Said Jimmy Kimmel, responding to a question about the effect of politics on his ratings, quoted in a Daily Beast interview with the inaccurate title "Jimmy Kimmel Doesn’t Want to ‘Appeal’ to Trump Fans: ‘I Don’t Think That World Exists Anymore.'"
I clicked through based on that headline, which made me feel that Kimmel had either meant that Trump doesn't have fans anymore or that the people who like Trump are just nonpeople as far as he's concerned. But what he means, as I read the larger context, is that TV has changed, and there are so many choices now that it's no longer the case that a late-night talk show needs to appeal to everyone. That might have been the way TV was done long ago, for example, when Johnny Carson did "The Tonight Show," but these days, taking on the limitations inherent in being likable to everyone isn't worth it.
But Kimmel is concerned about reaching a lot of people, because he explains his willingness to make fun of Trump in terms of the ignorance of the audience:
You don’t want to have to spend three minutes explaining a story to your audience. And if there is anything good about Donald Trump, it’s that people are paying attention to what’s going on in the White House. And you can make jokes about subjects that people might not have been paying attention to when Obama was president or Bush was president. Because he is such a colorful character and there is so much attention put on everything he says and does. So that makes it ideal for comedy. You don’t have to set up the setup. I’ve always felt that my job, even during my radio days, is to talk about the events of the day.So it's not that he's writing off the Trump fans so much as he's hungry for some material that will actually make people laugh.
And this was interesting:
In 2004, you were going to have Omarosa on.... And the legend is that she thought there was going to be a lie detector test, freaked out and left before her appearance. Is that an accurate description of what happened?Ironically, her reaction to the idea of a lie detector test is some evidence that she is a liar. But it's rather weak evidence. For one thing, being asked — as part of the show — to take the test is humiliating. It implicitly accuses her of being a liar. And a nonliar could feel anxious about taking the test and the anxiety could make you feel that you would fail the test.
Yes, what happened was, my Uncle Frank lied about something. And I thought it would be funny to give him a fake lie detector test on the air, something that he thought was real. She saw the setup for the lie detector test and decided that we were going to spring it on her, which, if you know anything about taking a polygraph test, that’s not how it works. It takes a long time. There’s no ding and no buzz. It’s a chart that they analyze afterwards. So that was preposterous just to start with. But she stormed out of there and the show was live so we had no guest. I don’t remember what I talked about, I probably just talked about her the whole time. But she was very angry. And I remember thinking it’s better this way. I didn’t want to have her on the show. The woman — there’s clearly something wrong with her. And the fact that Donald Trump hired her is really all you need to know about that guy and his organization.
ADDED: At this point in writing this post, I went looking in my archive for an earlier post explaining a point of evidence, the inference about a person's state of mind produced by the refusal to take a test even where that person is wrong about the test. It was something about "the ordeal of the bier" that I used to teach in Evidence class. And — ha ha — here's the old post, from April 29, 2004, "Omarosa and ... the ordeal of the bier!" I blogged it in the very context of the old Jimmy Kimmel show!
AND: Quoted at the 2004 post:
“The lie-detector test wasn’t even for her,” a spokeswoman for the show told the Scoop. “It was intended for Jimmy’s Uncle Frank [a regular character on the show], but when Omarosa saw it, she just freaked.” Some fellow contestants have accused Omarosa Manigault-Stallworth of lying when she said one of them used the N-word. “We tried and tried to calm her down, but she just kept saying ‘I’m not going on stage with that lie detector test’ then she just walked out.”First, interesting that the lie in question was about her saying somebody used the N-word. Second, how do we know they aren't lying about how they intended to use the lie detector? Even if they had some routine with Uncle Frank, that would have made lie detecting a subject that might be referred to in other parts of the show, an ongoing theme that Jimmy could tap. Since Omarosa didn't go on the show, we never found out, and the story that it was always only for Uncle Frank cannot be tested. Maybe Jimmy's lying.
८२ टिप्पण्या:
but these days, taking on the limitations inherent in being likable to everyone isn't worth it.
That's been the news strategy since Jessica in the Well. Soap opera women.
It sounds like he's saying that he wants an audience who agrees with him. He's not interested in reaching out to others. Which is fine, entertainers want people to like them, that's part of the point.
