Whatever happened to the facts?

I realise I've been ragging on conservatives for quite a while - but the problem is they drive me crazy! Especially trying to debate something with one.

Because conservative logic is blissfully free of fact. Opinions and decisions are not reached through an objective appraisal of the evidence, but through sheer, pig-ignorant gut feeling. "This is the way I feel," a conservative will argue, "and nothing you tell me or show me will make me feel any different."

It's a condition comedian Stephen Colbert characterised as 'Truthiness.' "We're not talking about truth," he explained, "we're talking about something that seems like truth—the truth we want to exist."

"It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts," he continues, "but that's not the case anymore."

Colbert managed to hit the nail right on the head with his definition of the word 'truthiness.' Because we live in a world now that's moving further and further away from rationality, straight into the lap of blissful ignorance.

And there, facts are totally redundant.

A conservative doesn't base his or her opinions on facts. Instead, they're based on a more nourishing mixture of gut feeling and assumptions. Assumption always comes before fact - whereas a rational person examines the facts first and makes assumptions based on them afterwards.

Take creationism, for example. A creationist makes the assumption that the Bible contains an 100% accurate account of the creation of the world - 7,000 years ago when God made Adam from the clay of the earth and Eve from one of his ribs. He examines the evidence afterwards and interprets it in a way that will match his assumption.

A rational person, on the other hand, examines the evidence first and uses that as a basis for his assumptions. Learning that every tree grows a 'ring' during each year of it's life, he could cut down the oldest tree in the world, count the rings and assume (based on the facts) that the world is 4,000 years old (the age of the oldest tree on earth.) Or he could learn that there's a new layer of ice grown in the North Pole every year, so he could drill through the ice and count the layers to discover that the 'world' (or, at least, ice) was 420,000 years old. Similarly, examining geological evidence suggests the world is half a billion years old. All assumptions are based on physical evidence.

That same physical evidence is open to interpretation - which means a rational person might come to one conclusion, but be forced to change their mind should further evidence disprove their original hypothosis. The problem with conservative is that their assumptions are set in stone - often before they've even examined the facts.

Once those assumptions have been made, a true conservative is incapable of changing their mind - no matter what the 'facts' say. That's my major problem with them.

You can't debate with somebody who's incapable of changing their mind. You might as well argue with a brick wall.

I am America! (and So Can You!) by Stephen Colbert

I've already mentioned just what a sublime comedy genius Stephen Colbert is. His nightly show is a ripping attack on right-wing political pundits and the increasing gap between 'Truth' and 'Fact' in the modern media.

So I have to admit, I was looking forward to reading his book, I Am America (and So Can You!) ever since it was released (cannily coinciding with his abortive run for the presidency in South Carolina.)

However, the book actually turned out to be every bit as flippant and inconsequential as the character Stephen portrays. I actually felt like the joke was on me once I'd finished reading it.

Which, in itself, is kind of the punchline. Having spent three days reading his whirlwind diatribe of opinion and ignorance, I was left feeling both cheated and validated at the same time. And I should have known better...

After all, Colbert proudly announced that he hadn't 'written' his book - he'd 'shouted it into a tape recorder over the Columbus Day weekend.'

It was meant to be written in the style of a narcissistic political pundit who churns out books without giving much more than scant attention to what's in them. And the twist in this satirical tale? That's exactly how the book was written!

In the 240 pages of I Am America, Stephen Colbert coolly waxes lyrical about politics, religion, education, history, sports and race relations - all in the slick, polished character he appears as every night on Comedy Central.

He perfectly apes the self-important, fact-free rants of right wing political conservatives who believe 'gut feeling' has more veracity than evidence or fact. However, in doing so, it all gets very tiresome very quickly.

Because Colbert's book is basically a one-trick pony. It's funny, I'll grant you. It provides consistent smug chuckles throughout. However, if I'm going to spend three days reading somebody's dumb political ideas, I'd rather read a real person's dumb political ideas, rather than read what a brilliant comedian scathingly imagines somebody's dumb political ideas to be.

In the end, I still think I Am America (and So Can You!) is something I'm very proud of to have in my bookcase - but owning this book isn't so much about reading it as making a political statement by buying it (and my copy was a gift from my sister.)

It's exactly like one of those Oprah-endorsed best-sellers that people buy so they can leave it on their coffee table as a statement of their values and beliefs.

Which, if they're brutally honest, is pretty much the point of it.

HOWEVER...

After reading Stephen Colbert's entirely inconsequential book, I got to the end and discovered a 'page filler' which suddenly validated the entire purchase.

