Politically Incorrect: David Letterman
Shapan Debnath | Oct 11, 2009 | Comments 2
David Letterman has always been known to push buttons. Part of his appeal has been that fact that he happens to do it very well. While Johnny Carson had his distinct niche during his hallowed “Tonight Show” reign and became the classic late night host, Letterman went the other way.
Letterman was a casual jackass, often making such a mockery of his craft that his audience had no choice but to laugh from shock. His influence runs so deep that even his major competitor in late night, the beloved Conan O’Brien, has repeatedly thanked Letterman for helping invent the kind of anti-show that O’Brien now thrives in.
With Letterman, you can expect the unexpected. While his act has definitely cooled down a bit between “Late Night” and “The Late Show,” he’s still loved for being the same pompous, irreverent guy. So it’s understandable that when Letterman had to reveal something serious about his personal life on the air, the audience would think it was a joke. Oh, but it surely wasn’t — not that the easy-going Letterman didn’t fool his audience a little.
Letterman kicked off October by coming clean with an extortion case that involved a CBS producer trying to blackmail the late night host. Letterman let his audience know about the entire thing without namedropping. Unlike any talk show host who would very likely stop the flow of the show to take a very serious tone, Letterman opened his confession with “I have a little story I would like to tell you, do you feel like a story?”
Although Letterman told the story candidly, it still felt like a joke. The audience laughed and Letterman didn’t stop them. As the story gained a little more weight, the audience cooled down, but even then there were still some light (and awkward) moments where the audience laughed. Letterman, even during such a fragile confessional, still went with the flow.
He confessed that he had affairs with female employees. Yes, the audience idiotically applauded infidelity, but hey, that’s American late night for you. This is the type of audience that Letterman helped sculpt. Letterman ended up telling the entire thing within 10 minutes, and even though it was very important that he let everything out in the public, he didn’t let it drag the show down.
There has been a lot of chatter about Letterman’s image and what he’s going to do about it. But really, what’s there to talk about? This is the same David Letterman that has spent his career ripping apart the generic image of a late night host. Of course he’s had commitment issues — the guy was with his current wife for over 20 years before he decided it was time to get married again. Even in that case, do any of us really care about Letterman’s personal life? Of all the late night hosts, Letterman is probably the last person concerned about image, so why should we care? Apparently, we don’t, at least for now. Letterman’s ratings continued to rise after his confessional, and his late night ratings war with his buddy O’Brien is still very competitive. I’m pretty happy about that. Amidst all this controversy about Letterman, it’s nice if people realize it shouldn’t affect how they feel about him as a late night host. You don’t need me or anyone else to tell you that cheating is wrong, and it’s even shadier when it’s with your employees. But did you ever like Letterman for being squeaky clean? Nope, it’s likely that you liked him for the opposite reason.
At the end of the day, people will say whatever they want about Letterman and it’ll just attract new people to a show that is already underappreciated as it is. From the way I see it, Letterman and O’Brien are both getting their viewers, Craig Ferguson is thriving an hour later, and Jay Leno’s ratings are awful. All is right in late night.
Popularity: unranked [?]
Filed Under: Entertainment
Yeah I completely see what you’re saying, and the internal structure of Letterman’s workplace is definitely unfair to these women. But that would be a different story, this column is more talking about Letterman’s public persona as an entertainer, not the morals behind his personal life. I think most people see Letterman as chauvinistic after this entire debacle. However it probably won’t effect his ratings much, as this event doesn’t really make people think, “Boy, David has sure changed.” His image hasn’t changed much because an event like this isn’t all that shocking. Had it happened to Jay Leno, then it would be more of a story.
You might see the big picture as being that internal work structure that definitely isn’t just restricted to David Letterman, but this column was written about something else. As far as women being subjected to things like this in order to secure themselves in a supposedly fair workplace, that’s a pretty broad issue, and it would take a lot more action than just the reprimanding of David Letterman. Would probably make a pretty interesting article.
Very well written, and completely beside the point.
Letterman has, as every American, the right to do in his private life, whatever he chooses. And the woman to whom he is committed must only decide whether or not she wants to endure. It is between the two of them, and an outside issue.
But the entitlement of persons in a workplace, also guaranteed by law to every American, is that no hint of privilege in return for sexual favors is given undue authority without check. You see, we are not Europeans, we have a terrible history to which all matters must be given precedence.
That history is slavery.
We could very well say that Sally Hemmings had the right to refuse sexual favors to Thomas Jefferson; but what if she had? yes, he was a single man, but she was a slave. And he wrote articles which akin blacks to animals while he was sleeping with Ms. Hemmings. Since she was not a sovereign human, with divine inalienable rights, he was doing nothing more than populating his stable of human animals, which was acceptable doctrine for those racist times.
But is David Letterman wildly different? does he give women who work for him the same inalienable sovereignty which he apparently bestows upon himself? Why was there no attraction to women NOT working for him? It’s not that Dave hadn’t the money or position to attract an independent woman with the right to say “no” without penalty.
The competition in the workplace, especially in these troubled financial times has to be fair and professional, and sleeping with the boss to guarantee your place in the flow of information, to be and “insider,” is…..slavery, masochism on the side of the woman, and sadism for poor Dave.
We made David Letterman, I have been a fan of his dry wit for many years, have agreed with him on so many issues, so I have no problem disagreeing with him on this one particular matter. I think that he is a chauvinist, a kid in a candy store, and the women’s movement should act quickly and decisively to take him out of the stable of humans he is abusing.