NEWS TALK RADIO Our Hosts
Powered by: Townhall.com
Sign Up
Friday, August 25, 2006
Brent Bozell III :: Townhall.com Columnist
Roasting the final frontier
by Brent Bozell III
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
How should California make up the projected 28 billion dollar shortfall projected over the next 20 months?


Most American families today subscribe to some kind of cable or satellite TV service, and increasingly they are asking themselves (and Congress) why they can't have "a la carte" choice -- the ability to take and pay for only the programming they want in their homes.

One of the channels that offers the richest arguments for cable choice is Comedy Central, which has proven time and again and around the clock that if there's a barrier of taste left, it will smash it to pieces. (Exhibit A is still its "Merry F---ing Christmas" special to commemorate the birth of Jesus.)

One of its bigger ratings successes last year was a "Celebrity Roast" for former "Baywatch" babe Pamela Anderson, which was tailor-made for incessant toilet bowl sex jokes. It drew not just the predictable lines about her artificially, cartoonishly enhanced chest, but a raft of cracks about her genitalia and a pile of gibes about masturbation. The person responsible for hitting the bleep button should have been paid overtime. But the ratings (at least compared to the usual Comedy Central gunk) were good, so they replayed this sleazy spectacle over and over again in heavy rotation until every member of Jerry Springer Nation had watched it twice.

Inspired by the Anderson show, on Aug. 20 it ran a celebrity roast of William Shatner of "Star Trek" fame. Even the promos leading up to the event were filthy. "The Shat Hits the Fan" was a constant advertising line. The TV promos themselves carried so many bleeps it was amazing any actual words remained.

And the show was even worse. The bleep-button pusher was exhausted. With the cast of roasters including Shatner's "Star Trek" castmate George Takei (who played Mr. Sulu), who recently declared he was gay, the audience was buried in man-on-man anal-sex and oral-sex jokes. Ben Stiller wrote a joke letter in which Shatner told 10-year-old Ben to write Takei, instead: "It would make his day knowing that a 10-year-old boy wants some photos from him. And I'm sure he'd want some of you right back.'" Comedian Jeff Ross kissed Takei solidly on the lips, after which Takei licked his lips.

That's not to say the regular heterosexual cracks were any better, especially out of 84-year-old roaster Betty White, who claimed she'd had sex with Shatner and urged him to hurry up, since it was just two minutes before the roast started.

More surprising were the many anti-black jokes thrown at Nichelle Nichols, another roaster and "Star Trek" castmate (Lt. Uhura). A whole pile of racial stereotypes were thrown out there, with comedienne Lisa Lampanelli urging Shatner: "Don't kill yourself. Then Uhura over there won't have anyone's house to clean. I kid. I love you, Nichelle -- or as they called you on the Enterprise, Mammy." Shatner ended the night with more of the same, bashing both Nichols and Farrah Fawcett: "Your skin looks so much like fried chicken that Nichelle's mouth is watering." Where's the NAACP?

But do bear in mind something here. The actual show, pre-editing, was even worse, even more tasteless, three hours of nasty overindulgence. Blogger Lynda Foley of the fansite Trek Nation attended the taping and explained, "I came home and threw up." She found the vulgarity rude even by her own "rude and vulgar gal" standards. (For those who not only like to watch sewage but also swim in it, the "Uncensored" DVD surely will follow, as it did with last year's roast.)

The Shatner roast's audience of 4 million was the most-watched original program of 2006 for Comedy Central, another win ensuring another pile of reruns.

But let's put this in its proper perspective. This also means that more than 190 million Americans did not want anything to do with this garbage, which raises the salient point. The most disturbing thing about this broadcast isn't even the content. It's the fact that more than two-thirds of U.S. cable subscribers were forced to help subsidize this raunch with their cable bills because of the cable industry's regime of forced extortion. Cable choice is the one solution that will truly empower the consumer. Because many Americans don't really care to pay for what Comedy Central thinks is the "final frontier" of tastelessness.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Founder and President of the Media Research Center, Brent Bozell runs the largest media watchdog organization in America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Brent Bozell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Subject: Why I watched the show
I'm not easy to upset or shock, but I thought the ugly homosexual jokes on this roast program ruined the show-- mostly because they dominated the show. Being funny is a challenge for any writer-- grossly graphic scatology is easy, insulting to any viewer with an average brain.

So why was the viewership so high? Because Shatner is a "cultural icon?" Partly that, and for a lot of people mostly that-- my fondness for the guy has a lot to do with his self-deprecating shtick. He's aged into a pretty funny guy, able to laugh at himself.

So I watched. I wish the material would've been in the same vein as his own self-satire. What does George Takei's going public about his sex life have to do with the guest of honor, other than a mention or two? The show obsessed about it.

If I'd known I was really tuning into the Sulu-out-of-the-closet roast, I would've kept turning the dial.


V-Chip and Polls
I should have said, "that dog don't hunt", coz I think that's the correct saying.

Anyway --

Whiners take note. Your TV already comes with a "V-chip", so, whether from cable, satellite, broadcast, or a rented VHS tape, if the material is objectionable, the TV will block it.

But obviously this isn't enough for the Whiners and Letter Writers.

Notice with all the recent discussions over the sleaze content of TV broadcasts, the V-chip has gone practically un-mentioned.

That's because NOBODY USES IT.

WHY NOT?

Is it too hard to use? Too inconvenient? Or, maybe it WORKS TOO WELL?

I know some people think the networks deliberately "deflate" the ratings. Of course the obvious counter to this is simply to "deflate" the blocking level on your TV.

Whether deflated or not, I know my satelite box has had numerous occasions to block a show I wanted to see, based on the "ratings" blocking I programmed into it. So, deflated or not, the ratings are there, they're available, and they work.

Different studies come up with different figures, but let's go with 10% (which I think is a HIGH estimate). That is, 10% of the V-chips in TV's so equipped are actually used. The rest sit idle, blocking nothing.

All this fuss and bother of "sleaze" on television, and the tools for parental control have already been *forcibly* imposed on television manufacturers, and WHO USES IT?

ALMOST NO ONE.

Yet, people still complain about "sleaze" on TV. Why?

I think it's the old answer to polls in general. Answering a pollster requires no action on the part of the pollee. No thought. No work. No effort. No concern over consequences.

Put another question on the polls, and let's see the results --

"Do you think there's too much sleaze on TV?"
- - - yes - - - no
"If yes, are you willing to pay $180 to make it all go away?"
- - - yes - - - no
"If yes, will you cut a check to the government RIGHT NOW?"
- - - yes, check enclosed - - - heck no

NOW THEN -- I say we only count the answers when ALL THREE are answered YES.

Because if only the *first* one is "yes", why don't people just spend 15 minutes learning how to work their V-chip? Their cable/satellite blocking? That would certainly cost LESS than $180!

And if the *third* one isn't answered in the affirmative, how do we know the respondent isn't just trying to get the pollster to shut up and go away? Probably so he can get back to the Playboy channel.

Hey, I got an idea! Let's get the GOVERNMENT to protect us! That way it'll cost us NOTHING! Wheeeeee! Hahahahahaha!!

Nothing, that is, except the gradual loss of all our freedoms.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City: