From the NY Post [original article]:
Gov. Paterson didn’t see the humor in a “Saturday Night Live” bit that mocked his blindness.
During the “Weekend Update” segment of NBC’s irreverent comedy show, actor Fred Armisen played Paterson, imitating his wandering eye, gravelly voice and blunt, self-effacing demeanor.
But Paterson and advocates for the visually impaired didn’t appreciate stock blind jokes that had Armisen pretending to be disoriented and wandering aimlessly.
“I can take a joke,” Paterson told reporters.
But he called the SNL spoof a “third-grade depiction of people and the way they look” that could lead others to believe that “disability goes hand-in-hand with an inability to run a government or business.”
“I run the place I work in, so I don’t have to be worried about being discriminated against,” noted Paterson
Although Paterson is legally blind and has aides help him with some tasks, the governor is rarely out of step with his surroundings and seems comfortable in virtually all settings.
After Armisen’s sketch with “Weekend Update” co-anchor Seth Meyers, the joke continued.
As longtime “SNL” player Amy Poehler was announcing her departure from the show, Armisen’s Paterson started wandering, as if lost, in front of the camera.
“Gov. Paterson . . . you’re in the shot!” a chuckling Poehler said.
The skit could leave viewers with the impression that blind Americans cannot be competent employees, advocates for the disabled said.
“When you have a perception problem like we have, you take these things a little more seriously,” said Chris Danielsen, spokesman for the National Federation of the Blind.
“We have 70 percent unemployment – and it’s not because we can’t work. Obviously, the governor of New York is blind, and he’s doing the job. Whenever you have a portrayal that calls the basic capacity of [blind people] into question, that’s a potential problem.”
Danielsen claims “SNL” has a long history of mocking the blind – going back to Eddie Murphy’s Stevie Wonder impression and, more recently, a “Weekend Update” one-liner that hybrid cars are dangerous to blind people because they can’t hear the engine.
Paterson’s spokesman, Errol Cockfield, said, “The governor is sure that ‘Saturday Night Live,’ with all of its talent, can find a way to be funny without being offensive,” Cockfield said.
“Knowing the governor, he might even have some suggestions himself.”
An NBC spokesman could not be reached for comment yesterday.
Okay, first I’ll admit it, I actually found the skit pretty darn funny. If that makes you hate me then I’d suggest not reading further because you’re not likely to enjoy what you’ll find.
In my personal experience the people who get in a tizzy over this kind of stuff are the same people that can never admit to walking face first into a door or slicing their thumb while chopping onions. Somehow, I get the impression Paterson is of that same mold. I’ll be the first to admit I’ve done things ten times funnier than that skit; in fact, I’m sure before the day is over I’ll do at least three. I’ve said on many ocassions that my life often resembles a sitcom so much so that many friends of mine have proposed I try and write one.
So, perhaps I’m not the right caliber of person to have an opinion on this, but suffice it to say I’m blind and I was hardly offended by Saturday’s skit. I especially got a kick out of the Poehler bit where Paterson walked through her monologue because I’ve actually walked through a news taping. While training with Dolly in Manhattan, she walked me right through the center of a bit about some street band. I remember the cameraman got all cranky about it and my reaction was quite literally to explain I was blind and hadn’t any idea what had happened. It wasn’t a smart reply, it was the truth. And honestly, Ellin and I laughed about it for most of the day afterwards.
The thing that actually caught my eye in this particular article is the statement regarding hybrid cars because this is actually something both the NFB and ACB are trying to get legislation on and I find it ridiculous. Which only goes to show, as far as I’m concerned, that comedy isn’t necessarily so off base from reality.
Anyway, if I were Paterson, I’d worry less about what people think of his disability and focus on a budget that doesn’t require a raise in my tuition. Tomorrow’s proposal doesn’t appear any less grim either.
I can see your point, but I can also see theirs. I didn’t see this skit, but I read a fairly thorough description, and I think the issue isn’t so much whether or not it’s offensive (and to many I’m sure it isn’t in the least) but about presenting people with disabilities who work as being incompetent and incapable. This is a bit of a sensitive subject for me, as I’ve struggled extensively in getting jobs because of people’s perceptions of people with disabilities similar to mine.
