Hasan Minhaj's New Yorker response: that was not who I am
October 26, 2023 4:13 PM Subscribe
Hasan replies in his best medium. Many will make their own decisions.
Like any fight the actual truth will exist somewhere in the middle. Pretty sure his stand up will have changed. It would have been nice if the New Yorker and him could have worked it out together. (Perhaps the New Yorker will). Hasan likely will be a changed performer.
Like any fight the actual truth will exist somewhere in the middle. Pretty sure his stand up will have changed. It would have been nice if the New Yorker and him could have worked it out together. (Perhaps the New Yorker will). Hasan likely will be a changed performer.
Like any fight the actual truth will exist somewhere in the middle.
That is not the impression I'm left with here, not at all.
posted by mhoye at 4:42 PM on October 26, 2023 [46 favorites]
That is not the impression I'm left with here, not at all.
posted by mhoye at 4:42 PM on October 26, 2023 [46 favorites]
Wow. This is very embarrassing for the New Yorker. I hope they fire that staff writer.
posted by dobbs at 5:03 PM on October 26, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by dobbs at 5:03 PM on October 26, 2023 [5 favorites]
Thanks for posting this, it greatly reduced my respect for the New Yorker and its reputation for rigorous fact checking. I'm not even sure Minhaj had anything to apologize for at all, he does explain political comedy is based on facts but it would never have occurred to me that a standup comedian was held to some sort of journalistic standard. In any case, as he says, ironic that the NYer didn't fact check their own story nor use the extensive documentation he gave them.
posted by Rumple at 5:37 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by Rumple at 5:37 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
Methinks Hasan protesteth too much...
posted by Czjewel at 5:42 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by Czjewel at 5:42 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
As an FYI, Hasan has lost out on the Daily Show gig due to this.
As someone who does real life storytelling (NOT making up shit) and used to be a reporter yonks ago, I'm conflicted!
I'm not sure what to make of this at all. I've always liked the guy before this. I don't like that he made up some shit, but yes, there's a difference between "storytelling comedian" and "political comedian." If I were Hasan, I would have stuck to the latter and not blurred things because his primary reputation is for truthfulness and the news, not for doing a liar's contest (which is a thing in the storytelling world) or "tall tales." I've always found it a bit weird and irritating on some level with the storytelling people I know who do vacillate between telling true to life stuff and telling obviously ridiculous stuff that might be originally based on something real, or they do something that seems to be in the middle and you're not entirely sure what to buy or believe. Hasan seems to have wandered into that mushball middle territory. People have told me that it's okay if I fudge some facts or combine some people or shit like that ("creative nonfiction"), but I categorically refuse to in my own stories, exactly so nothing like this happens. Standup stories aren't the first thing we think of with him, so no wonder we're having this issue.
I find myself liking him again, watching this, darn it. I love it when someone has receipts. But I'm not sure what to think any more. I hope he improves. I want him to not be "a fucking psycho," per him. I hope he learns from this and it kind of sounds like he has, but we'll have to see in the future.
posted by jenfullmoon at 5:43 PM on October 26, 2023 [7 favorites]
As someone who does real life storytelling (NOT making up shit) and used to be a reporter yonks ago, I'm conflicted!
I'm not sure what to make of this at all. I've always liked the guy before this. I don't like that he made up some shit, but yes, there's a difference between "storytelling comedian" and "political comedian." If I were Hasan, I would have stuck to the latter and not blurred things because his primary reputation is for truthfulness and the news, not for doing a liar's contest (which is a thing in the storytelling world) or "tall tales." I've always found it a bit weird and irritating on some level with the storytelling people I know who do vacillate between telling true to life stuff and telling obviously ridiculous stuff that might be originally based on something real, or they do something that seems to be in the middle and you're not entirely sure what to buy or believe. Hasan seems to have wandered into that mushball middle territory. People have told me that it's okay if I fudge some facts or combine some people or shit like that ("creative nonfiction"), but I categorically refuse to in my own stories, exactly so nothing like this happens. Standup stories aren't the first thing we think of with him, so no wonder we're having this issue.
