's not like Sammy didn't have enough clout within the Rat Pack. If you have thin skin sometimes you just have to suck it up. I don't know if that sounds mean or not. But to change comedy routines because some folks are uncomfortable is not the answer. I don't like the idea of "policing" people. Don't do this, don't say that. I'm of Slavic descent and I've heard tons of Slavic jokes and I'm always busting a gut laughing. Lots of the jokes are pretty spot-on, lots are exaggerated but it doesn't matter. At no point do I feel offended. Don Rickles was a great example of a comedian who just let loose and didn't spare anyone. Nothing was off limits. Rickles couldn't do that today. Different times. He'd be labeled as racist or cruel or whatever. But that's what made him funny. He wasn't playing the nice guy. He was playing the mean-spirited guy and he did it well. All part of the act. People understood that and didn't get their britches in a knot. And those who didn't understand it probably chose not to watch him. They had that right too.

I'm not trying to make this partisan, but in speaking about individuals being thin-skinned, I find that President Trump seems quite sensitive to this kind of lampooning by late-night talk shows, SNL, etc... It comes with being a public figure, and certainly a political figure. I recall he appeared on SNL years ago and was in a pretty funny skit that was a commercial for Trump's House of Wings. I remember it well because I'm a huge roots reggae fan, and Toots and the Maytals performed. SNL hasn't featured more than a couple reggae artists in over 40 years. He seemed okay with the mild lampooning then.

Based on some of his tweets, I'm reasonably sure Trump wouldn't appear again now with Alec Baldwin's caricature of him. It's unfortunate. Sarah Palin appeared in a skit with Tina Fey playing her and Hillary Clinton did as well with Amy Poehler's portrayal of her. I also recall President George HW Bush invited Dana Carvey to the White House to perform as him. These were all pretty funny characters, Carvey's being one of my all-time favorites. I also loved Darrell Hammond's absolutely wooden Al Gore and Will Farrell's W impersonation. I forgot Larry David's Bernie impression. These are all talented comedians and I totally agree with you that that's there job.

Actually regarding the lampooning of Trump by all these late night comedians and SNL it's waaaaay past simple lampooning. They're in flat-out hate-filled attack mode. I mean they're not even trying to cover it up. Guys like Kimmel and Colbert flat out want the guy to get run over by a truck and have no qualms in saying so. I don't even watch these guys anymore because they're so political that it's pathetic. I mean who wants to watch a comedy show that's all Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump?? You mean there's nothing else out there to poke fun at? Heck, they wouldn't dare poke fun at Obama when he was in the White House. Maybe some safe joke here or there. They sure loved to take shots at George W. Bush but even with him there was some sort of balance. It wasn't just Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, and nothing else. But with Trump they're on a crusade to destroy him at all cost. It's clear as day. I'm not going to defend Trump for being some beacon of high morals and virtues but when the entire left wing media is dead set on destroying a single individual I find that very disturbing.

[eagle]

Actually regarding the lampooning of Trump by all these late night comedians and SNL it's waaaaay past simple lampooning. They're in flat-out hate-filled attack mode. I mean they're not even trying to cover it up. Guys like Kimmel and Colbert flat out want the guy to get run over by a truck and have no qualms in saying so. I don't even watch these guys anymore because they're so political that it's pathetic. I mean who wants to watch a comedy show that's all Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump?? You mean there's nothing else out there to poke fun at? Heck, they wouldn't dare poke fun at Obama when he was in the White House. Maybe some safe joke here or there. They sure loved to take shots at George W. Bush but even with him there was some sort of balance. It wasn't just Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, and nothing else. But with Trump they're on a crusade to destroy him at all cost. It's clear as day. I'm not going to defend Trump for being some beacon of high morals and virtues but when the entire left wing media is dead set on destroying a single individual I find that very disturbing.

I, too, find it disturbing. It's sad when the entire purpose is simply to destroy one man. I sometimes wonder if I'm the only one who actually remembers the reason why "MoveOn.org" (now simply called "MoveOn") was created. They sure won't "move on" anymore.

Anyway, back to comedians: The only one I like today is Brian Regan, because he is funny and clean. I also liked Abbott and Costello, and my kids love watching their videos on YouTube. I don't find profanity funny, which rules out most modern comedians, and I agree with the earlier comment about Jim Carrey's 90s "comedy" movies.

I'd love to know of some other comedians I should check out. Anybody got any suggestions for modern-day comedians?

