Stephen Colbert in the Zeitgeist
By
Because sometimes a post just needs some eye candy
Colbert Nation
- The Rise of the Active Audience and Stephen Colbert – Flow.TV:
A lengthy discussion of the Colbert Nation and its relationship with the ‘Colbert Report’However, I would argue that the active Colbert Nation audience resembles an improvisational text that relies on the inventiveness of an active audience, one that seeks to be both spectator and creator. As in traditional improvisational modes of performance, the suggestions and themes that make up Colbert’s challenges to his audience cannot, in the end, control or predetermine the outcome of the audience’s action. The audience, in being an improvisational performer as well, receives the suggestions and then enacts its own text. What makes the Colbert platform so successful is not only the fact that the audience accepts his challenges, but that Colbert is able to adjust to his audiences’ text, incorporating the outcome, whatever it may be, into his own performance. What we have is a dance, not a directive.
Guest alert for 1/28- Denis Dutton
- According to Dave Lull from the Books Inq blog:
Denis Dutton, just minutes ago, received e-mail from the ‘Colbert Report’ staff indicating that he’s still going to be on tomorrow night as a guest. Both he and Paul McCartney are scheduled to appear, with, of course, top billing going to Mr McCartney.
Wikiality
- Proposal to flag, approve Wikipedia revisions provokes ire – Ars Technica blog:
Wikiality rears its ugly head and gets some attention from the Washington PostWikipedia is no stranger to article vandalism, and it’s not as though the world isn’t aware of that fact by now (see Stephen Colbert’s attempt to rewrite the entry for “elephant,” for instance, or last week’s episode of 30 Rock). But the edits to the Byrd and Kennedy bios [announcing their death] attracted national attention after the Washington Post ran a piece about the five minutes of inaccuracy.
Twitterverse
- @realericacosta: KUMAIL BACK ON COLBERT AGAIN TONIGHT!!!! [Looks like we might be seeing more "Omar"/Homer tonight!]
- @mileskahn: The Daily Show has come down with a cold. I blame John Oliver. [Okay, that was TDS, but it made me laugh.]
- @jonassink: Stephen Colbert would be proud: http://www.rei.com/product/761282
Gratuitious Name Dropping
- Macca meets Colbert Wednesday night – Creative Loafing blog:
The best description of Sir Paul’s visit tomorrow thus far.Either the most hilarious thing you will see all year or another sign that the apocalypse is upon us.
- Liberal Parents, Liberal Children – Huffington Post:
Another “kids get their news from Stewart/Colbert” piece, but with a few other interesting points to bootI suspect that some young people have figured this out as well. They’re the ones who increasingly call themselves liberal, and who don’t by that term mean traitorous; they’re the ones who have found sources of political information actually worth keeping up with; they’re the ones who watch Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, and who get more of the news that citizens need from a half-hour of satire than they do from a half-hour of the soft features and consumer segments that dominate the networks’ evening newscasts below the fold of the first commercial.
- Exit the Boy King – New York Times:
Maureen Dowd compares Obama’s inauguration speech to the 2006 White House Correspondent’s DinnerAfter thanking President Bush “for his service to our nation,” Mr. Obama executed a high-level version of Stephen Colbert’s share-the-stage smackdown of W. at the White House correspondents’ dinner in 2006.
With W. looking on, and probably gradually realizing with irritation, as he did with Colbert, who Mr. Obama’s target was — (Is he talking about me? Is 44 saying I messed everything up?) — the newly minted president let him have it.
Related posts
15 Comments
January 27th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
Paul wanted so badly to come on, and I thought, why should I hog the whole evening with Kant, Plato, and aesthetics?
So now Paul’s doing the second segment, plugging his new Fireman album.
I’ll do the third part, on my new book, The Art Instinct.
Denis
Reply
January 27th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Sounds fantastic; this sounds like something that definitely deserves a spot on my “to read” list. Good luck with the interview, and I’m looking forward to seeing it.
Reply
January 27th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
I was just reading about The Art Instinct. It sounds like an interesting book. I’ve added it to my list of books to read. Good luck on TCR tomorrow night!
Reply
January 28th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
We’re definitely looking forward to seeing you on The Report. Good luck!
