I was driving home listening to the radio a few days ago and heard an open line host tossing out the question "Should Obama have appeared on the Leno show?" I hadn't even known he was going on, which isn't surprising considering how little we watch t.v. around here.
Apparently, the only thing sort of controversial that transpired was a gaffe when he self-deprecatingly compared his bowling scores to what someone from the Special Olympics might achieve.
I thought about it--I don't see anything terribly wrong with him being on the show, and I'd suggest that the previous administration's avoidance of such situations probably stemmed more from their fear of Bush's potential to misspeak when unscripted rather than from any greater respect for the dignity of the office.
In Canada, there's less of a mystique about our top office--probably because of the televised mayhem that is parliament. All three of at least the last three prime ministers have appeared--I think--on a sketch comedy show "This Hour Has 22 Minutes". The title is a spoof on an old television newsmagazine from back in the early 60s called "This Hour Has Seven Days". The fact that most of their target audience would have no memory of the original doesn't matter; they try to keep it geared, though, to those who are at least somewhat politically aware.
Opposition leaders have also appeared on the show as well. Usually it's in a rather harmless, self-deprecating cameo role.
Some have pointed out that Obama's not the first president to appear on this type of show--both Kennedy and Nixon appeared on the Jack Paar show in 1960. There was a difference, though. They both appeared during the campaign; neither was in office at the time.
Also, while Johnny Carson was the successor to Jack Paar's time slot, it's wrong to assume the shows are two flavours of the same thing. Paar's show was more like Dick Cavett than Carson's. He tended to have on newsmakers as much if not more than entertainers, and there was a willingness to spend longer on one interview and get into depth, rather than simply have people making the rounds to plug their latest book or movie.
To get a rather silly illustration of the difference, try to find the spoof of Jack Paar in the "Classic Krusty" reruns on the Simpsons when they showed a black & white program with Krusty smoking and interviewing the head of a major union.
One of the great things about Youtube is that people can access the old Paar and Cavett shows. Looking at those interviews makes the current crop of vaccuous shills just that much harder to take.
Sorry no posts for a long time, but I don't think many read this any more anyway. Now life's a little less busy, I hope to get back to writing more.
1 comment:
I'm not an Obama fan, but I see nothing wrong with him appearing on the Leno show. I think we'll see less and less of those type of appearances if future gaffes continue.
Larry King, I think, is similar somewhat to Cavett and Parr in that his interviews are more in-depth and perhaps more serious topics (caveat- not all the time). The problem with American television I think is that we only see in-depth coverage of the sensational- with purported experts exploring every possible hypothesis and theory. Our thirst for information, of any type, has led to the dissemination of a great deal of misinformation which then becomes fact because, "I saw it on CNN."
Wow! That was a lengthy comment. For me, anyway.
Post a Comment