[☨magnum.t]

Yes! Brian Regan's skit about spelling in school is absolute gold!

[Amian]

Just came across this piece on Robert E. Lee, written by Stanley McChrystal, a retired general from the South. It's an excerpt of a new book called Leaders: Myth and Reality.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... e-atlantic

I am posting it because it coherently and succinctly touches on a lot of what we've discussed in this thread. I am not suggesting it's the absolute authority on the subject. The headline is supposed to be provocative, but the majority of the piece is less so: it's focused on historical narrative. Have a look.

[Pahonu]

There are certainly thin-skinned people in every generation. I have a very self-effacing sense of humor as does my wife and my daughter, but my son, less so. This seems to be more nature than nurture as far as my wife and I can see. Along those lines, however, I don't believe that today there are suddenly dramatically more people who are thin-skinned and pre-disposed to sensitivity. Instead I see the circumstances being a social moment where minorities finally feel empowered to speak up and say they don't like these type of comments or this type of humor. Sammy likely didn't speak up about his dislike of these racial jokes because just a decade or so earlier, and during his childhood, doing so could have had tragic consequences. "Uppity" black folk, to use Reef Monkey's sadly too accurate term, often found themselves hanging from a tree. I believe the same is true of other minority groups, not just racial minorities. In the past, speaking out against these bigoted comments carried with it very real consequences. A significant part of this perceived "politically correct" behavior (or overly politically correct according to some) is simply the new-found voice to speak up without serious consequence. People aren't suddenly more sensative to hurtful racial jokes, they are simply more likely to speak out against them than they were in the past.

I understand what you mean when you say "uppity" but that was in the past. Certainly no one is going to hang anyone on a tree today for being "uppity" so all this talk about tolerance and respect today rings a bit hollow with me. As you said, people are no longer afraid to speak out but that doesn't mean we should automatically change something because someone is speaking out. Someone will always speak out. But you'll never be able to please everyone. Ultimately we need to preserve our sanity and use some common sense when it comes to these matters. Can't always have a knee-jerk reaction and start changing things because someone is complaining. Let them complain. They have that right. No one will hang them for it. Meanwhile we need to use common sense in deciding whether or not it's a valid complaint. Like folks who get offended by a Christmas display. You will NEVER convince me that that's a valid complaint. NEVER! Imagine if I moved to a Middle Eastern country and started complaining about a Muslim display. Really??

That's precisely my point. In the past nothing was said about these racial jokes and comments for a variety of reasons. Now, if a comedian or individual wants to comment on race they have every right to, and many still do, but they also may face potential criticism from others, which is their right as well. That last part is what's changed. Their is still a large amount of comedy on racial topics today. I listed several comedians in a previous post. I don't think there is a knee-jerk reaction to shut down all of this, or these comedians would be out of work. I also think if any changes are made, they are often in response to a very powerful bottom line: money. If a comedian uses material that offends too many people, for whatever reason, and their audience shrinks, it might be wise for them monetarily to make some changes. It's totally their call, of course. Comedy is, after all, a business, driven by profits, like any other business. The same happens in the corporate world. Large corporations want the largest market share possible, and so are attuned to negative publicity that might cost them part of their market. One group may not agree with that corporate decision about some negative PR. They may think it is a knee-jerk response to a complaint, but that decision was ultimately made with corporate profit in mind, not any perceived social position of the company. These are classic market principles at work.

[Pahonu]

I still think the problem is more with the thin-skinned individual. A comedian's job is to make people laugh and the audience respond by laughing. If the individual is uncomfortable then he can just choose not to watch or choose not to participate. Or in Sammy's case even come right out and talk to Frank in private. It's not like Sammy didn't have enough clout within the Rat Pack. If you have thin skin sometimes you just have to suck it up. I don't know if that sounds mean or not. But to change comedy routines because some folks are uncomfortable is not the answer. I don't like the idea of "policing" people. Don't do this, don't say that. I'm of Slavic descent and I've heard tons of Slavic jokes and I'm always busting a gut laughing. Lots of the jokes are pretty spot-on, lots are exaggerated but it doesn't matter. At no point do I feel offended. Don Rickles was a great example of a comedian who just let loose and didn't spare anyone. Nothing was off limits. Rickles couldn't do that today. Different times. He'd be labeled as racist or cruel or whatever. But that's what made him funny. He wasn't playing the nice guy. He was playing the mean-spirited guy and he did it well. All part of the act. People understood that and didn't get their britches in a knot. And those who didn't understand it probably chose not to watch him. They had that right too.

