A The Colbert Report Community
Comedy Central (ended 2014)

The past few days have been rough for Twitter reactions and out-of-context satire. The internet—well, part of it, anyway—got out its torches and pitchforks on Thursday night when the The Colbert Report's official Twitter feed clicked "Tweet" on the following:

(That's a .jpg and not a direct link, because the account was deleted during Monday's show.) OMG so offensive, right? Well, it was part of a larger bit from the Thursday show that of course wasn't included in the tweet. Such is the paradox of Twitter: Almost every tweet is out of context, because contextualizing something in the span of 140 characters doesn't always work. The line above was from Wednesday's show; it was part of a bit about Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder starting a foundation called "The Washington Redskins Original Americans Foundation," a charity for Native Americans. Snyder, who's a huge asshole (IMO), created the organization in response to repeated calls for the Washington Redskins to change its name. "Redskins" is a derogatory slur aimed at Native Americans, yet Snyder and supporters of the name can't see that. So Snyder shoved it in their faces—or, and this is very possible, he's just THAT stupid—when he included the term in the name of the foundation that's supposed to support Native Americans. 

Stephen Colbert's response to The Washington Redskins Original Americans Foundation was to shine a light on its inherent insensitivity with his own horrible name for a foundation, and thus The Ching-Chong Ding-Dong Foundation for Sensitivity to Orientals or Whatever was born. (For what it's worth, I'm of Asian heritage, and I found the idea hilarious.) That was during Wednesday's show; on Thursday, the @ColbertReport Twitter account, which is run by a promotional department at Comedy Central and not Colbert himself, tweeted the joke, but didn't add a link to the original bit or provide any context. An Asian-American activist group picked up the tweet and started a campaign to get The Colbert Report canceled, and before long, the #CancelColbert brouhaha was in full swing. 

Because Thursday's episode had already taped and The Colbert Report doesn't have a Friday show, Colbert wasn't able to respond until last night—at which point he spent a whole show on it. Watch the intro—which features BD Wong in a near reenactment of his Awake character—and first desk bit from last night and take a stand on this atrocity/misunderstanding!

Let's hear it, America! Big deal or no big deal? 

Previously Aired Episode

AIRED ON 12/18/2014

Season 11 : Episode 40

73 Comments
Comments (72)
Submit
Sort: Latest | Popular
Well Tim, I guess it's okay if you say so. You have two women on opposite ends of the political spectrum who found the bit and tweet racist and offensive, and gained a pretty large following who agreed with them. Like it our not, neither you nor me nor any of the posters here are the final arbiters of what is or is not offensive.

While I don't agree with Suey Park on some things, she is right in the fact that there is a lot of casual bigotry aimed at the Asian community that needs to stop.

Also, satire is not a defense for being racist. Was the tweet meant to be racist? No. That doesn't forgive the fact that it was.
Reply
Flag
Classic response! Made Colbert all the more lovable.
Reply
Flag
I think Stephen handled the whole thing really well. I was very impressed when he asked people to stop attacking Suey Park. I'm certain I don't agree with her about all this, but she has a right to express her opinion. Disagreeing with her is fine, but threatening her ain't cool.
Reply
Flag
Hilarious - it's not even too soon to snark the junk in the Indian Ocean. Dog bless America, it's uncanny ability to stop caring about tragic events in 7 days, and Stephen Colbert.
Reply
Flag
Twitter - the most useless, ridiculous corner on the interwebs!
2
Reply
Flag
I watched last Wednesday's episode and thought it was fantastic and Monday's episode was just as good. Colbert is doing a lot of good to fight bigotry and you can't do satire without engaging your subject matter.

However it does make me think. Some of the people offended by the tweet were genuinely offended by the slur itself and find such slurs offensive even if they are used satirically. We shouldn't stigmatise people like that for being thin-skinned. It makes you think about derogatory slurs, how some are more acceptable than others. Now some have stronger negative ties than others but is that because they are intrinsically more offensive, or is just that they have had greater exposure and more vocal resistance. There are some slurs that Colbert would not dare to use like the n-word. Is that how it should be or should it be okay to use that word in satire, would that make the satire all the more effective? What are East Asian-origin people supposed to think when slurs against them are more socially acceptable than slurs against African Americans. And at the other end of the spectrum slurs against women like bitch are so commonplace that I bet many people don't even know they are slurs. Will all of these words eventually become unacceptable to use in all contexts? I don't know, I don't have any easy answers.
More+
4
Reply
Flag
"Hashtag activist"? Is that an actual thing like for real?
1
Reply
Flag
How did he compress that. Was it Hashctavist?
Reply
Flag
Yet another moment proving how awesome Stephen Colbert is.
3
Reply
Flag
I thought the tweet was funny even without context. I mean, it was so obviously a joke, it's unbelievable that anyone would take it as something genuinely derogatory. But on the plus side, Colbert got to take full advantage of the situation with his sarcastic and (jokingly) mocking tone. So yay Colbert :)
4
Reply
Flag
""Redskins" is a derogatory slur aimed at Native Americans, yet Snyder and supporters of the name can't see that"

you could not possibly be less correct if you tried. you could tell us four plus two in nineteen, and it would be closer to correct than your above statement.

