Slashdot Mirror
Measuring the "Colbert Bump"
An anonymous reader writes "Democratic politicians receive a 40% increase in contributions in the 30 days after appearing on the comedy cable show The Colbert Report. In contrast, their Republican counterparts essentially gain nothing. Moreover, even a cursory analysis demonstrates that despite being a comedy program The Colbert Report appears to exercise 'disproportionate real world influence' — likely due to the 'elite demographic' of its audience." In my home we refer to Stephen as "Loud Daddy" because my child would scream bloody murder when we paused him (and only him) on screen. Even at 8 months old the kid has strange taste.
If this were a politically oriented web site, I could see this being posted, but not on the front page. It would be buried under a dozen or so more relevant.
This is Slashdot. It is tech oriented. I understand politics are important, but the slant has always been how politics will impact our IT related issues. So net neutrality is very relevant. This is not.
I am absolutely baffled how this got accepted as a story.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
If people were given the plain truth about some things, they simply couldn't stomach it. "They can't handle the truth" and I believe that to be the truth.
For example, I think it's VERY evident based on the evidence that one of the hi-jacked airliners were shot down by US military forces. The cooked up story about people calling from cell phones while the plane was in flight? (Have you ever made a successful phone call while a plane was in flight at any altitude? I have tried over and over and over again and have never been successful and I simply don't buy that story at all.) The US public would rather think of the victims as heros -- it's a much better picture. But the evidence doesn't indicate that to be the case, and I was watching TV live when they announced debris from that crash scattered for more than 5 miles. There's no way on earth that could have happened from a mere nose-dive into the ground. The plane was shot down.
Most logical thinking people would agree that it was the right call to make too. Those lives were lost already. Shooting them down could only serve to save lives and property of their targets.
But do you think the general public can really handle that? Those whiny people who want to negotiate with terrorists? I doubt it.
What is the point I'm making? Politicians can't speak the truth, even when they know it. (I'm not entirely convinced they know the truth either.) The people can't handle the truth. If they spoke the truth, they'd either be considered a whack-job or a doom-sayer and either way, the smoke-blowers will always have more voter appeal.
Someone made a comment about The Governator being a bad governor. He's actually a very good governor fighting an impossibly broken system. He has the balls to keep fighting it though even if it means being amazingly unpopular in his decision-making. You've got to respect his drive to balance the California budget -- something that probably hasn't been done in decades. Making hard and unpopular decisions are what makes him a good leader. The truth is actually very ugly and unpopular, but candy-coated smoke is bad for the state's and the nation's long-term health.