Vulture.com Article: "Who Does Comedy Central Turn to Now? And Five Other Questions About Colbert’s Departure"
http://www.vulture.com/2014/04/stephen-colbert-letterman-analysis-questions-answered.html
This article concerns Colbert stepping into Letterman's shoes at CBS in the coming years and whom Comedy Central will be looking to choose to fill Colbert's vacant spot. However, the part of the article I want to focus on is this: Will a non-white, non-male ever get a network late-night gig?
I think the wrong questions were asked here. The responses all seem to point to them choosing the personality with the most experience and with a proven brand. Yet my own question is this: "Why haven't non-white, non-males been mentored and given opportunities to obtain the experience needed to establish a brand?"
The Comedy Central machine hasn't been diversified in developing talent in those roles that last, taking away the excuse that a white male was the most qualified for the job. Are they considering a non-white, non-male as the host of The Daily Show if Stewart eventually leaves? To be slotted in Colbert's time?
What about Saturday Night Live? Who is being groomed for pet projects there? Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, and Casey Wilson has been about the only non-males I can think of that have been mentored to advance up in the world of entertainment, but Tina Fey would be the only viable choice for a late-night gig, even if by a long shot.
And the fact that it's a long shot is concerning. Why did Stephen Colbert beat everyone by such a wide margin? Other potentials may have been consulted, but compared to him, they didn't really have a chance. It should have been a closer race, and the other players should have been more diversified--not because anyone was consciously trying to make an affirmative action decision, but just because there is no system of only going with the 'default' choice in placing comedians in these hosting positions from the beginnings of their careers.
Why let non-whites and non-males fend for themselves in the entertainment business? I'm sure they would love these kinds of opportunities, too. It's not as if they don't exist. A hard push from people in high positions who are in their corners would go a long way.
I do happen to like Stephen Colbert. A lot. I like his show and the character he's created and grew over the years. Hope I get to see it again on the Late Show. However, the decision by CBS only brings to light a frozen mindset that probably won't be broken until a non-white, non-male pulls her-/himself by the bootstraps and breaks out. But why can't it be that someone has been developing their career from the start?
This article concerns Colbert stepping into Letterman's shoes at CBS in the coming years and whom Comedy Central will be looking to choose to fill Colbert's vacant spot. However, the part of the article I want to focus on is this: Will a non-white, non-male ever get a network late-night gig?
I think the wrong questions were asked here. The responses all seem to point to them choosing the personality with the most experience and with a proven brand. Yet my own question is this: "Why haven't non-white, non-males been mentored and given opportunities to obtain the experience needed to establish a brand?"
The Comedy Central machine hasn't been diversified in developing talent in those roles that last, taking away the excuse that a white male was the most qualified for the job. Are they considering a non-white, non-male as the host of The Daily Show if Stewart eventually leaves? To be slotted in Colbert's time?
What about Saturday Night Live? Who is being groomed for pet projects there? Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, and Casey Wilson has been about the only non-males I can think of that have been mentored to advance up in the world of entertainment, but Tina Fey would be the only viable choice for a late-night gig, even if by a long shot.
And the fact that it's a long shot is concerning. Why did Stephen Colbert beat everyone by such a wide margin? Other potentials may have been consulted, but compared to him, they didn't really have a chance. It should have been a closer race, and the other players should have been more diversified--not because anyone was consciously trying to make an affirmative action decision, but just because there is no system of only going with the 'default' choice in placing comedians in these hosting positions from the beginnings of their careers.
Why let non-whites and non-males fend for themselves in the entertainment business? I'm sure they would love these kinds of opportunities, too. It's not as if they don't exist. A hard push from people in high positions who are in their corners would go a long way.
I do happen to like Stephen Colbert. A lot. I like his show and the character he's created and grew over the years. Hope I get to see it again on the Late Show. However, the decision by CBS only brings to light a frozen mindset that probably won't be broken until a non-white, non-male pulls her-/himself by the bootstraps and breaks out. But why can't it be that someone has been developing their career from the start?
Comments
Post a Comment