But he can stick his moral preening.
Jimmy Kimmel is just another partisan leftie ass. No wonder he doesn’t see another way. I’d love to warch a Carson. Merv would be great.! but lefties crave, need affitmation of thier righteousness. A daily dose. Neutral doesn’t get them where they need to be. That’s why it doesn’t exist anymore.
"It sounds like he's saying that he wants an audience who agrees with him."
I think it's more that he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended.
I strongly encourage that approach to comedy.
Kimmel says that the Colorado baker looks like a fag himself.
It's hard to come up with comedy like that today that can please your Lefty audience.
Kimmel is desperate to keep his popularity high in a Seriously real Donald Trump world, and his phony silliness is now leaving people cold. But it was fun while it lasted.
Ann Althouse said...
"It sounds like he's saying that he wants an audience who agrees with him."
I think it's more that he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended."
Or he's saying he wants to use comedy as agitprop.
I think it's more that he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended.
Lucky for him that those who might be offended are not the ones who control his employment.
Instead of a monologue, he can run over a plank positioned above a chipper/shredder every night.
I'll let him start with a 2 x 12, and he can plane a 1/16 of an inch off both sides every day.
Anticipation = comedy gold.
free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended.
"Offended" is overused and inapt. I'm not offended by Kimmel, just bored and not interested in watching his show.
He is competing for the same small audience that the others pursue.
It’s a poor strategy.
And if the general audience no longer exists, that’s because the Left killed it.
I think it's more that he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended.
He might first work on finding an audience that doesn't need to fret about laughing at his sexist and homophobic jokes. Look at how social media works these days. Users can be labeled liberal or conservative based on the stories they decide to view. And now some of the users are being sanctioned for their interests.
Althouse,
It’s cute that you think people laugh at Kimmel.
Clapter is not laughter.
I'm doing the mental exercise of substituting "Greg Gutfeld" for "Jimmy Kimmel."
And with that, it all seems so tame as to be a non-story.
Ann Althouse said...I think it's more that he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended
That's the charitable interpretation. Problem is, you have to assume he doesn't care about success. Given his recent history, I'm not so inclined to charity.
‘I Don’t Think That World Exists Anymore.'
I think this is the other side of the 500-channels-and-there-is-nothing-on coin. The balkanization of TV land.
Alt house said...
I think it's more that he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended.
I strongly encourage that approach to comedy.
The calibration is still there, but only in terms of what will please or trigger the leftist outrage mob, that’s all.
The debasement of comedy, if you ask me.
Gov. Christie was not the only overweight person in public life, but I can't recall anyone who was ever ridiculed so much and so relentlessly about his weight......I voted for Trump because he was the better candidate, not because he was the best candidate. Hillary as a candidate was far more absurd and ridiculous than Trump. SNL, for a time, inadvertently presented a far crueler parody of Hillary than of Trump. They straightened it out, but it's an easy mistake for a comedian to make. I don't watch Kimmel, but I presume he avoids this problem by only mocking Trump and his supporters,
I thought he was still on The Man Show in 2004.
There used to be many non-political standup shows on evening cable. Are there still?
Broadcast networks are almost all unscripted contest/reality/award shows.
Ann Althouse said...I think it's more that he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended.
OK. So, that bit where he used his son as a prop to browbeat Republicans about healthcare was one of these "jokes" you mention?
Same with his rants about gun control? More "jokes?"
Actually, I think he just finds it so much easier to preach to the converted.
And you can make jokes about subjects that people might not have been paying attention to when Obama was president or Bush was president.
There were plenty of jokes about Bush. Most of them were just versions of "isn't he stupid?". I don't remember hearing very many about Obama and the ones that I did were just variations of "he's so cool, aren't those other people stupid?".
My local ABC network affiliate helpfully runs all of his anti-Trump jokes as a part of its local morning news. I'll be eternally grateful.
Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire,
The comparison with Gutfeld is a good one. They both appeal to a small sliver of a market. There is almost no competition for Gutfeld’s sliver.
And the property Kimmel inherited was valuable. Kimmel has overseen it’s decreasing value.
Gutfeld created a property that was nearly worthless. And it hasn’t lost value.
Are you always so thick or do you save it for us? If so, quit doing us the favor.