I find myself liking him again, watching this, darn it. I love it when someone has receipts. But I'm not sure what to think any more. I hope he improves. I want him to not be "a fucking psycho," per him. I hope he learns from this and it kind of sounds like he has, but we'll have to see in the future.
posted by jenfullmoon at 5:43 PM on October 26, 2023 [7 favorites]
He's very convincing that he has been badly misrepresented, and he brought receipts.
Yeah, the audio clips with the reporter where she's listening to what he's saying explaining all this, and then goes ahead and writes the opposite in the article. She already had her story written in her mind and he was just filling in some details for her.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 5:44 PM on October 26, 2023 [23 favorites]
Yeah, the audio clips with the reporter where she's listening to what he's saying explaining all this, and then goes ahead and writes the opposite in the article. She already had her story written in her mind and he was just filling in some details for her.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 5:44 PM on October 26, 2023 [23 favorites]
The point of the Daily Show had long become that news media has some systemic and serious flaws.
I had thought the New Yorker was shit before this. I am glad, both that he apologized, and that he pointed out that no other comedian has been given this treatment. To me, it is evidence of some racist decisions on the part of the New Yorker, although I would understand if people disagreed.
posted by eustatic at 5:48 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
I had thought the New Yorker was shit before this. I am glad, both that he apologized, and that he pointed out that no other comedian has been given this treatment. To me, it is evidence of some racist decisions on the part of the New Yorker, although I would understand if people disagreed.
posted by eustatic at 5:48 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
Methinks Hasan protesteth too much...
How exactly? I admit I'm not a fan of his (and I was a fan of The New Yorker) but his receipts seem compelling to me. In my opinion The New Yorker owes him an apology and perhaps a retraction.
posted by phliar at 5:56 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
How exactly? I admit I'm not a fan of his (and I was a fan of The New Yorker) but his receipts seem compelling to me. In my opinion The New Yorker owes him an apology and perhaps a retraction.
posted by phliar at 5:56 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
This reminds me of the time Phyllis Diller was cancelled and her career destroyed because somebody reported that her idiot husband 'Fang' didn't exist. Which never happened.
posted by zaixfeep at 6:01 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by zaixfeep at 6:01 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
For more context, here’s the previous MetaFilter thread on Clare Malone fact-checking Minhaj in the New Yorker.
posted by mbrubeck at 6:01 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by mbrubeck at 6:01 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
She already had her story written in her mind and he was just filling in some details for her.
it's funny, I suppose, how this approach makes me far more uncomfortable than the discomfort she clearly wants readers to feel about Minhaj's work
hearing the audio, I'm not sure how conscious it is on her part, but even in the best-faith reading I'd have she's still being negligent in failing to clarify on things that she then states as fact in the peice.
it's a shame -- I liked malone's work at 538 (back at a time in my life when I was more able to read a website like 538), and would have hoped the subject matter here would have led to a particular excess of care and attention to detail
posted by Kybard at 6:02 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
it's funny, I suppose, how this approach makes me far more uncomfortable than the discomfort she clearly wants readers to feel about Minhaj's work
hearing the audio, I'm not sure how conscious it is on her part, but even in the best-faith reading I'd have she's still being negligent in failing to clarify on things that she then states as fact in the peice.
it's a shame -- I liked malone's work at 538 (back at a time in my life when I was more able to read a website like 538), and would have hoped the subject matter here would have led to a particular excess of care and attention to detail
posted by Kybard at 6:02 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
Wow, I've been side-stepping this video every time YouTube suggested it to me because I've seen SO MANY cringe response videos to various accusations and scandals that I just couldn't possibly with this one.
But now I will take the time to watch. Thanks for posting. No opinions on the content I haven't viewed.
posted by hippybear at 6:09 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
But now I will take the time to watch. Thanks for posting. No opinions on the content I haven't viewed.
posted by hippybear at 6:09 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
This is reminding me of the episode between This American Life and Mike Daisey about his monologue about Foxconn factories that made iPhones. What I took away from that was that if you are doing any kind of performance where the value of the story you are telling is that it is what really happened, you have a responsibility to tell the absolute truth. If being transparent about your elisions, composites, exaggerations, or re-sequencing would diminish the impact of your story, you should leave it out.
