“The principal forms of our physical and social environment are fixed in representations…and we ourselves are fashioned in relation to them.” - Serge Moscovici
In response to the discussion question from coursework, I do think that it was more effective for Colbert to testify in character (assuming that doing so doesn't make his testimony a "lie" or unacceptable in court for some reason.) There are two reasons for this. 1) A lot of the points he made were more effective because of his character, because he was allowed to say things that were slightly outrageous but probably true in his mind, e.g., the "they better keep farming because I don't want to do it- it sucks" type of comment. 2) The Stephen Colbert character is one that I've seen people of all ages, race, and gender enjoy. Many people in congress probably watch his show, and thus would find his testimony more captivating and interesting.
In response to the discussion question from coursework, I do think that it was more effective for Colbert to testify in character (assuming that doing so doesn't make his testimony a "lie" or unacceptable in court for some reason.) There are two reasons for this. 1) A lot of the points he made were more effective because of his character, because he was allowed to say things that were slightly outrageous but probably true in his mind, e.g., the "they better keep farming because I don't want to do it- it sucks" type of comment. 2) The Stephen Colbert character is one that I've seen people of all ages, race, and gender enjoy. Many people in congress probably watch his show, and thus would find his testimony more captivating and interesting.
ReplyDelete