i am white [skinned], Jay-Z is black [skinned]. Ming Yao is yellow [skinned]. Marvin the Martian is green [skinned]. Jeronimo was, wait for it.. yes, thats right, red [skinned]

there are five distinct anthropological "races" of human being. not a single one of them is white brown black yellow red azure heliotrope or aubergine.

was colbert rude or insensitive? maybe he was, but that doesn't make it "racist"

i don't support the name, or even watch any game of football, european or north american. i do, however, support understanding the reality of something, not just the party line you affiliate yourself with politically.

now, who's going to be first to call me a racist?
1
Reply
Flag
Not only are you bizarrely naive about what constitutes a derogatory slur, you're also naive about the details of this incident. Colbert's controversy had nothing to do with Native Americans. Read the tweet in the article above.
2
Reply
Flag
liberal?
Reply
Flag
I don't see how my personal political persuasion has anything to do with my comment. And I thought from your comment you were more interested in whether popular assumptions about prejudice were incorrect, not a mindless polarised standoff on cliched political lines.

For your information I have no interest or allegiance to any USA political party. In my country there is a political party called the Liberal Party which I want nothing to do with.
Reply
Flag
who said a word about any union of states?

liberal is a political spectrum, not a political party. your own countrys political spectrum is entirely irrelevant to any discussion here. what was it you said about polarized standoff cliched political lines, again?
Flag
I won't call you racist, but I will call you ignorant. The meaning behind the term is what makes it derogatory, not the accuracy of the word. For example, if someone called me a bitch in a non joking matter, I'd be offended, despite the fact that I am not a female dog in heat.

I mean, by your logic, the oh so famous and offense "n-word" shouldn't offend African Americans because it isn't strictly a race. Like, I get what you're trying to say with the word racism, but...seriously, how can you not understand it? Did you never take a single history class? Yes, technically we all share the same race as human, but, that's kind of the point with racism is that people are treated as not being human/less then human because of discriminatory views, so the "race" of racism is used rather loosely to refer to a group of individuals that share certain cultural/religious/whatever else traits, including skin color.

Really, you can argue semantics all you want, but it seems like a moot point, because the title is clearly offense to a large group of people, hence all the attempts to get the name changed. What confuses me even more is in the initial quote racism wasn't even mentioned, the term used was "derogatory slur," which is 100% accurate without even having to argue semantics.
More +
5
Reply
Flag
liberal?
Reply
Flag
+more
"What confuses me even more is in the initial quote racism wasn't even mentioned, the term used was "derogatory slur,""
this is where understanding party lines and english on a whole comes into play. so, liberal?
Reply
Flag
There are no such thing as "races", there's only ONE race, human race. I won't call you a racist, but I do think you don't understand what the concept of "derogatory slur" actually conveys. You don't get to decide what constitutes or not a slur for any specific ethnic group, the people who are named after it have the right to explain why it is or it isn't a slur, and more importantly, if they are being refered to with any kind of names, they most certainly can feel however they feel about it. The history of the word is what makes it a slur, it has nothing to do with the color of their skin or whatnot. "Spic", "coconut". "redneck", "wetback" - these are all racist slurs that have nothing to do with a person's skin color. It's these words' connotations, and not their denotations, what make them offensive.
3
Reply
Flag
liberal?
Reply
Flag
Ignoramus?
Reply
Flag
Correction: I responded with another question. ;)
Flag
i asked a question, you responded with insult. you never learned the idea of debate or discourse, i presume?
Flag
Seriously, anyone who actually watched his show (like ever) knows that everything he says is sarcastic. That's his bit.
5
Reply
Flag
On donating money to the Redskins foundation "The Internet must be fine with it, because I haven't heard s**t about that."

Yeah, he still got it.

Honestly, I'm with the reasonable voices that resent the attack on Colbert not because it's "political correction", but because it gives the gang of abusive, sexist racist manchildren claiming that being respectful equals censorship a clear target of an instance where all their paranoid fears about... well, not being a dick, did get out of hand.