I do think some of Minaj's standup comes right up to that line. Unlike Daisey's monologues, however, the impact of the standup shows comes from the jokes and the delivery. The Netflix show was in a different register, and there seems to be no insinuation that he was sloppy with facts there. This reflects much worse on the New Yorker and Malone than it does on Minaj, imo.
posted by mtthwkrl at 6:31 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
I do think some of Minaj's standup comes right up to that line. Unlike Daisey's monologues, however, the impact of the standup shows comes from the jokes and the delivery. The Netflix show was in a different register, and there seems to be no insinuation that he was sloppy with facts there. This reflects much worse on the New Yorker and Malone than it does on Minaj, imo.
posted by mtthwkrl at 6:31 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
Wow.
I mean, I have to keep in mind this was produced by a team of professionals but yeah, very compelling. The article was weirdly decontextualized from comedy more broadly, or even 'edutaining' comedy in the John Steward mold. So even if the New Yorker were to respond to this response, I don't see how they can deny that aspect of this.
posted by latkes at 6:44 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
I mean, I have to keep in mind this was produced by a team of professionals but yeah, very compelling. The article was weirdly decontextualized from comedy more broadly, or even 'edutaining' comedy in the John Steward mold. So even if the New Yorker were to respond to this response, I don't see how they can deny that aspect of this.
posted by latkes at 6:44 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
Like any fight the actual truth will exist somewhere in the middle.
That is not the impression I'm left with here, not at all.
I’m not 100 percent sure what the original assertion here means or what the negation means, if I’m being honest, but the whole thing does seem to illustrate how comedians and reporters both selectively edit for effect. Of course, there’s a reason we don’t usually hold those two categories to the same standard. The chief reason some of Minhaj’s editing felt over the line to begin with is that he deals with some serious, reporterly topics.
posted by atoxyl at 6:45 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
That is not the impression I'm left with here, not at all.
I’m not 100 percent sure what the original assertion here means or what the negation means, if I’m being honest, but the whole thing does seem to illustrate how comedians and reporters both selectively edit for effect. Of course, there’s a reason we don’t usually hold those two categories to the same standard. The chief reason some of Minhaj’s editing felt over the line to begin with is that he deals with some serious, reporterly topics.
posted by atoxyl at 6:45 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
So even if the New Yorker were to respond to this response
"I stand by my story..." yadda yadda yadda.
posted by dobbs at 6:50 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
"I stand by my story..." yadda yadda yadda.
posted by dobbs at 6:50 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
I’ve only made it through the part about the prom bit (which is the only one I’ve actually seen) but I said before that I didn’t feel like the article really conveyed the spirit in which it was told. Certainly the way people online reacted to the article made it seem like they didn’t pick up on it.
posted by atoxyl at 6:55 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by atoxyl at 6:55 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
Does anyone have examples of a white male comedian or white woman comedian who has had such an article written like this about their work? If not, what about POC comedians? Bonus points if they are taking over an institution like The Daily Show? I'm really curious, because the original article itself was written in a pretty outrageous tone...It just feels too much like a smear campaign, and it makes me wonder if white comedians are held up to the same standards as him.
posted by yueliang at 7:07 PM on October 26, 2023 [36 favorites]
posted by yueliang at 7:07 PM on October 26, 2023 [36 favorites]
This video is a really interesting breakdown of artistic choices, and what makes good storytelling, and what mix of truth and invention is appropriate in what genre. In particular, Minhaj's discussion of the fake anthrax letter anecdote, and what he pulled from that event and the broader situation to communicate the experience of being terrorized by random threats while caring for small children, is extremely well-done. I'm sorry that it was done in the context of a news article with major career consequences.
I'm not familiar with anyone involved except the New Yorker, but the journalist and New Yorker come across as being... very interested in ethics in stand-up comedy? From the audio recordings provided, the journalist was cherry-picking and editing Minhaj's quotes like I did writing essays in high school, with no respect for the underlying source material.
I am also not overly familiar with stand-up comedy as a genre, but as I remember, the act that usually had me fleeing the family television involved a ventriloquist puppet of a 'dead terrorist'? So I feel like comedians have some amount of leeway to be inventive. At least the way Minhaj tells it here, he does respect the source material in his stand-up work, in the sense that he tries to convey his lived experience in a genre-appropriate (i.e. funny) way. (I am more familiar with theater, where the rule is never let the facts get in the way of a good scene or musical number.)
posted by mersen at 7:43 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
I'm not familiar with anyone involved except the New Yorker, but the journalist and New Yorker come across as being... very interested in ethics in stand-up comedy? From the audio recordings provided, the journalist was cherry-picking and editing Minhaj's quotes like I did writing essays in high school, with no respect for the underlying source material.
