Discuss.

• RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,vince3, 12:07 PM, 09-29-10
  • RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Round Robin, 00:43 AM, 09-30-10
• RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Tahj, 03:45 PM, 09-30-10
  • RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Round Robin, 01:56 AM, 10-01-10
    • RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Tahj, 02:29 PM, 10-01-10
      • RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Round Robin, 03:03 AM, 10-02-10
        • RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Tahj, 12:04 PM, 10-02-10
          • RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Round Robin, 01:29 AM, 10-03-10
            • RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Tahj, 02:08 AM, 10-03-10
• RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Colonel Zoidberg, 04:13 PM, 09-30-10
• RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Nume, 06:09 PM, 09-30-10
  • RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Round Robin, 01:49 AM, 10-01-10
    • RE: ABC's boo re-edit: comedy or cowardice?,Nume, 05:44 AM, 10-01-10

Mainly cowardice that they threw the judges under the bus to protect Miss Sarah.

I find it hard to believe that the judges could be that clueless that the booing was entirely for them... Especially given Bruno's reaction as the Tom/Miss Sarah interview's audio came into play...

Pure cowardice. Sure, there are probably some pretty powerful people both in the company and in the political world that ABC didn't want to pi$$ off, and I'd bet a dollar to a donut that ABC probably got paid a nice chunk of change by somebody to put Bristol Palin on DWTS, but that shows an amazing lack of spine to expect the judges, Tom and the production people to fall on their swords and/or go to a bunch of extra work to keep Saint Sarah from looking unpopular. Hell, I'm a right winger myself and I don't like Sarah much, and if they're gonna make such a big deal out of the audience trying to boo her out of the studio, I hope Bristol gets voted off posthaste so the judges don't have to put up with that bull$hit again.

Well if the audience were truly booing Palin, I think it would have happened during the interview with Tom or right after, and it didn't. There were also other opportunities during the whole TWO hours but it also didn't happen. Seriously, she's there to watch her daughter and I think the audience respected that. This isn't a political event after all.

Then there's this little ditty:

http://www.showbizspy.com/article/214234/sarah-palin-wants-to-take-part-on-dancing-with-the-stars.html

It's a Tribe!

They were booing Palin before Tom interviewed her, not during, and I'll guaran-damn-tee you that the only reason they didn't boo her during the interview is that the production people probaby told them anybody booing Sarah during the interview would be thrown out. And they probably told them the same thing Tuesday.

I'm sure most viewers agree with you. If you and they prefer to think that, fine. I don't. The evidence is on the tape and until there's more evidence to the contrary, that's what happened. The rest is just speculation, even your "guaran-damn-tee."

It's a Tribe!

They knew they had a PR mess on their hands, and the had ample time overnight to doctor the tape so they could show what they wanted to show and sell what line of bull$hit they wanted to sell. If it walks like a duck and looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, IT'S A FREAKING DUCK!!! You can't prove what you're saying any more than I can prove what I'm saying, but I know hogwash when I see it, and I'll bet you a dollar to a donut that the tape was doctored and it was Sarah Palin they were booing, not the judges.

I'm not trying to prove anything. Being forceful about your opinions and claiming you're sure that's what happened doesn't mean anything.

If it walks like a duck and looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, IT'S A FREAKING DUCK!!!

Exactly. And what we see and hear on that tape points to booing of the judges. There is no indication at all that they are booing Palin. Again, what you are asserting is pure speculation and your calling it the duck. We'll never know if the tape was doctored. It doesn't look like it to me, but, sure, it could have been. Anything is possible. Only the people who were there really know what happened and, once again, no one has come forward to make any statements about what happened except Tom Bergeron. Here's the link.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2010/09/29/2010-09-29_dancing_with_the_stars_goes_to_great_lengths_to_prove_sarah_palin_wasnt_jeered_o.html

What he says makes sense to me and he points to the Shirley Sherrod incident as comparison.

"Something as innocuous as sitting next to the mother of a competitor with the right convergence of events turned into this major imbroglio."

It's a Tribe!

Bergeron has to talk the party line to keep his job, so I'd hardly accord his statements any special credibilty. It wasn't just any competitor's mother he was about to talk to, that competitor's mother happens to be a famous politician who a lot of people hate with a bleeding passion, and before ABC gets the rest of us to believe their bull$hit they'll need a lot more than some hastily ginned-up re-editing and some unproven blather from an overpaid host who's probably watching his back every second till this blows over. Anybody who wishes to do so may drink all of ABC's Kool-Aid they please, but don't expect the rest of us to swallow their hot air without a lot better proof than that.

Well, it's more than you've got and that's what I'm pointing out. And re drinking the kool-aid--it's such a predictable pattern that so many people are so quick and willing to jump to conclusions because of what they want to believe. It's a rush to judgement because it's the fast and easy thing to do. Drink up.

It's a Tribe!

We all know a large chunk of the country believes that it should be illegal to criticize, boo, or mock anyone in the Palin family.

Having ABC validate them is ludicrous, cowardly, and dumb. Now I might have to take the show out of my DVR out of principle...except my wife likes Audrina and The Situation...and I was rooting for Kurt Warner.

Incidentally, I heard that about three-quarters of the population of Philadelphia was just relocated to Guantanamo Bay since Tuesday.

I think it was a pure business move on ABC's part, and a smart one at that. The way they did it, it may ##### off some people, but they're people who are already solid fans of the show and who probably wont stop watching because of it. They didnt hurt the judges in any way (they get boo'd all the time...), so it made sense for them to do their best to preserve relations with the entire demographic they were hoping to bring in by having Bristol on the show in the first place. Its all about maximizing viewership.

The judges get booed all the time, yes, but it was still unfair to throw them under the bus to avoid pi$$ing off the Palins and/or their supporters. Increasing your audience and making more money ain't worth your network's integrity, and a network whose political integrity was pretty close to running on empty anyway sure didn't need to pull a stunt like this.

Since when have tv entertainment shows cared about "fairness"? And whether you like it or not, they did indeed do it to get more viewers/money. The judges surely arent going to quit/even complain about it in any way, and whether you agree with Sarah Palin or not, she is indeed a very well known figure who has a lot of fans. In the end, tv is about money. You may wish it was about fairness and integrity, but I cant think of a single network that puts those over making money.