The irony of Colbert actually being in the process of calling out that same racist "anti-PC" crowd when he made the controversial remarks only makes things sadder.
Reply
Flag
Can we already forget that Twitter ever existed? Please?
15
Reply
Flag
Amen. Seriously.
Reply
Flag
Damn, I always forget how fun yet smart that man can be.
1
Reply
Flag
The American Native tribes should just pow-wow and sue the Redskins to ruin and despair; they have the Casino money to have the best lawyers in the country and then some.As for Colbert, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, get over it.
Reply
Flag
Nobody cares about your opinion on the Redskins, Tim.
2
Reply
Flag
His show was spotted off the coast of Australia? ............. hysterical. Take that, lying Malaysian government.
1
Reply
Flag
Everyone wants to talk about The King.
Reply
Flag
Have some people forgotten that the entirety of The Colbert Report is a joke?
12
Reply
Flag
Probably the same people that like to quote The Onion as fact.
1
Reply
Flag
Yes. Some people are morons.
6
Reply
Flag
Yes, I agree it was taken out of contest. The originial showed the guy not getting it and Colbert made a joke by repeating it with another example.
I found it mostly harmless.

What I dont like is how certain races/religions/sexual preferences/ are allowed to be offended while others are not. So when certain people get riddiculed and get offended, they get told off that they can't handle a joke. But when it is directed at certain others,the whole world is suppose to be up in arms about it. It should be equal rules for every on
4
Reply
Flag
as a christian i am generally met with mockery and ridicule or derision. if i, however, were muslim, good lord there would be hate crime committees convened, the aclu would come to canada and run amok, the sky would bloody fall
Reply
Flag
Who knew BD Wong could be so funny.

Twitter and Facebook people are morons, so I'm not surprised. In the least.
3
Reply
Flag
I speak as an outsider looking in. I am a Brit. I am also of Asian descent. It is an old, old joke. Americans have no sense of irony. Cobert Report was being ironical for all the right reasons. It seems obvious looking in from the outside!
6
Reply
Flag
Bingo. Most Americans watch Duck Dynasty, Mano, so they are knuckle dragging morons and wouldn't know a joke if it slapped them in the face.

Meanwhile, Colbert gets all this free PR. GOOD for him.
2
Reply
Flag
Your hyperbole is stunning.

1
Reply
Flag
Erm, I am annoyed that an organization that is out there to be watchful of discrimination and stick up for people bullied the Colbert Report without even doing their due diligence to get the context on the comment. Was their reaction really that immediate and misinformed?

If so, I think they deserve a "wag of the finger." Given that Colbert was in fact speaking up for people, it makes this other organization seem short sighted for jumping down his throat before reading anything more than 140 characters.
13
Reply
Flag
No one seems to be pointing out that the woman who started the campaign has a book out about how internment camps were justified. So exactly how is she allowed to tell us what is and isn't racist? I'm a Redskins fan, and I enjoyed the bit, however I will contest your notion that the word "Redskins" is a slur. Boardwalk Empire's Jeffrey Wright talked about the controversy in the fall on "totaly biased" and talked about how some native americans had referred to themselves as Redskins to the settlers. He also said there was a team, somewhere on the west coast, I don't recall exactly what state, that was 90% native american who called themselves the redskins. And finally most native americans either like or don't care about the name because they face more serious real world issues. Even though Dan is addressing them due to the "controversy", which should really be referred as a few attention whores trying to make a big deal out of a small issue, he didn't have to do anything, and the fact that he kept it under wraps instead of publicly saying "I'm going to visist all these places to talk to Native americans", makes me feel that he actually does care. *tom hank's forrest gump*:And that's all I have to say about that.
More+
3
Reply
Flag
If by no one, you mean Colbert. It was mentioned in the above linked video. Ignore this if the second video wasn't posted when you first made the comment though.
Reply
Flag
actually, a person named Suey Park started it.
1
Reply
Flag
Visit*
Reply
Flag
Another example of the impending Apocalypse. Too many people are too stupid to even recognize the inherent insensitivity of the Redskins "gesture". Otherwise, the brilliance of Colbert's joke would not have caused such a crazy reaction.
7
Reply
Flag
Of course, you are correct.
Reply
Flag
It gave Colbert alot of exposure outside of comedy central, so it's a big win for the show
woot.
:)
4
Reply
Flag
plus the show itself got a bunch of material from this. win-win.
Reply
Flag
Exactly. He is smiling all the way to the bank, while the morons who think Twitter and Facebook are important are popping their pimples.
2
Reply
Flag
This was funny altogether LOL
Reply
Flag
Follow this Show
Members
465