Althouse at 8:51 This is a coffee spewing moment. Kimmel would be the first to object to an Andrew Dice Clay show.
"I think this is the other side of the 500-channels-and-there-is-nothing-on coin. The balkanization of TV land."
I agree.
I should correct myself. One fundamental difference between Jimmy Kimmel and Greg Gutfeld, is what Kimmel said about ABC; that ABC would be happiest if his show appealed to everyone, but that world doesn't exist anymore.
The Fox News channel isn't in that old world, and it is responsible, to a great extent, for making the new media world, and neither Fox News nor Greg Gutfeld are concerned about appealing to everyone.
Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire, pines for the days when the big three networks could enforce rigid Leftism on a public without choice.
Careful with that mask.
What I took from the post, "The woman — there’s clearly something wrong with her."
Kimmel got something right.
It would help taking Kimmel seriously if he were funny.
Someone else said it better, he preaches to the converted.
...he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended.
I strongly encourage that approach to comedy.
So you're ok with Polish jokes? I'm confused.
Carnac the Magnificent predicted all this.
I've never found him to be that funny, but his argument (why he's not attempting to appeal to a broader audience) may be good. TV has changed and audiences for late night TV are probably smaller and more focused for a number of reasons.
Obviously there's plethora of alternatives to standard late night fare in out modern age. But I think another factor may be the effect that Jon Stewart's Daily Show had on late night comedy. For 15 years Jon Stewart's political night show trained an entire generation to expect and consume left leaning political comedy/satire at night. When he retired the void he left couldn't be filled by any of the sad pretenders that Comedy Central has put forth. So I think the more "mainstream" late night hosts picked up the slack (Colbert was from the same ecosystem as Stewart so it was super easy for him). As a conservative it's sad, but it's business.
I don't watch late night chat shows much, but I've long thought Kimmel's was the best, and that he was the funniest host.
It doesn't matter if Omarosa is right about whether or not Trump or anyone else said "nigger". They COULD have said it, and that is proof enough for me. And I don't care if they said it; they have my permission.
"...the fact that Donald Trump hired her is really all you need to know about that guy and his organization."
That makes sense, since he hired her to be, what was it, Secretary of Defense, or Commerce, or something like that? Very poor judgment, Mr. Trump!
It would help taking Kimmel seriously if he were funny.
Someone else said it better
No, they didn't.
I read Omarosa also worked for Gore in the 90's.
I think it's more that he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended.
Naturally. He's a liberal. Meaning, if you force them to live by the same rules they impose on everyone else, they become the victim.
I put it down to lazy.
He has an hour to fill and he isn't that talented. His young team of writers clearly are Bubble Boys, so don't know HOW to do centerist comedy.
All he needs to do is run a news report on a stupid person and say 'Trump supporter' and he gets his laugh.
Not in my wheelhouse anymore.
Nor are the networks. It's like Zuckerberg: they want Consetvative eyeballs and money while clearly despising them. No thanks
Even I would trust Jimmy Kimmel before Omarosa.
TV shows live and die by their ability to attract an audience that advertisers desire. There are a lot of different late night shows out there and it seems every single one of them has decided to write off about half of the country. Each show is an echo chamber within itself. When you have a dozen or so shows all trying to attract the same audience*, the only way any show can gain marketshare is by being more outrageously anti-Trump than the others. Sounds like a programming recipe for low ratings all around.
*The audience they're fighting over is a Venn diagram consisting of people who watch late-night TV and people who are anti-Trump. People who watch late-night TV are likely people who don't have to get up and go to work early in the morning.
After Trump won, I naively thought the late night fools, after the beclowning they received on Election Night, would hire conservative writers, make more fun of the Never Trump silliness etc. Boy was I wrong! They just tripled down on whining and staying in The Bubble of LA and/or NYC.
To claim half the country is Trump's is an exaggeration worthy of Trump so Kimmel can keep appealing to folks with his Trump jokes, as he should, and still expect an sizable audience.
Birkel said...
Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire, pines for the days when the big three networks could enforce rigid Leftism on a public without choice.
Careful with that mask.
Of course, that is completely wrong, Birkel.
And let's be completely clear; the people who complain about the "mainstream media" are those on the right, and the kookier-right you are, the more invested you are, in creating the myth that the mainstream left-leaning media is all-powerful.
