In the skit, show guest host James Franco plays an assignment editor at the New York Times at the head of an editorial meeting. During a mock assignment meeting where the paper announced that 50 reporters were being sent to look for dirt on Sarah Palin, a Times “reporter” asks,”What about the husband? You know he’s doing those daughters. I mean, come on. It’s Alaska.”
In response, Franco’s character said, “He very well could be. Admittedly, there is no evidence of that, but on the other hand, there is no convincing evidence to the contrary. And these are just some of the lingering questions about Gov. Palin.”
For God’s sake folks, this skit is a rip on the MEDIA!!! And how rediculous they are behaving!!! For once SNL’s taking a shot at the liberal media!!! Sheesh.
I have to strongly agree with you.
Its unfortunate that conservatives refuse to get this.
The point is that the NYT is over the top. The fact that the skit calls them out directly rather than the oblique media is quite a statement in itself.
On a brighter note, any controversy will probably help our side regardless.
Which is why they portray the Palin's as engaing in incest.
many are lacking in intelligence, it appears.
It clearly was a rip on the media.
That’s how I saw it - they were showing how ridiculous the media is. The whole skit was about that.
We don’t do ourselves any favors by screaming when we don’t need to. I heard Rush this a.m. on this subject and he admittedly didn’t see the skit but to listen to him you’d think it was a serious attack on the Palins, not the media.
IMHO.
If they are knocking the media, then we could expect a similar skip with editors talking about confirming if Barack and Michelle had joined the Al Qaeda group.
They are sending reports to investigate if the Obamas had even said thay had wished they joined before 9/11.
Who would think that was funny? I’m for Sarah Palin, and I wound not think it was funny, but in very poor taste.
Indeed, SNL set out to belittle the MSM and the NYT, specifically. But, they obviously used their “humor” as a double-edged sword in order to make sure that the Palins took a hit, as well.
They should have been able to poke the NYT with less prurient material, if that’s what they really wanted to accomplish.
JMHO.
They could have easily ripped the liberal media without even venturing into incest territory.
The simple fact is, they not only insulted the Palins, they insulted Alaska, as well.
They planted a seed in the mind of folks by doing so. Sorry, doesn't fly with me.
I agree that it sounds to me as if the skit was lampooning the media and its eagerness to throw rumors out there as stories -- especially when it involves a conservative. That said, the idiots that watch SNL would probably assume that the story (about Palin) is true or it wouldn't have been included in the skit.
NOPE, as RUSh accurately said, it's a "clever" way to attack Palin while "claiming" it was an attack on the media.
I agree. As disgusting as it is, this is actually a rip on the Media that is tearing her apart!!
I’m not so sure.
If he had said “You know he’s doing those daughters. I mean, come on. The Daily Kos said so”
Then the humor would have been clearer. As it stands it, sounds like a jab at Alaskans as well as NYT arrogance.
I think it was left ambiguous on purpose.
Disagree.
While it may have been a shot at the media, it no doubt was ALSO a shot at a rural small town woman.
The two do not need to be mutually exclusive.
“In the skit, show guest host James Franco plays an assignment editor at the New York Times at the head of an editorial meeting. During a mock assignment meeting where the paper announced that 50 reporters were being sent to look for dirt on Sarah Palin, a Times “reporter” asks,”What about the husband? You know he’s doing those daughters. I mean, come on. It’s Alaska.”
In response, Franco’s character said, “He very well could be. Admittedly, there is no evidence of that, but on the other hand, there is no convincing evidence to the contrary. And these are just some of the lingering questions about Gov. Palin.”
For God’s sake folks, this skit is a rip on the MEDIA!!! And how rediculous they are behaving!!! For once SNL’s taking a shot at the liberal media!!! Sheesh.”
You are correct.
I really believe they used taking a shot at the media as a cover for putting that disgusting idea out there.
This is like the flipside of the Obama/New Yorker controversy.
It may be a rip on the media, but it is putting the idea out there to sink into people’s subconscious minds which accept things at face value. Some (stupid) people will forget that they heard it on SNL and will report it to friends as fact. It is a dirty trick with semi-plausible deniability. “We weren’t ripping on the Palins - we were ripping on the media!” They were ripping on both, but the rip on Palin is harder to defend against.
My thoughts exactly! The whole point of the satire was that with everything going on, the NYTimes had sent all reporters to alaska to find some none existent story...and finally, no one wanted to go because they didn’t have a Starbucks, etc.
It was making fun of the NY Times
Geeze
I agree.
This is a gross over-reaction by that tiny segment which thinks that merely acknowledging that certain impolite subjects are bandied about by the irresponsible, automatically places us among their number.
Horsepuckey!
"...but on the other hand, there is no convincing evidence to the contrary."
Here is the money quote, admitting that proving a negative is a major weapon in the arsenal of the propagandists. Of course, the DU types are oblivious to the implications, but most normal adults have a firm grasp of the technique.
A tempest in a teapot.