I am also not overly familiar with stand-up comedy as a genre, but as I remember, the act that usually had me fleeing the family television involved a ventriloquist puppet of a 'dead terrorist'? So I feel like comedians have some amount of leeway to be inventive. At least the way Minhaj tells it here, he does respect the source material in his stand-up work, in the sense that he tries to convey his lived experience in a genre-appropriate (i.e. funny) way. (I am more familiar with theater, where the rule is never let the facts get in the way of a good scene or musical number.)
posted by mersen at 7:43 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
It feels like Minhaj is setting this up as his credibility vs. Clare Malone's (the New Yorker reporter), as if the piece was solely based on interviews with him about his misrepresentations, ignoring the many supporting interviews she did with former employees and associates of Minhaj's, including the woman who he previously caused to be harassed with the prom story.
posted by usr2047 at 7:57 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by usr2047 at 7:57 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
Nick Swardson has a joke where he feeds his cat something weird in it, like human hair or something (I forget) and he follows it up with someone getting mad at him for that joke because he clearly was harming the cat. He then says: “are you an idiot?” And then jokes about how it wasn’t obviously true but now he goes home to feed his cat the hair because now all jokes must be true.
Anyway, if you’re consuming stand up and expect the comedy routine to be a 100% reflection of what actually happened, you’re a fool and misinterpreting things.
I never saw his stand up but this looks really bad for the New Yorker.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:58 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
Anyway, if you’re consuming stand up and expect the comedy routine to be a 100% reflection of what actually happened, you’re a fool and misinterpreting things.
I never saw his stand up but this looks really bad for the New Yorker.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:58 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
including the woman who he previously caused to be harassed with the prom story
Did you watch a different video
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:59 PM on October 26, 2023 [21 favorites]
Did you watch a different video
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:59 PM on October 26, 2023 [21 favorites]
John Steward
Jon Stewart, perhaps?
Searching "John Steward" doesn't yield anything really.
posted by hippybear at 8:08 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
Jon Stewart, perhaps?
Searching "John Steward" doesn't yield anything really.
posted by hippybear at 8:08 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
Did you watch a different video
My point was poorly made. He is showing old emails from 'Bethany' that appear to support his argument, but ignoring that she spoke to the New Yorker later and gave a different story. He doesn't address why, if in his opinion she confirmed his story about racism and was fine with the story in the show, she would later be upset about it (which the NYer article reports is due to harassment she received, due in part to him showing a photo of her at some shows and poorly concealing her identity).
He also pulls the classic trick of complaining that because a reporter didn't print a full transcript of an entire conversation, that quotes are somehow twisted or selectively edited or whatever. Reading the transcript of the exchange with Malone about the doorstep story and her summary of it, it seems to be an accurate summation of what he said, and trimming quotes and combining sentences (from only one paragraph later on) is totally normal journalistic practice, as is nodding along and being sympathetic to the person being interviewed in order to keep them talking.
posted by usr2047 at 8:11 PM on October 26, 2023 [9 favorites]
My point was poorly made. He is showing old emails from 'Bethany' that appear to support his argument, but ignoring that she spoke to the New Yorker later and gave a different story. He doesn't address why, if in his opinion she confirmed his story about racism and was fine with the story in the show, she would later be upset about it (which the NYer article reports is due to harassment she received, due in part to him showing a photo of her at some shows and poorly concealing her identity).
He also pulls the classic trick of complaining that because a reporter didn't print a full transcript of an entire conversation, that quotes are somehow twisted or selectively edited or whatever. Reading the transcript of the exchange with Malone about the doorstep story and her summary of it, it seems to be an accurate summation of what he said, and trimming quotes and combining sentences (from only one paragraph later on) is totally normal journalistic practice, as is nodding along and being sympathetic to the person being interviewed in order to keep them talking.
posted by usr2047 at 8:11 PM on October 26, 2023 [9 favorites]
but ignoring that she spoke to the New Yorker later and gave a different story.