I have been under no illusions about how the three broadcast networks tilt their coverage, and limit themselves to what they deem to be politically correct. But now the most popular cable news network is the Trump-adoring Fox News Channel.
And for along time, one of the biggest national newspapers has been the Wall Street Journal.
It is people like you, Birkel, who seem to be so invested in the power of the three networks and NPR, the NYT, and WaPo. Not me. I subscribe to the Journal, I read the Weekly Standard, and National Review, and rarely watch the networks.
Isn't 'calibrating who might be offended' central to the art of joke writing?
I was grateful to see Althouse post this part of the Kimmel quote, but didn't see her address it substantively:
"The woman — there’s clearly something wrong with her. And the fact that Donald Trump hired her is really all you need to know about that guy and his organization."
Kimmel is trying to entertain people with TDS every night. Its an artistic and creative prison that can kill your soul.
"...he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended."
Spot on.
Too bad Gavin McInness and other conservatives don't have that freedom without lefties being all too willing to resort to violence.
"So it's not that he's writing off the Trump fans so much as he's hungry for some material that will actually make people laugh."
"Strictly business", eh?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qvpcfYFHcw
Decades ago I read a piece noting that in early TV the Borscht Belt comedians were incredibly popular, but ratings began to tank when broadcast signals reached middle America which didn't find that humor funny. Or had they simply not been trained to find it funny. Or has there never been a universal funny bone?
RV
What percentage of the country is Trump's in your view? 40%,? 10,%?
Kimmel has been pretty consistent with his politics and style and I have never watched him much. Really, not at all in the last several years. When I first realized he existed it was as Sarah Silverman's boyfriend and that made him interesting at the time. I think Jimmy Fallon's story is much more interesting. For a bit, I was watching him some and refreshed by his relatively apolitical or, at least maybe even-handed, style. This was probably during the primaries and general election of 2015-16. I remember that his ratings fell and he seemed to panic and start doing the same dull anti-Trump stuff that the rest of them are doing. I stopped watching him regularly, as well, but on the few nights I am still up with the TV, I occasionally check on his monologue. I did this a couple of weeks ago and he went right into a really weak Trump joke/attack. Clicked on down the dial. Having said all that, I think Kimmel is right that it is impossible to cross the comedy aisle these days and he might as well not worry about it and do what he wants.
According to the polls he has a solid 30% of the voters; we know over half the voters went for Hillary and a good number sat out. I can't guess, but I suspect his voters will not have a huge effect on late night ratings.
Blogger Chuck said...
I should correct myself. One fundamental difference between Jimmy Kimmel and Greg Gutfeld, is what Kimmel said about ABC; that ABC would be happiest if his show appealed to everyone, but that world doesn't exist anymore.
That’s Baloney. Why did they toss Tim Allen?
Disney could create those shows they choose not to. Look at their kids content.
Hillary: I'm shocked that Trump would pay women to keep quiet about sex.
Bill: What an idiot?
Hillary: You got to kill them.
Bill: Damn straight!
This is how comedy is done.
It's not just the television world that's changed, Jimmy. It's audiences all over the country. Recently, a nightclub entertainer played at a large public university. Part of his schtick was to bring a female audience member on stage and make remarks filled with sexual innuendo. This has been standard fare for nightclubs for centuries, but this entertainer was booed offstage by "offended" female audience members, forced to apologize for his act and the university gave refunds to all who asked for them. Imagine, a bunch of college students who are bothered by sex talk!! The university I attended used to show porn movies on movie night!!! Nobody protested or got "offended" about it. If that wasn't their thing, they didn't go. It seems that today, we need to issue bubble wrap garments along with social security numbers at birth, so as never EVER to subject anyone to something that might hurt their feelings.
Kimmel is good friends with Adam Carolla (his Man Show partner), and Carolla is definitely not a left-winger (though I don't think he's a Trump supporter), and is probably best described as a libertarian. And Kimmel's other ex-TV-show partner is Ben Stein, who's unapologetically conservative (though I don't know if he supports Trump). I wonder what his old friends think of Kimmel's swing leftward.
I would take his claim that media is more balkanized more seriously if it weren't for the fact that the vast majority of them are balkanized to the Left.