I'm not trying to make this partisan, but in speaking about individuals being thin-skinned, I find that President Trump seems quite sensitive to this kind of lampooning by late-night talk shows, SNL, etc... It comes with being a public figure, and certainly a political figure. I recall he appeared on SNL years ago and was in a pretty funny skit that was a commercial for Trump's House of Wings. I remember it well because I'm a huge roots reggae fan, and Toots and the Maytals performed. SNL hasn't featured more than a couple reggae artists in over 40 years. He seemed okay with the mild lampooning then.

Based on some of his tweets, I'm reasonably sure Trump wouldn't appear again now with Alec Baldwin's caricature of him. It's unfortunate. Sarah Palin appeared in a skit with Tina Fey playing her and Hillary Clinton did as well with Amy Poehler's portrayal of her. I also recall President George HW Bush invited Dana Carvey to the White House to perform as him. These were all pretty funny characters, Carvey's being one of my all-time favorites. I also loved Darrell Hammond's absolutely wooden Al Gore and Will Farrell's W impersonation. I forgot Larry David's Bernie impression. These are all talented comedians and I totally agree with you that that's there job.

Actually regarding the lampooning of Trump by all these late night comedians and SNL it's waaaaay past simple lampooning. They're in flat-out hate-filled attack mode. I mean they're not even trying to cover it up. Guys like Kimmel and Colbert flat out want the guy to get run over by a truck and have no qualms in saying so. I don't even watch these guys anymore because they're so political that it's pathetic. I mean who wants to watch a comedy show that's all Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump?? You mean there's nothing else out there to poke fun at? Heck, they wouldn't dare poke fun at Obama when he was in the White House. Maybe some safe joke here or there. They sure loved to take shots at George W. Bush but even with him there was some sort of balance. It wasn't just Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, and nothing else. But with Trump they're on a crusade to destroy him at all cost. It's clear as day. I'm not going to defend Trump for being some beacon of high morals and virtues but when the entire left wing media is dead set on destroying a single individual I find that very disturbing.

So you are saying there is a limit to comedy? In earlier posts you stated that it is a comedians job to do this, including offending others. You clearly think it has gone too far, and it is indeed very extreme in many cases, but if enough people are tuning in and laughing, they will likely continue. These late night shows made huge profits during the 2016 campaign, record ad revenue in some cases, and continue to do so. I agree the deep divisions in this country, including the media, is very disturbing, but it's wise to remember that it takes two sides to argue and be divided.

[Chris109]

I'd love to know of some other comedians I should check out. Anybody got any suggestions for modern-day comedians?

Craig Ferguson. He had his Late, Late Show. You can find it on Youboob.

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

So you are saying there is a limit to comedy? In earlier posts you stated that it is a comedians job to do this, including offending others. You clearly think it has gone too far, and it is indeed very extreme in many cases, but if enough people are tuning in and laughing, they will likely continue. These late night shows made huge profits during the 2016 campaign, record ad revenue in some cases, and continue to do so. I agree the deep divisions in this country, including the media, is very disturbing, but it's wise to remember that it takes two sides to argue and be divided.

I don't think there is a limit to comedy. I do think there should be a limit to being hateful, especially when the intent is to destroy an individual. You know if something terrible happened to Trump all these comedians would be ecstatic doing an Irish jig celebrating. Not as part of some show or skit but for real. This is disturbing, considering that he's the president of the United States, regardless of what one thinks of him or his policies. But these guys just hate his guts, pure and simple. I just never saw this with comedians when it came to previous administrations, Democrat or Republican. Sure, they always picked on the Republicans more but it was never vile like this. When Dana Carvey was doing Bush, Sr. or Will Ferrell was doing Bush, Jr. you didn't sense they hated their guts or were out to destroy them. It just seemed like everyone was having a good time. No malice. Johnny Carson used to poke fun at Ronald Reagan (my favorite president) in his monologues and I found it funny. I enjoyed it. I don't even know what Carson's political views were but it never felt malicious or hateful. You can very easily tell when someone is taking jabs at a president because that's their job as a comedian vs. when someone is practically foaming at the mouth with their hate-filled spewing of vile jokes at the commander-in-chief while working their crowd up into a hysterical frenzy. Somehow I don't think this would have been acceptable in the past but because it's Trump it's okay. Of course the media won't speak up about this because they're against Trump too. I really don't want to get too political here but consider also the Kavanaugh supreme court hearings. You have a woman who accuses Kavanaugh of raping her but she has ZERO evidence to back this up. Then you have Kavanaugh who categorically denies this ever happened. Essentially it's her word against his. There is no proof. So basically he's innocent. But of course SNL jumps on this and immediately gets Matt Damon to play Kavanaugh as they mock him every which way. But wait a minute? Why don't we see some actress playing the woman accuser? Why isn't she being mocked?? Oh that's right. Because that would be insensitive, right? But Kavanaugh who as far as we know is innocent (no proof that he did anything) is being vilified as a monster. I can't stand double standards like this. You want to mock the hearings? That's fine. But play fair. Mock everyone. Don't just mock the Republican guy and leave the Democrat woman out. She's the victim? Well, I say he's the victim. But of course SNL already decided that she's the victim and he's the scumbag. Until SNL stops playing dirty politics I will not tune in.