Reply
January 27th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Wow. I’m inclined to buy your book already due to your graciousness towards Sir Paul:) Would you be willing to share some of your behind-the-scenes experiences at TCR following your interview Wednesday evening? Either way, good luck!
Reply
January 27th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
DB, thanks for all the neat tidbits. And most especially for the eye candy – I love the relaxed, out of character shots best.
And Denis, good luck on the show tomorrow – have fun, and be sure to tell us all about it!
Reply
January 28th, 2009 at 12:51 am
I prefered the relaxed, out-of-character shots as well. It’s nice to see the real Stephen shine through:)
Reply
January 28th, 2009 at 12:57 am
P.S. Did anyone else notice the small framed black and white photo of Stephen behind his head? Haha.
recaptcha: pictures me!
Reply
January 28th, 2009 at 2:12 am
ColbertGirl27, I didn’t notice the small photo-within-a-photo until you pointed it out. There’s something irresistably funny about that smaller framed picture.
reCAPTCHA: moisten reform (no coment!)
January 27th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
i also heard him being mentioned on npr by an author whose new book is called “Snark.” he was talking about satire and the new snarkiness of the blogosphere, and of course, colbert/stewart came up. they are and will be forever invoked, both rightfully and wrongfully. this little brew of satire they have concocted over the years has really captured the zeitgeist of our current times.
that being said, i love that pic of colbert in this post. i really like him in his natural, ungelled state.
Reply
January 27th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Interesting insights from these links, and particularly from Rebecca McCarthy. I’d love to see more articles expound on that discourse of inclusiveness and interaction that Stephen creates in every episode (the improvisational space) through his mobilization of the Colbert Nation. :)
Reply
January 28th, 2009 at 11:10 am
I thought the McCarthy article was pretty interesting, too (if a bit redundant). Some of the comments to it seemed to be way off the mark, though. Several people raised the issue of (financial) compensation for viewers who submitted content to the show – as in “what does the viewer get out of it?” and “the show is just exploiting viewers.”
But of course what they’re missing is that there can be other motivations for contributing than purely financial ones.
I just finished Clay Shirky’s book Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations”, which is a fabulous exploration of how the internet is changing the ways in which people organize and interact. One theme in the book is that in order for any community to be successful, you need the right combination of bargain, promise, and tools. The bargain is what your potential community member will get out of joining (For instance, the implicit bargain of Wikipedia is “if you contribute, this will get better”), the promise is what the community might be able to achieve or become, and the tools chosen have to fit both.
So the bargain (and promise) of TCR is that The Colbert Nation actively participates in the show (both as an audience, and out in the world), and in return they become part of the show’s narrative. McCarthy was right on target when she identified the audience as improvisational partners. They’ve been more successful than any other show to date at recognizing and mobilizing this sort of audience participation, and it’s one of the big reasons they won a Peabody.
I really recommend the Shirky book. It’s a fascinating read, and makes sense of so many bizarre and wonderful social/internet phenomena.
Reply
January 28th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
I started reading it as well, but then I encountered graphs and Venn diagrams and sort of became disinterested. But, what I did read of it was very interesting, especially at the very beginning about the whole cell phone debacle. Maybe I’ll give it another shot…
Reply
January 28th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
It’s true, the article is a bit redundant. I do love this particular line from McCarthy’s article: “What we have is a dance, not a directive.” It a good description of the closeness and intimacy that Stephen has with his audience, and what the members of the audience (or the Colbert Nation) have with each other.
Having reread the comments, I zeroed in on the one that asked about issues of labor and self-promotion. What does one get out of it? How about, among others, the satisfaction of curiosity (which I think is one huge motivation that drives the Colbert Nation to do something Stephen tells them to do), the feeling of belonging to a community, having the power to affect positive changes (the stuff TCR sells – like the WristStrong bracelets – goes to charity)?
I believe these things are worth more than the financial compensation they’re looking for. :)
And thanks for the recommendation. I’ll go scavenger hunting here in Manila for a copy. :)
Reply
January 27th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Surely Stephen is the only person in recorded history to make the “sweatshirt over collared-shirt” look that attractive! It seems to be his signature casual look, which cracks me up. It is kindof adorable though. :)
also, I just noticed for the first time that in the disclaimer below, NFZ is not endorsed by bears. Good to know!
Reply