I mean, you would think that we'd have 3-4 Late Night programs and one or two would be conservative, but no.
90% of the news media is Left. That's not balkanization that's the Left being irritated that they don't have 100%.
My local TV station also does the morning "Late Night Laughs" segment, which is always some anti-Trump diatribe. They just do it so they can say what they want to say while pretending to just be sharing something someone else said.
I wonder what his old friends think of Kimmel's swing leftward.
It's not personal. It's business.
dbzdak,
His former partners think the ABC checks keep clearing and they understand.
Love the opportunity to virtue my signal. I quit watching late night talk when Johnny Carson retired. For 10-years before JC retired, Letterman was all the rage with my 20's demographic. Couldn't stand him then or now. I only know Kimmel from Fox N.F.L. Sunday and he wasn't funny then. John Stewart was pretty good some of the times, but his replacement is dreck shampoo on prednisone.
kimmel swing left likely THC induced dreamland viewed thru a pipe.
Fuck you, too, Jimmy Kimmel.
Millions and millions of dollars at stake for Kimmel. He does what pays him well. Also, he believes most people agree with him, and maybe they do
Far as advertising dollars, not that important or potential hit Roseanne would not have been dumped so quick.
If Republicans maintain control after November, TDS may subside a bit until 2020. By then however, if economy still strong, gonna be tough for dems to recreate current hysteria. That is one reason they keep all things Trump front and center. All about up coming election.
Revealed preference shows that it's bullshit to claim that ABC values someone who appeals to a wider audience over someone who expresses the "correct" politics. If any of the three legacy networks would allow desire for an audience override their political bias, they'd put in a right-of-center late night host to gather the audience that the other two (and TBS, with Conan and Bee) are leaving on the table. And instantly shoot to #1 in the ratings because the others would be splitting the left-of-center audience (see Fox News versus the other cable news outlets).
"Our audience is becoming more selective." Ian Faith, manager, Spinal Tap
Kimmel did a bang-up job at the Oscars, too. Ian Faith would be proud
[hollywood reporter]
Oscars Drop to All-Time Low 26.5 Million Viewers
The telecast stumbles an unfortunate 19 percent from 2017.
I fully support Kimmel running his show as he sees fit, but that bit about not wanting to calibrate his show to fit a broader audience is disingenuous at best- he clearly doesn't want to offend the Left. Right now Kimmel and the other late night hosts are fighting over the same sliver of the potential audience- that is cutting off your nose in spite of your face.
These writers are missing a large fount of humor by only going after the Right. If my job was as a comedy writer, I wouldn't let my politics direct my work this way- it is self-sabotage, in my opinion.
And now to defend Kimmel a bit:
What are the demographics of late night TV? The audience surely leans very young and thus quite a bit left. Middle-aged people have day jobs that they can't skip the next morning and sleep in. Most older and retired people I have known go to bed early, too, and rise at 4 in the morning. Could a late night show that leans the other way from all the others be #1? Not sure that is the case.
Jay Leno, on nights off, used to do a set at a comedy club in Hermosa Beach to try out material. One Sunday night, he told a funny story about when he was a teenager and his father made him go along to the hardware store to return a toilet seat that had a twenty year warranty. The toilet seat was older than Jay. There is so much humanity in what I just typed. And, yes, it's very American. Does Jimmy Kimmel have anything to say about his old man? About the country he grew up in?
Jimmy Kimmel: Butt Boy for the Hive. If Ellsworth Toohey were a real character and still alive, Kimmel would be one of his entourage.
Jimmy Kimmel? The sexist pig from The Man Show?
That Jimmy Kimmel?
Darrel wrote:
"'Hillary: I'm shocked that Trump would pay women to keep quiet about sex.
'Bill: What an idiot?
'Hillary: You got to kill them.
'Bill: Damn straight!'
"This is how comedy is done."
It made me laugh out loud, anyway.
RV, Hillary did not get more than half the voters. She got 48%, a plurality, not a majority.
Kimmel can slant his show however he wants, but it's tiresome when his and all the other shows slant relentlessly in one directions. Theoretically, the President, any President, will be the biggest target of political humor because of his position, but after 8 years of Obama, we all know that theory and reality don't align.
And if the Dems' strategy of first woman, first Hispanic, first openly gay, first transgender President continued, no jokes about the President would be allowed.