It was a transcription of Colbert's stunning 2006 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner speech, which he'd given in front of President Bush and the entire White House staff.

A copy of this speech alone is more than worth the price of the book.

In having the chutzpah to stand on a podium in front of the leader of the greatest nation on earth - and horribly insult him - makes Stephen Colbert one of the bravest comedians of his generation - and also demonstrates that's he's possibly as arrogant as the character he portrays on TV.

It's a scathing speech - and whether you agree with it or not, it's difficult not to admire the depth of comedy genius behind it. You may think it an appropriate criticism of the press and the 43rd President - or you might agree with Fox & Friends that it went 'over the line.' Whatever you think, you'll probably agree with Colbert's colleague Jon Stewart, who told the press: "We've never been prouder of him... But holy shit!"

"The greatest thing about this man [President Bush] is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday. Events can change; this man's beliefs never will."

Colbert Nation

The White House Dinner speech is a whole other reason to buy Colbert's book - but if you do, just remember. You don't have to read it. You've already got the joke.

I Am America (and So Can You!) is available for $26.99 from most good booksellers.

The Writer's Strike

At the moment, the Writer's Guild of America (East) and the Writer's Guild of America (West) are on strike.

There is no Writer's Guild of America (Central) because according to the popular media, nothing exists between the east and west coasts except cornfields and the world's largest ball of twine.

The Strike

There are 12,000 writers striking against the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers - the people who make the quality programming we enjoy every night on cable TV.

Television has pretty much ground to a standstill. The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are in reruns (like they are every Friday - leading one detractor to demand: Why is it called the 'Daily' show if it's only on four nights a week?)

And there's no end in sight - experts warn that this strike could continue well into the beginning of 2008.

Leading us all to ask: What the hell is going on?

The Write Stuff

I'm a writer. It says so in my job description. Should I be on strike?

I feel, deep within my heart, that I should be mortified if my writing brethren are being exploited. I'm all set to jump on a bandwagon - but nobody sent me an invite!

Maybe the invitation writers were on strike too...

But to be honest, I'm pretty much confused by the whole thing. I'm a big supporter of 'writers' so I'm instinctively on their side... But I'm also a stuffy old Tory and don't like Unions very much -and besides, these guys are getting paid to write so they shouldn't be complaining, should they?

I mean, the first rule of being a paid writer is to remember that there is ALWAYS somebody willing to do your job better, for less money, just to get their foot in the door.

Anybody who gets paid to write (even marketing stuff like me) is very, very lucky. The alternative is scrubbing toilets for a living - or selling radio advertising.

So if you've got the best job in the world (being a writer) why should you be on strike?

I figured I'd look into it and see what all the fuss was about.

New Media

The last time the writers were on strike was 1985.

It was around the time of the birth of the home-video market. Movies and TV shows the writers had worked on were being offered for sale on VHS cassette for the first time - and the writers figured they should get a percentage of that revenue, just like they did with box-office income and television cash.

After all, it was their work. The studios were making a profit from it. They deserved 'their cut.' And so they got it. The writer's were awarded 0.3% of all revenue generated from the sale of their work on videotape.

That means if the studios got a million dollars in profit from selling one particular movie on VHS tape, the writers walked off with $3,000.

Even Newer Media

Twenty two years later, the writers have realised that the home video market has exploded. Money raised via DVD sales now beats box-office income. For every $MILLION a movie makes when it gets released in theatres, it can bring in two and a half times that in subsequent DVD sales.

So the writers want a bigger 'piece of the pie.' The union is demanded a doubling of the current percentage, raising the average writer's income from a DVD sale from 4c to 8c. What's more, they want 2.5% of revenue from 'new media' - in the form of iPod downloads, webcasts and all that jiggery with mobile phones that play TV. [If the download is free, surely 2.5% of it earns the writers nothing - Editorial Bear.]

Naturally (since a 100% increase is a pretty big opening negotiation) the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers are saying 'no ball!'

I can see where the writers are coming from. Their experiences with the home video market proved that the way the viewer consumes TV and movies is constantly changing - and if they don't get their percentage in now, in five years time, television could be defunct and their contracts might not get them any revenue for their work being transmitted over the net, direct to people's mobile phones or - and it could happen - beamed into their brains or something.

It's a small percentage, but it's valuable. God knows a professional writer doesn't often have a steady paycheque. The trickling revenue from DVD sales and television reruns is often all that sustains them over the lean periods - and they're going to get a whole lot leaner if DVD sales get overtaken by automatic downloads that the writer gets no revenue from.