Did she tho? She said she was doxxed. She never disputed the racism part. Is the gist of it? That Hasan was insufficiently careful about someone’s identity who appears in his jokes? Why am i reading about that in the New Yorker?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 8:21 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
Did she tho? She said she was doxxed. She never disputed the racism part. Is the gist of it? That Hasan was insufficiently careful about someone’s identity who appears in his jokes? Why am i reading about that in the New Yorker?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 8:21 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
New Yorker, according to AV Club, stands by their story.
posted by jenfullmoon at 8:33 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by jenfullmoon at 8:33 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
Wow, we're getting into weird online beef territory.
Logan Paul, accused by Coffeezilla, is backed up by iiluminaughtii, who is then exposed by etc etc etc.
posted by hippybear at 8:36 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
Logan Paul, accused by Coffeezilla, is backed up by iiluminaughtii, who is then exposed by etc etc etc.
posted by hippybear at 8:36 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
I rewatched the video and reread the article. The article is poorly written and Minhaj is a bad liar who is using a lot of poorly placed pathos. I'm going to save my explanation and analysis, since I don't really feel like writing it all out and putting it here right now.
posted by yueliang at 8:37 PM on October 26, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by yueliang at 8:37 PM on October 26, 2023 [7 favorites]
I don't think Hasan Minaj is a very good comic. I also don't see why his work warrants this type of scrutiny? Why do we care so much about this? ppl were slightly less racist to him than we thought? So what?
posted by sid at 8:44 PM on October 26, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by sid at 8:44 PM on October 26, 2023 [5 favorites]
I will say, if there is such a thing as Resting Bitch Face, which I think is true for both men and women because this is a non-gendered concept in faces...
I think that Hasan suffers from a thing where he presents as pleading to be accepted as trustworthy and innocent with what he is saying even while there is something about his face that subconsciously reads as "I am bullshitting you". It's something about the eyebrows and other gestures combined with vocal tone....
Look, I'm not saying he's lying! There's just a tiny thing in there which reads, to me, as that. And I don't think I'm the only one. And I think in Patriot Act I took that, let's say it's a tic. I think in Patriot Act I took that tic and felt it was effective because it said as an undercurrent "I am saying a thing that is not necessarily really true but you feel should be true and that untruth is okay because that's what we're trying to get at here".
And I can't say how often that was a part of Patriot Act because I'm not going back to watch it, I'm just speaking from emotional memory here.
I think the difference is with these newer things, after that, is that they were presented not as Hasan playing a Jon Stewart part on the stage, that is spinning out a yarn that contains a truth within it but probably is stretched to get to "the funny"... But that in his stand up, he's speaking and is leading the audience to believe he's telling a story about himself.
And so THAT is why any of this matters. Hasan has a face that is at once earnest even while it seems to be bullshitting you. And if that is in service of comedy, we're okay with that. But if that is is service of truth, well, it's more difficult to be bullshitted in service of truth, even if truth is the end result.
posted by hippybear at 8:49 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
I think that Hasan suffers from a thing where he presents as pleading to be accepted as trustworthy and innocent with what he is saying even while there is something about his face that subconsciously reads as "I am bullshitting you". It's something about the eyebrows and other gestures combined with vocal tone....
Look, I'm not saying he's lying! There's just a tiny thing in there which reads, to me, as that. And I don't think I'm the only one. And I think in Patriot Act I took that, let's say it's a tic. I think in Patriot Act I took that tic and felt it was effective because it said as an undercurrent "I am saying a thing that is not necessarily really true but you feel should be true and that untruth is okay because that's what we're trying to get at here".
And I can't say how often that was a part of Patriot Act because I'm not going back to watch it, I'm just speaking from emotional memory here.
I think the difference is with these newer things, after that, is that they were presented not as Hasan playing a Jon Stewart part on the stage, that is spinning out a yarn that contains a truth within it but probably is stretched to get to "the funny"... But that in his stand up, he's speaking and is leading the audience to believe he's telling a story about himself.