[Pahonu]

So you are saying there is a limit to comedy? In earlier posts you stated that it is a comedians job to do this, including offending others. You clearly think it has gone too far, and it is indeed very extreme in many cases, but if enough people are tuning in and laughing, they will likely continue. These late night shows made huge profits during the 2016 campaign, record ad revenue in some cases, and continue to do so. I agree the deep divisions in this country, including the media, is very disturbing, but it's wise to remember that it takes two sides to argue and be divided.

I don't think there is a limit to comedy. I do think there should be a limit to being hateful, especially when the intent is to destroy an individual. You know if something terrible happened to Trump all these comedians would be ecstatic doing an Irish jig celebrating. Not as part of some show or skit but for real. This is disturbing, considering that he's the president of the United States, regardless of what one thinks of him or his policies. But these guys just hate his guts, pure and simple. I just never saw this with comedians when it came to previous administrations, Democrat or Republican. Sure, they always picked on the Republicans more but it was never vile like this. When Dana Carvey was doing Bush, Sr. or Will Ferrell was doing Bush, Jr. you didn't sense they hated their guts or were out to destroy them. It just seemed like everyone was having a good time. No malice. Johnny Carson used to poke fun at Ronald Reagan (my favorite president) in his monologues and I found it funny. I enjoyed it. I don't even know what Carson's political views were but it never felt malicious or hateful. You can very easily tell when someone is taking jabs at a president because that's their job as a comedian vs. when someone is practically foaming at the mouth with their hate-filled spewing of vile jokes at the commander-in-chief while working their crowd up into a hysterical frenzy. Somehow I don't think this would have been acceptable in the past but because it's Trump it's okay. Of course the media won't speak up about this because they're against Trump too. I really don't want to get too political here but consider also the Kavanaugh supreme court hearings. You have a woman who accuses Kavanaugh of raping her but she has ZERO evidence to back this up. Then you have Kavanaugh who categorically denies this ever happened. Essentially it's her word against his. There is no proof. So basically he's innocent. But of course SNL jumps on this and immediately gets Matt Damon to play Kavanaugh as they mock him every which way. But wait a minute? Why don't we see some actress playing the woman accuser? Why isn't she being mocked?? Oh that's right. Because that would be insensitive, right? But Kavanaugh who as far as we know is innocent (no proof that he did anything) is being vilified as a monster. I can't stand double standards like this. You want to mock the hearings? That's fine. But play fair. Mock everyone. Don't just mock the Republican guy and leave the Democrat woman out. She's the victim? Well, I say he's the victim. But of course SNL already decided that she's the victim and he's the scumbag. Until SNL stops playing dirty politics I will not tune in.

When saying there should be a limit to hatefulness in comedy, the problem then, is who gets to decide the limit to being hateful? If a minority feels a racial joke is hateful, do they get to decide it's passed the limit. Does one or the other political party get to decide the limit if they don't like a joke? Don Rickles was brought up earlier. His comedy was based on making insulting or mean or maybe even hateful comments, in some people's view. Who gets to decide that limit? The argument of common sense is also problematic. One person's "common sense" decision may not be exactly the same as another's, so who decides? That was my earlier point about a comedian's audience. If material is deemed too offensive or hateful by too many people, the audience will diminish. They are deciding the limit by their viewership. If you don't like SNL's comedy, by all means don't tune in. The same holds true with the late night comedians. I would point out, however, that SNL's debut episode rating, with the Kavanaugh hearing skit, was the highest since the 2016 election season (presidential elections are gold to SNL) and several percentage points higher than last season's debut. You didn't watch, but many others chose to, and apparently more than usual. My last thought on comedians being too hateful toward President Trump is that it seems plausible that the level has, in part, been ratcheted up by more than a few hateful comments made by the president himself, and those were not in the interest of comedy, but rather political expediency. It seems to be a downward spiral, that is indeed disturbing, but it's simply not one sided.

