Newt Gingrich: Saturday Night Live Guilty of Slander
Cidu Bill on Oct 24th 2008
Newt Gingrich told Fox News Wednesday (see clip) that Saturday Night Live’s portrayals of Sarah Palin “were slander and were worthy of a lawsuit.”
This is kind of funny until your remember that Gingrich used to be Speak of the House, and therefore one of the most powerful members of the governmental body that makes our laws. Then it becomes kind of scary.
Filed in Bill Bickel, Fox News, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Saturday Night Live, satire, slander | 12 responses so far
brien Oct 24th 2008 at 10:50 am 1
Used to be? This is “scary” because he “used to be” but is no longer Speaker of the House? And he’s suggesting that someone should do something legal, but he’s not actually doing anything, he’s just speaking his mind. This is scary?
Here’s something scary for you. There’s a guy named Barack Obama, who is a current candidate for President of the United States, no less, who has deployed something called a “Truth Squad.”
The Squad’s sole purpose is to litigate against people who dare to exercise their constitutional rights and speak negatively of their candidate. Let me repeat this - this is going on NOW by a candidate for President of the United States.
If Gingrich scares you, but Obama doesn’t - well, that’s called a double standard. It doesn’t make sense. Maybe it’s something in the Kool-Aid.
Hockey Baby-Mama Oct 24th 2008 at 12:24 pm 2
Newt is just thrilled that anybody actually asked his opinion about anything, because he thinks this means he’s automatically morphed into an elder-statesman just by benefit of living long-enough.
As for the above posting, it should be noted that the McCain camp also uses “Truth Squads”, but a bigger issure should be why this is “scarey” ineaither case. When did the right to “dare to” slander and/or libel ANYONE become a constitutional right? And when did it become scary that citizens have valid legal recourse when people are spreading lies about them?
One last thing - the laws of out country DO protect parody, which you’d think any legislator should know. You’d think.
Cidu Bill Oct 24th 2008 at 12:30 pm 3
Hockey Baby-Mama, you answered your own question: It’s scary because a powerful legislator was so thoroughly ignorant of the law.
brien Oct 24th 2008 at 01:35 pm 4
Parody is NOT the same as slander or libel. It’s an imitative mockery. It’s satirical, it’s exaggerative, it’s misrepresentative, and it can be offensive. But, parody is (at least within certain subjective limits) THE TRUTH.
Gingrich isn’t talking about parody. He knows what he’s talking about, and he’s right.
Incidentally, the SNL thing is just an aside in this context. The actual issue he’s talking about is CNN reporter Drew Griffin’s gross misrepresentation of a National Review article he was supposedly quoting during an interview with Sarah Palin. His point is that the media goes to great lengths to make Sarah Palin look bad, by distorting facts and taking things out of context.
… which, ironically, is exactly what this little video clip does for Newt Gingrich. He dares to point out this unfair treatment, and as a reward he’s subjected to it himself.
Here’s a link to the full article for those who prefer to be more fully informed:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,443712,00.html
brien Oct 24th 2008 at 01:43 pm 5
Actually, I looked at the video clip again - he didn’t refer to SNL’s parody of Sarah Palin, but of their portrayal of her husband and children. Her CHILDREN! I like tasteless humor as much as the next guy - but that’s way out of bounds.
FadedC Oct 24th 2008 at 02:13 pm 6
It’s perfectly reasonable for him to be upset if he views it as a tasteless parody of people who should be off limits. But in order for it to be considered slander, it would be required to be presented in a format that the reasonable person would consider to be true. Nothing presented on Saturday Night Live can be viewed as anything worse then an offensive parody.
So it’s fine for him to think that it’s wrong to make fun of their children, but it’s clueless for him to call for a lawsuit that would be laughed out of court.
Kevin Andresen Oct 24th 2008 at 03:29 pm 7
Newt Gingrich, in the full transcript, makes it fairly clear that he’s talking about the second week’s Palin skit on SNL and it seems to me that he didn’t understand it. But is it his fault?
Newt said “Should Katie Couric have apologized for misquoting Henry Kissinger? I mean, how often — you know, should “Saturday Night Live” apologize for the viciously dishonest and mean-spirited skits they did, particularly about Todd Palin and his daughters, things that I think were slanderous and worthy of a lawsuit?”
The skit shows escalating absurdities that the media are coming up with; the whole point was to skewer the media for their exaggerations, postulations, and lies. SNL was doing exactly what Newt was doing, protesting left wing media fantasies, and doing it in a way much clearer than the New Yorker (New York?) cover from the summer.
(The reporters in the skit did unfortunately come up the Todd being the father of the daughter’s baby theory; the idea of the SNL writers was, I’m sure, to come up with something obviously outrageous, but when an idea short circuit’s people’s brains, it may not be perfectly effective. That sole survivor in the front car of the recent L.A. area train collision has no memory of the impact; likewise may the actual details of the skit have been lost as minds tried to reject the image. It’s a different kind of bad judgment.)
Mark in Boston Oct 24th 2008 at 04:39 pm 8
Oh, I think Newt’s just jealous. If he was ever portrayed on SNL, nobody remembers it. Gingrich is just an insignificant little newt. Can you remember even three of the points of the “Contract With America”? Can you name even one that got more than token treatment?
DocBob Oct 24th 2008 at 05:16 pm 9
FadedC
I do not have the exact numbers handy, I could look them up if you need me to, but recently a survey was done to find out where the teens and 20’s got there news. Most of them did not watch news (local or national) but got there news from Leno, Comedy Centrals fake newscasts and skits like were seen on Saturday Night Live. Yes they understand some is humor but not where the line is. In that respect, it could be argued (though I am not, just saying it could) that this becomes slander as we know Mr. Palin did not have an incestuous affair with his daughter that produced the child in question.
What is scary to me is that most young people get there news from comedy shows.
FadedC Oct 24th 2008 at 10:39 pm 10
Bob,
There are always people who can try to argue things like that, but there precedent is against them. Plus while there are a number of comedy programs where people sometimes get their news, SNL is not one of them. They do not present real news along side their skits, the weekend update they do is pure parody.
As for young people getting news from comedy programs, it all depends which ones you are talking about. Somebody watching the Daily Show is going to be far better informed then somebody watching Leno.
Hockey Baby-Mama Oct 25th 2008 at 09:51 am 11
Is everyone in this country as stupid as people seem to think they are? And do we have to dumb-down everything in the universe for the supposed masses with a collective IQ of 10? If people are smart-enough to hold down jobs and function in society, do we still need to coddle them and protect them from learning their news from a weekly late-night TV show that’s clearly labeled as parody and farce? Plenty of people learn their news from Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and that ilk, too, but nobody here’s complaining about that!
David N Oct 25th 2008 at 02:13 pm 12
Brien - while you are squawking about the children - my god the CHILDREN - remember who has thrust them, without consent, into the limelight. Sarah Palin drags those kids to every function, including places they probably shouldn’t be going, and puts them in difficult situations. The hockey games and puck drops come to mind. It could be said that she uses them as shields, and in fact Palin (or her campaign) said so - how could Philadelphia boo when her daughter was there in a Flyers jersey?
I feel for the kids because they do not get to choose, really. But the campaign decided to make them part of the campaign and as such, it becomes fair game for parody. Not insults, but parody. The fake “ads” and such on Rush’s show are protected by the same legal rights, so be careful what you wish for.
You might note that you almost never see Obama’s kids. (One might guess that they are in school.) Biden’s are grown, but even McCain doesn’t drag his out and show them off constantly.