Reality Bites

However, the legitimacy of the unions' claim suffers a bit when other things are taken into consideration - like America's obsession with Reality Television.

You've all heard of reality shows. Big Brother. American Idol. That sort of thing. They normally involve putting a bunch of opinionated people in a confined space and then videotaping the results.

A lot of Writer's guild members work on these TV shows - but since they're 100% unscripted, can they claim credit (and revenue) for 'writing' on them?

No! Of course not. That's silly. They should just take their paycheque and be done with it.

Union Busters

In fact, I'm surprised the Alliance for Motion Picture and Television Producers is playing ball at all - because writers don't have much of a foundation when it comes to this sort of thing. If steel workers or train drivers go on strike, you can't exactly replace them with fully trained alternatives the next morning. But writers?

America is FULL of millions of aspiring writers and, like I said earlier, they'd be quite willing to replace the union members at the drop of a hat.

If the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers put an ad on Craigslist reading: 'Opportunity for Writers! Pay on Contract Basis Only' there would be millions of applicants who'd be happy to do what the on-strike writers currently do without demanding a cut of resales and reruns.

They'd just be happy to get their foot in the door of the showbiz world.

As a professional writer, I always remember my mantra: There is always another writer willing to do your job better, for less money.

Writing is a passion. A calling. And those of us who earn a living from it are very lucky indeed.

I agree with the Writer's Unions that they shouldn't be exploited - but I also believe that every single 'striking' writer should remember how incredibly lucky they are to have that job.

For every Larry David (the writer of Seinfeld) who makes $500 million from his work, there will always be a hundred writers who can barely pay the rent and do it just for the love of writing and the thrill of contributing to a TV show or movie that people enjoy.

Besides... Isn't the whole concept of a 'writer' striking just absurd? I mean, writing for a living is the ultimate white-collar job. I can hardly imagine a band of writers making a picket line outside the studios, warming their hands around a fire and singing songs about 'the man' exploiting them and chaining them to a typewriter.

While decent, hardworking Americans might have sympathy for exploited steel workers, cops and firemen, they're not much sympathy for the striking writers. The public are effected - by their favourite TV shows going off air. But I think the general opinion is that the writers should stop bitching and just get back to work.

It will be very interesting to see how it all pans out.

In the mean time, I'll adopt a Yorkshire accent and cry: 'Stay strong, my writing brethren!'

Crown of Comedy

When it comes to comedy, we Brits tend to think we're number #1.

And with good reason. The UK has a solid comedy heritage that no other nation can match. From the Goon Show to Monty Python, from The Office to Shaun of the Dead, there's something wonderfully offbeat and subversive about British comedy that gives it a timeless quality.

But coming to America made me realise something. We Brits are resting on our laurels. There is some hilarious stuff being produced stateside.

Top of the Totem Pole has to be the magnificent Colbert Report - a spoof political commentary show presented by the blustering Steven Colbert.

The Report (the T is silent, like Colbert's last name, so the show is pronounced The Coal Bear Re Pour) is a spin off from hit comedy The Daily Show. That's Comedy Central's leading political commentary program, hosted by sardonic comedian Jon Stewart.

But while The Daily Show attacked the crazy political climate with wry, liberal, sarcasm, The Colbert Report goes one step further, which shifts Funny to Hilarious.

We're in on the joke as Steven Colbert portrays himself as a pompous, right wing egotist, inviting his guests to "take a spin in the no fact zone." It's a dead-on mockery of 'personality pundits' like Bill O'Reilly, who seem to think facts play second fiddle to dogma and 'liberal' is a dirty word.
.
And it's this persona Colbert invents that makes his comedy so brilliant - because Colbert can invite guests onto his show and mock them with abandon. The Daily Show is limited by it's liberal bias. The Colbert Report wallows in it's pretend conservatism.

For example, the Report had socialist documentary maker Michael Moore on the other night. Throughout the interview, Steven Colbert portrayed himself as an opinionated, laughable buffoon - spoofing all the comments real right wing opponents of Moore's work might make.

However those very same comments, which Michael Moore took in smug good humour, were actually sharp stabs at the real flaws and hypocrisy in Moore's 'documentary' film making techniques.

A straight interviewer would never have got away with hurling the insulting questions at the famously touchy Moore. On the Colbert Report, however, the pie-loving documentary maker thought he was in on the joke, when he was actually it's target. It made for exceptional television that satisfied on many levels.

Movies like Hot Fuzz show we Brits can still make 'em better than anybody else... But we'd better keep on the ball, or American Comedy will steal our crown.