Is it wrong to show this type of thing about people with disabilities? No, not any more than parodying other involuntary aspects of a person’s identity, but it does stand to make many people’s lives harder, especially since there is essentially no representation in the media of people with disabilities being competent employees. When I apply for jobs, it often happens that a less qualified individual will get the position simply because it’s assumed that I won’t be capable, despite my qualifications.
I guess to sum up what I’m trying to say is that I don’t see this so much as an issue of SNL causing offense, but a unfortunate promotion of our society’s view that people with disabilities are incompetent and unemployable.
I get the reasoning behind people’s offense. I really do. I struggle with the same issues. I’ve lost out on apartments because of my guide dogs and people’s misconceptions about her. And I’ve had just as hard a struggle as anyone else in terms of finding a job. The last few notwithstanding, almost every interview I’ve ever had has showcased rather profoundly that people don’t understand how capable and competent a blind person can be. Let alone others with different physical disabilities.
But I think what makes me less inclined to be fired up about it is that fighting that kind of stuff only proves to add fuel to the flames as far as I’m concerned. People think that by their outrage they’ll get results, but in my experience that only serves to turn others off to those voicing such opinions. I’m not saying the picture painted is necessarily great in terms of how blind people are perceived in mass media, but the idea of the NFB and ACB being so vocally opposed to this only proves to me that these organizations waste far too much time on non-issues than the ones that really matter.
I get the point, I do. It’s the direction that people take with regards to it that I don’t agree with.
I understand what you’re getting at. I agree that public outrage is no good, and I think in many cases, extremely counterproductive. I lurk on the NAGDU mailing list, and I’m often shocked at how little they consider their own public image when protesting things like this. Nine times out of ten it comes across to the general public as whiny. What is needed (though I don’t know how we’d get it) is some way of positively portraying people with disabilities in places of employment. Not the whole “look at the nice employer being so kind as to offer the helpless cripple a job” type, but showing employees with disabilities as what they are…your everyday coworker. But sadly, I think that’s a long ways off.
NFB as a whole is very much like that. I think sometimes they feel the only way to get anything done is to be the loudest voice out there, regardless of what side of the fence they’re on regarding a particular issue. I lurk on the NAGDU list too and mostly I’m kind of glad I’m not a member. >_> I like to think ACB is slightly better, but even they can be short-sighted (no pun intended) on some things too. They do tend to be less quick with the reaction first type stuff at the very least.
And I agree completely about positive representation. I’ve had employers, teachers and landlords remark about how my own experience with them has shown them that they were ignorant of what a blind person really is capable of and that’s encouraging. But certainly it makes me wish and hope for something on a grander scale.
Great comments above me. As to showing accurate representations of blind employees, this would have been the perfect opportunity without all the whining. If I were Paterson I would have first pulled a Sarah Palin and invited myself on the show. Next I would have arranged an interview with Someone like Barbara Walters like the one obama just had, He could show her a day in the life of the governor of New York. He’s the governor of New York, responsible for appointing someone to fill Hilary’s seat, he could certainly get that sort of interview. He could mount a full scale education campaign on the media, and wouldn’t have to pay a dime to do it. But will he do that? Probably not. Whining about comedy skits will get you nothing but negative results, and what we really don’t want, pity. There is a place for complaining, like if the owners of your favorite website render said website less accessible than it was, and they refuse to listen to their customers, or you’re barred from boarding the subway with your dog, or you have evidence you’ve been discriminated against for a job because of your blindness. But even then you should also try to educate. How the NFB can oppose accessible money and then complain about this is beyond me. Anyone who’s watched the movie Ray would know accessible currency would be a good thing. I hope SNL does a funny skit about a blind guy at a fast food joint getting change for a $50 for a burger, then trying to get the girl at the counter who barely speaks English to tell him which is the $10, which is the $20 and which are the ones. Now that would be funny!