Terminalcoffee discussion

29 views
Helping You To Know The News > Censorship or editing of Tina Fey's comments? You decide

Comments Showing 1-8 of 8 (8 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Sarah (new)

Sarah | 13815 comments http://voices.washingtonpost.com/arts...

"Fey, this year's recipient of the prize, caused a few ripples during her acceptance speech at the ceremony on Tuesday when she mock-praised "conservative women" like Sarah Palin, whom Fey has so memorably impersonated on "Saturday Night Live."

"And, you know, politics aside, the success of Sarah Palin and women like her is good for all women - except, of course --those who will end up, you know, like, paying for their own rape 'kit 'n' stuff," Fey said. "But for everybody else, it's a win-win. Unless you're a gay woman who wants to marry your partner of 20 years - whatever. But for most women, the success of conservative women is good for all of us. Unless you believe in evolution. You know - actually, I take it back. The whole thing's a disaster."
But that's not what viewers heard when PBS and WETA (channel 26) broadcast an edited version of Fey's speech on Sunday.

The part about rape kits and evolution was gone, leaving only Fey's more harmonious -- and blander -- comments about Palin and politics: "I would be a liar and an idiot if I didn't thank Sarah Palin for helping get me here tonight. My partial resemblance and her crazy voice are the two luckiest things that ever happened to me. All kidding aside, I'm so proud to represent American humor, I am proud to be an American, and I am proud to make my home in the 'not real' America. And I am most proud that during trying times, like an orange [terror] alert, a bad economy or a contentious election that we as a nation retain our sense of humor."

Was PBS shielding its viewers from Fey's more pointed remarks?

"It was not a political decision," responded Peter Kaminsky, one of the broadcast's executive producers. "We had zero problems with anything she said."

But with the 90-minute show running about 19 minutes long after the taping Tuesday night, a few things had to give, Kaminsky said. "We took a lot out," he said. "We snipped from everyone."

---
Whadaya think? I feel like if they were really editing not censoring, they probably would have chosen different comments to cut, to avoid this question.
And it seems strange to cut the acceptance speech of the guest of honor.


message 2: by Jim (new)

Jim | 6485 comments I agree that it seems like a bit of censoring. It tried to keep the remarks in as neutral a tone as possible it seemed. I guess that is their prerogative.


message 3: by Sarah (new)

Sarah | 13815 comments I feel like they can edit other things for neutrality, but editing a speech in this way is changing someone else's meaning, which is an entirely different thing. It's no better than when Fox News takes a single sentence out of context and blows it up into liberal conspiracy.


message 4: by Jim (new)

Jim | 6485 comments Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you Sarah, I don't like it either, and feel that it is wrong. I'm just saying that they seem to have that right, and they used it.

They completely cut the speech off at the knees, leaving it with a different meaning. I guess after watching all of the political ads with all the cutting and pasting that happens you almost become immune to the fact that you are not getting the whole truth.


message 5: by Sarah (last edited Nov 16, 2010 10:38AM) (new)

Sarah | 13815 comments Sorry, Jim. I could tell you weren't advocating it.
Barb, my guess is actually that they cut it for the opposite reason: to keep from getting called liberal and getting accused of partiality by right-wingers. But now, like in the Juan Williams fiasco a couple of weeks ago, there'll probably be some backwards uproar where Rush Limbaugh goes after PBS for censorship and uses it as an excuse to demand their de-funding.


message 6: by Gus (new)

Gus Sanchez (gussanchez) If PBS was so worried about her speech going on longer, they should have pruned some other parts of the show and given her speech the attention it's rightfully due.

I won't go as far as to decry censorship on PBS' part, but it does seem extremely sketchy to edit the line about conservative women, i.e., Sarah Palin. Why be so PC about someone who's constantly putting PBS on her crosshairs?

Oh, and as for defunding, it's not like PBS gets all their funding from the Federal Government; they get less than 1% from the Gov, the bulk coming from the Corporation for Public Broadcast (not a federal entity) and private donors. So Limbaugh and the other right-wing gasbags can shut the fuck up.


message 7: by RandomAnthony (new)

RandomAnthony | 14536 comments I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt here and say it wasn't censorship. Don't awards shows often get edited this way? Heidi, what do you think as a former producer? I think the person who edited, though, is kicking her/himself now because of all the controversy.


message 8: by Lobstergirl, el principe (new)

Lobstergirl | 24358 comments Mod
Censorship or self-censorship, whatever. Yes it was one of those. And it probably was done because someone at PBS was afraid of being called "that liberal PBS that fired Juan Williams and broadcasts insults about Sarah Palin." Even though it was NPR that fired Juan Williams, teabaggers don't know there's a difference between NPR and PBS.

Utterly lame.


back to top