[Pahonu]

Just came across this piece on Robert E. Lee, written by Stanley McChrystal, a retired general from the South. It's an excerpt of a new book called Leaders: Myth and Reality.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... e-atlantic

I am posting it because it coherently and succinctly touches on a lot of what we've discussed in this thread. I am not suggesting it's the absolute authority on the subject. The headline is supposed to be provocative, but the majority of the piece is less so: it's focused on historical narrative. Have a look.

I've not read it. McChrystal is an interesting individual, a retired military general with quite a conservative background, who on Joe Scarborough's show a few years back endorsed stronger U.S. gun control laws, saying that assault weapons were for the battlefield, not schools or streets.

[MagnumsLeftShoulder]

who gets to decide the limit to being hateful?

The same people who have always decided: network executives!

Somewhere in the last decade or so, entertainment lost the plot on politics. They stopped making fun of the human foibles of the politicians and made it about insulting the people in the audience who might support the other side. Back in the day, political humor had a sense of "hey, we're all in this together and ALL the politicians are a bunch of doofuses who don't know what they're doing." When a late night "comedian" on broadcast TV can say "suck my * Mr. President" or another one can call the first daughter a "feckless c-word" and get away with it, then that's the end for anything resembling good natured ribbing.

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

So you are saying there is a limit to comedy? In earlier posts you stated that it is a comedians job to do this, including offending others. You clearly think it has gone too far, and it is indeed very extreme in many cases, but if enough people are tuning in and laughing, they will likely continue. These late night shows made huge profits during the 2016 campaign, record ad revenue in some cases, and continue to do so. I agree the deep divisions in this country, including the media, is very disturbing, but it's wise to remember that it takes two sides to argue and be divided.

I don't think there is a limit to comedy. I do think there should be a limit to being hateful, especially when the intent is to destroy an individual. You know if something terrible happened to Trump all these comedians would be ecstatic doing an Irish jig celebrating. Not as part of some show or skit but for real. This is disturbing, considering that he's the president of the United States, regardless of what one thinks of him or his policies. But these guys just hate his guts, pure and simple. I just never saw this with comedians when it came to previous administrations, Democrat or Republican. Sure, they always picked on the Republicans more but it was never vile like this. When Dana Carvey was doing Bush, Sr. or Will Ferrell was doing Bush, Jr. you didn't sense they hated their guts or were out to destroy them. It just seemed like everyone was having a good time. No malice. Johnny Carson used to poke fun at Ronald Reagan (my favorite president) in his monologues and I found it funny. I enjoyed it. I don't even know what Carson's political views were but it never felt malicious or hateful. You can very easily tell when someone is taking jabs at a president because that's their job as a comedian vs. when someone is practically foaming at the mouth with their hate-filled spewing of vile jokes at the commander-in-chief while working their crowd up into a hysterical frenzy. Somehow I don't think this would have been acceptable in the past but because it's Trump it's okay. Of course the media won't speak up about this because they're against Trump too. I really don't want to get too political here but consider also the Kavanaugh supreme court hearings. You have a woman who accuses Kavanaugh of raping her but she has ZERO evidence to back this up. Then you have Kavanaugh who categorically denies this ever happened. Essentially it's her word against his. There is no proof. So basically he's innocent. But of course SNL jumps on this and immediately gets Matt Damon to play Kavanaugh as they mock him every which way. But wait a minute? Why don't we see some actress playing the woman accuser? Why isn't she being mocked?? Oh that's right. Because that would be insensitive, right? But Kavanaugh who as far as we know is innocent (no proof that he did anything) is being vilified as a monster. I can't stand double standards like this. You want to mock the hearings? That's fine. But play fair. Mock everyone. Don't just mock the Republican guy and leave the Democrat woman out. She's the victim? Well, I say he's the victim. But of course SNL already decided that she's the victim and he's the scumbag. Until SNL stops playing dirty politics I will not tune in.