I think it's more that he wants to be free to write jokes that people will laugh at without having to calibrate who might be offended.
This says more about his current audience than the audience he doesn’t have. Maybe he is aware that he can’t make jokes about what the left find unfunny lest he finds himself crucified.
What are the demographics of late night TV? The audience surely leans very young and thus quite a bit left.
"Quite a bit" doesn't mean they aren't leaving money on the table.
There are three legacy networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) and two basic-cable networks (TBS, Comedy Central) all doing the left-of-center late night comedy talk show thing, with a combined audience of 7.2 million in the 11/11:30 segment for August 13-17 2018.
So, let's make three assumptions.
1) The partisan lean in the potential audience is the two-to-one D over R that matches the Pew data on Millennials as a cohort.
2) Half of the R-side of the potential audience don't watch at all because of the partisanship, but would watch a right-of-center host.
3) Our new R-side host would win the R-side viewers; the D-side viewers of the guy he replaced would move to one of the surviving D-side hosts, proportionate to their current audiences.
In that case, the potential audience is 8.4 million. Assuming Kimmel is the guy dropped, we wind up with Colbert 3.1 (currently 2.9), New Guy 2.8, Fallon 2.3 (currently 2.2), Cable 0.2 (currently 0.3).
So, sure, not instant #1, just a close #2.
"I don’t really see any other path. I also think one of the biggest mistakes you can make as a performer is trying to guess what your audience wants.“
So Kimmel is telling us that he does not understand his own audience? Why am I not surprised?
In the olden days, Johnny Carson (or Bob Hope) could mock politicians on both sides, and if the jokes were funny, everyone (EVERYONE !!!) laughed. (Hell, go back to Will Rogers, who said, I'm a member of no organized political party; I'm a Democrat. Everyone laughed.) But today, much of the Left, particularly those who are closest to the university world, believe that anyone who disagrees with them, who dissents from the orthodoxy, is a HATER!!!! You wouldn't laugh at a HATEFUL joke, would you? You'd be ashamed. The lefty comedians are the canaries in the coal mine. When everyone (EVERYONE!!!) was sure Hillary was going to win the 2016 election, it was OK to poke a little light-hearted fun at her on SNL. Nowadays, to do humor that could be perceived as pro-Trump would be like singing Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott at the Vatican. Ask Roseanne.
Our real problem is an intolerance problem. In the 1950's that problem was on the Right. Now it's on the Left.
I fully support Kimmel running his show as he sees fit, but that bit about not wanting to calibrate his show to fit a broader audience is disingenuous at best- he clearly doesn't want to offend the Left.
It's the Left that got him this job and is keeping him in this job.
There's lots of guys who are funnier and better hosts who are barely scraping by at the margins (or completely out) of show biz, while Kimmel has a multi-million dollar gig. If you were Kimmel, wouldn't you do the same thing? Why piss off the gatekeepers, when the gatekeepers are the difference between "making seven figures on national TV" and "making almost nothing working at a comedy club in Topeka"?
Kimmel is not funny to millions and millions of people and that's good enough for me.
Sounds like the old Spinal tap joke:
"Marty: The last time Tap toured America, they where, uh, booked into 10,000 seat arenas, and 15,000 seat venues, and it seems that now, on their current tour they're being booked into 1,200 seat arenas, 1,500 seat arenas, and uh I was just wondering, does this mean uh...the popularity of the group is waning?
Ian: Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no...no, no, not at all. I, I, I just think that the.. uh.. their appeal is becoming more selective."
...
R-V you extrapolate from “voters” to “the country” but in a nation of 330,000,000 people only about 145,000,000 showed up to vote. So Hillary! only received votes from about 21% of Americans.
So it's not that he's writing off the Trump fans so much as he's hungry for some material that will actually make people laugh.
He should try saying something funny, then. And I'm not being facetious. Kimmel's jokes aren't even jokes in the traditional sense - they're just group signifiers designed to appeal to an in-group by excluding the out-group. If you listen closely you'll realize his audience isn't laughing - they're cheering. The same way you'd cheer at a sporting event.
This kind of stuff is so simple you could churn it out with a computer program, and I guess if your in-group is large enough for advertisers you can make a business model out of it.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा