SNL: The ethics of a Sarah Palin invitation
Posted by Dan
October 21st, 2008 at 01:08pm
In SNL
It’s only been a couple days since the episode aired and I’m sure everyone’s sick of talking about Sarah Palin and her appearance on SNL. But I still feel the need to do a bit of hand wringing on the idea that she was allowed on the show to begin with.
There seems to be some sort of duty to fairness at SNL wherein it’s assumed that politicians from each side of the political aisle are entitled to an equal amount of cameos on the show. However, I would posit that SNL doesn’t necessarily need impress anyone with its even-handedness this close to the election.
I can’t imagine any fewer than 90 percent of the people working on SNL are anything but flaming liberals — liberals who flame hotter and brighter than all of the joints Andy Samberg has ever smoked. Very few people on that set probably plan to vote for last week’s guest star.
If I were running SNL, I really don’t know if I’d be able to invite someone like Sarah Palin onto the show this close to the election. The idea that I would give exposure and (most likely) positive attention to the woman who could (through a series of two specific disasters — a McCain victory and subsequent death) become president of the United States.
If anything, Palin’s experience on the show made her even more likable. As we’ve seen over the past several weeks, likability is her biggest asset. After all, the fair Alaska governor is basically just a really nice lady whose ascendancy to the presidency would probably dwarf the disasters called for in the Book of Revelations. So, SNL basically did her a big PR favor — even if they plan on writing an amazing sketch for Barack Obama right before the election.
Let me put it this way — I think the tension during the episode was most palpable during the Alec Baldwin segment. If we know two things about Alec Baldwin, it’s that he’s a tremendously gifted comic actor and that he is also a heaving mass of barely suppressed rage. During that moment where he said “that horrible woman,” everyone in the viewing audience (or, well, at least me) was holding their breath or nervously guffawing through a slackened jaw. We know that he actually meant it, even if he could pretend it was just a gag that was written for him.
The tension was clear.
SNL made a decision to play for ratings and comedic opportunity over partisan politics. I know that if you only pillory politicians from one side of the aisle you risk alienating half of your audience and, worse yet, losing relevance due to the perception that the show is merely satirical porn for the left wing (Despite its clear liberal bias, The Daily Show has guests from all political leanings and Jon Stewart asks them all real questions — that is a testament to the long-term success of his show and his credibility as a source of real answers.). While that may be plenty fair, I don’t know if I could stomach making the same decision.
Anyway, I don’t want to try to make an official declaration of whether or not having Sarah Palin on was morally right or wrong. In fact, if I had a thesis to this entire blog post it would probably merely be: “yeesh” followed by the sound of me sucking air through my teeth.
What I’ve heard about SNL and politicians is that they have an “open-door policy” where if someone big-time in the presidential race wants to be on, and they contact the show, they’ll be game. So I’m not sure if it was a true invitation, per se, although obviously they could’ve avoided it if they really wanted to.
Regardless, I’m not so sure it made her more likable; as a lot of people pointed out, she didn’t really even make fun of herself so much as allow herself to be made fun of while she was standing right there (which is also what made the Baldwin bit pretty interesting — you know he does actually think those things — which dissolved some of the typical toothless chumminess inherent in these appearances). McCain delivered a lot more jokes when he appeared last spring (or hosted a few years back), even if he didn’t write any of ‘em. I can’t imagine Palin being on the show won her many or any new supporters — so, so many people have done the show and you’d have to be woefully unfamiliar with television to be impressed that a politician would turn on a late-night comedy show.
But even if she had been given her own jokes, and as such had been made to look gloriously likable, I’m not sure if that’s such an awful thing, and I say that as someone who really dislikes Palin and was sort of relieved that Tina didn’t have to share the screen with her for more than a sight gag. The Daily Show is great and all, but a comedy-nerd friend of mine opined that a lot of it (comedy-wise) now seems designed to make liberals in the audience feel good about themselves and their righteous indignation more than actually make them laugh out loud. That’s an oversimplification, but I see his point.
Not that politicians on SNL equals LOL, either. I think a better argument could be made that having the real anyone — the real Sarah Palin, the real Barack Obama, the real Mark Wahlberg — on the show kind of diminishes the sense of fun, like having a teacher sit with you at lunch in junior high. It may be novel and the teacher may in fact be a cool guy or gal for doing it, but it shifts the dynamic of the room. Then again, I’ve never really bought the idea that SNL is really supposed to be “edgy” or whatever it’s often accused of failing at. In fact, I’m not sure if I’d want to watch a 90-minute show that considers itself some kind of force for good in the world.
Whatever the ins and outs, I’m not sure if this is really a case of ethics.
**ed note**
–John says nevermind–
Saying that, the ‘dick in a box’ sketch was quite funny.
(In my calmest reaction, I do remain surprised that we’ve not heard of a single writer or performer walking off the show because of the sketch. That really does depress me).
So let’s say you have a television show that nobody has talked about much in like twenty years. Then let’s say you suddenly become politically relevant thanks to a few well-timed sketches (bitch is the new black, etc) and then you have the lucky coincidence that one of your former head writers looks exactly like a suprise new halfwit candidate for VP. If you have a chance to get that halfwit on your show you fucking take it. What were they supposed to do, have her come on and criticize her policies for 5 minutes? That wouldn’t be funny. It’s not a news show. The Weekend Update sketch made her look exactly like the national punchline she is and was extremely funny.
Since this episode got the show’s highest ratings since Nancy Kerrigan’s post–knee-bashing episode in 1994, I’d say Kyle has the right of it. I’m still uncomfortable with her being on the show, since I think her being a good sport made her look more likable to a certain portion of the nation, but then again I don’t know if that portion was watching the show. Like Dan, I am torn on the good idea–bad idea spectrum.