However, Stephen Colbert did handle the issue on his show probably about as well as it can be covered, tying it in with other news stories.
Wednesday, March 27, 2019
Colbert Did It So I Don't Have To
I am harassed about why I haven't addressed the terrible wrong of Jussie Smollett being let off the hook for mounting a publicity stunt in the form of a fake hate-crime against him. Yeah, apparently in some worlds there's nothing else going on and the inhabitants of those worlds are demanding that those of us who live in reality comment on TV personalities who I have never seen and couldn't pick out of a line-up of two suspects because, for one thing, I'd never heard of him and if they had asked me, cold, to pick out "Jussie Smollett" I wouldn't even know what gender to picture in my mind.
However, Stephen Colbert did handle the issue on his show probably about as well as it can be covered, tying it in with other news stories.
However, Stephen Colbert did handle the issue on his show probably about as well as it can be covered, tying it in with other news stories.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Smollett was charged with felony disturbing the peace; not exactly a "hate crime." He's doing community service and forfeiting a $2000 bond (i.e., a "fine"). Most of the problem seems to be the PR. The DA dropped charges, rather than entered s plea deal (well, Smollett didn't plead out). Compare with the OK civil suit on opioids: the settlement mostly goes to a state university to set up a center for study and treatment. Purdue looks responsible rather than evil; the Chicago DA looks incompetent.
ReplyDeleteIt's all about the narrative.
Hey, all the Sacklers and their corporation did is knowingly push powerful opioids on the country, resulting in massive addiction and multiple deaths a day, while white. I have a nephew who almost died of an overdose and another relative whose roommate shot himself under the influence of their products both from towns so small you'd never have heard of them.
DeleteI figured the guy is an immature jerk - he's in the TV actor end of show-biz, those are ubiquitous - no one got their door bashed down or their heads bashed in by cops looking for suspects, no one got arrested and put through an expensive trial. I don't remember people getting this angry about Susan Smith after we found out she was the one who drowned her kids and blamed it on an anonymous "black man". I just looked it up, she's eligible for parole in 2024, how much do you want to bet that when they let her out people are all "meh" about it.
I wanted to correct myself: the bond was $10,000, and the charge "felony disorderly conduct."
ReplyDeleteStill nothing he was going to get buried under the jail for. Had there been at trial, I'm sure who ever was still paying attention would be disappointed he wasn't subject to being drawn and quartered.
The whole thing was stupid, but it wasn't a crime, as you say, comparable to that of Susan Smith's. And Oklahoma gets a research center it hopes will attract world attention and give OK a reputation for something besides oil and idiots in government. I assume that somehow "trickles down" to the lives destroyed in that state by opioids, but I don't think that's really so much of a consideration by the OK AG. I saw a headline that the Sacklers were being "held accountable," I can only assume it was related to this story, as no other lawsuit has settled yet. I'm sick of the narratives of punishment and who deserves what, and why. Smollett didn't so much buy his way out of jail as Chicago didn't really want to prosecute such a minor, but still infamous, offense. Had he done this and not been a minor celebrity, it would be the same crime, but nobody would give a shit. And, as I say, it's not the crime most people imagine it to be. Sure, Chicago PD spent a lot of time on it, but he wasn't charged with defrauding the police department, or Chicago taxpayers.
It's all about the narrative (to repeat myself).