When saying there should be a limit to hatefulness in comedy, the problem then, is who gets to decide the limit to being hateful? If a minority feels a racial joke is hateful, do they get to decide it's passed the limit. Does one or the other political party get to decide the limit if they don't like a joke? Don Rickles was brought up earlier. His comedy was based on making insulting or mean or maybe even hateful comments, in some people's view. Who gets to decide that limit? The argument of common sense is also problematic. One person's "common sense" decision may not be exactly the same as another's, so who decides? That was my earlier point about a comedian's audience. If material is deemed too offensive or hateful by too many people, the audience will diminish. They are deciding the limit by their viewership. If you don't like SNL's comedy, by all means don't tune in. The same holds true with the late night comedians. I would point out, however, that SNL's debut episode rating, with the Kavanaugh hearing skit, was the highest since the 2016 election season (presidential elections are gold to SNL) and several percentage points higher than last season's debut. You didn't watch, but many others chose to, and apparently more than usual. My last thought on comedians being too hateful toward President Trump is that it seems plausible that the level has, in part, been ratcheted up by more than a few hateful comments made by the president himself, and those were not in the interest of comedy, but rather political expediency. It seems to be a downward spiral, that is indeed disturbing, but it's simply not one sided.

You're right of course. It's all based on viewership and how many folks tune in. I would wager that the majority of the viewers of SNL and those late-night comedians are Democrats and liberals. Or folks who are apolitical. Though I would think that folks who don't follow politics would get very little out of the heavily political comedy on those shows. So I must go back to the viewers being mostly Dems and liberals, which no doubt is a sizable demographic. They are the show's core base and of course the show will pander to their base and do everything they can to get even more non-viewing liberals to tune in.

As for the president's rhetoric (which I don't always condone) to me there is a difference between him stirring up his base by talking about building a wall, securing our borders, keeping undesirables out of the country, or even "fake news" (all valid points, by the way) vs. Colbert stirring up his audience into a frenzy with jokes about the president performing oral sex on Putin. Something like that is crass by any standards (and against anybody) and just highlights the vile hatefulness of the individual making such remarks. Yes, this is where "comedy" CLEARLY crosses the line. Again, it's no longer comedy. It's an agenda.

[ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan)]

who gets to decide the limit to being hateful?

The same people who have always decided: network executives!

Somewhere in the last decade or so, entertainment lost the plot on politics. They stopped making fun of the human foibles of the politicians and made it about insulting the people in the audience who might support the other side. Back in the day, political humor had a sense of "hey, we're all in this together and ALL the politicians are a bunch of doofuses who don't know what they're doing." When a late night "comedian" on broadcast TV can say "suck my * Mr. President" or another one can call the first daughter a "feckless c-word" and get away with it, then that's the end for anything resembling good natured ribbing.

Spot on! I'm a grown man and when I'm turning red hearing these so-called comedians saying something like this to our president (their president too, whether they like it or not) or the first daughter then you know something is seriously wrong! Of course also insulting those who voted for Trump as being a few "deplorables" out there in the boonies somewhere is extremely elitist and offensive because half the country voted for Trump. The left would have you believe it was just a few uneducated farmers in Iowa and the rest of the votes were rigged by the Russians?

[Pahonu]

who gets to decide the limit to being hateful?

The same people who have always decided: network executives!

Somewhere in the last decade or so, entertainment lost the plot on politics. They stopped making fun of the human foibles of the politicians and made it about insulting the people in the audience who might support the other side. Back in the day, political humor had a sense of "hey, we're all in this together and ALL the politicians are a bunch of doofuses who don't know what they're doing." When a late night "comedian" on broadcast TV can say "suck my * Mr. President" or another one can call the first daughter a "feckless c-word" and get away with it, then that's the end for anything resembling good natured ribbing.

My earlier point was that the escalation in rhetoric has been fueled by both sides. I'm sure we can list many comments we didn't like or found unfunny. I wasn't too pleased to hear the president talking about grabbing women's genitalia, for example. Lets not pretend the rhetoric is the fault of one side only. That's overly simplistic.

Network executives make these decisions based on ad revenue, which is directly related to viewership. If enough people are watching to gain ad revenue, it will stay on the air. If not, it gets the ax. Network programs don't stay on the air without sufficient viewers. As I said before, it's basic market forces at work.