And so THAT is why any of this matters. Hasan has a face that is at once earnest even while it seems to be bullshitting you. And if that is in service of comedy, we're okay with that. But if that is is service of truth, well, it's more difficult to be bullshitted in service of truth, even if truth is the end result.
posted by hippybear at 8:49 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
I am in no place to watch this right now and will get to it later, but the meta-commentary around Malone’s story at the time was about how no one in the comment community had voiced support for Minhaj despite previously backing, say, Louis CK over much worse stuff. Race probably played a factor in that (as it does) but the other idea was that the story passed the general smell test among those who had worked with Minhaj.
posted by Going To Maine at 8:51 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by Going To Maine at 8:51 PM on October 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
One of the things that seemed most potentially objectionable (certainly it got a lot of play in the other thread) was of him showing a picture of the high school ex. He says here: "even in the Netflix special I don't use any real photos of Bethany or her family those are actors and their faces are blurred..." They're talking about the same thing, yes?
posted by praemunire at 9:16 PM on October 26, 2023 [9 favorites]
posted by praemunire at 9:16 PM on October 26, 2023 [9 favorites]
He also pulls the classic trick of complaining that because a reporter didn't print a full transcript of an entire conversation, that quotes are somehow twisted or selectively edited or whatever.
No, he's using his own excerpts from the full transcript to show exactly how selected fragments of those excerpts were cherry-picked to prop up the reporter's preconceived angle. That's typically not how the "classic trick" you mention is played: the standard form involves making completely context-free claims of having been taken out of context and expecting your audience to take those on faith.
If the New Yorker wants to claim that Minaj's excerpts were themselves cherry-picked, they are of course completely free to bring their own receipts in a rebuttal. I doubt we'll see that, not when they have the classic trick of "standing by their story" from a position of presumed journalistic authority so ready to hand.
posted by flabdablet at 9:21 PM on October 26, 2023 [18 favorites]
No, he's using his own excerpts from the full transcript to show exactly how selected fragments of those excerpts were cherry-picked to prop up the reporter's preconceived angle. That's typically not how the "classic trick" you mention is played: the standard form involves making completely context-free claims of having been taken out of context and expecting your audience to take those on faith.
If the New Yorker wants to claim that Minaj's excerpts were themselves cherry-picked, they are of course completely free to bring their own receipts in a rebuttal. I doubt we'll see that, not when they have the classic trick of "standing by their story" from a position of presumed journalistic authority so ready to hand.
posted by flabdablet at 9:21 PM on October 26, 2023 [18 favorites]
Yeah, the audio clips with the reporter where she's listening to what he's saying explaining all this, and then goes ahead and writes the opposite in the article. She already had her story written in her mind and he was just filling in some details for her.
As someone who has been interviewed by Claire Malone, I will say that she's actually incredibly thorough, but yes, she does tend to have a very "give you enough rope to hang yourself" interviewing style. That doesn't mean she's a bad reporter. Just because she doesn't report what he's saying as truth doesn't mean she's "reporting the opposite". She talked to Bethany, and she talked to him for example - and found one more convincing than the other.
Minhaj also is absolutely changing the goalposts, too. He's saying "Oh, she said I made up racism." No, she said that the story didn't happen the way Minhaj said it did, and that Bethany told her she felt humiliated. And you know what? Honestly, I believe Bethany probably did say that to Claire Malone because I think it's highly probable that what someone tells a trained reporter who is trying to ferret out feelings, and what someone tells their famous ex who they don't want to have a bad opinion of them are going to be different. Like, you know what, if my exes asked me about direct quotes I have said about them I'd probably be like "Whaaaat? That's so crazy" despite absolutely saying them because there's a power imbalance and I don't want to deal with their shit. Also, "race was a factor" isn't the same as "I was turned away at the door because of the photos".
He's also absolutely trying to turn people on Claire Malone as a way of turning them off himself, which...honestly kind of makes me feel the vibe in her article was even more solid.
posted by corb at 9:46 PM on October 26, 2023 [40 favorites]
As someone who has been interviewed by Claire Malone, I will say that she's actually incredibly thorough, but yes, she does tend to have a very "give you enough rope to hang yourself" interviewing style. That doesn't mean she's a bad reporter. Just because she doesn't report what he's saying as truth doesn't mean she's "reporting the opposite". She talked to Bethany, and she talked to him for example - and found one more convincing than the other.
Minhaj also is absolutely changing the goalposts, too. He's saying "Oh, she said I made up racism." No, she said that the story didn't happen the way Minhaj said it did, and that Bethany told her she felt humiliated. And you know what? Honestly, I believe Bethany probably did say that to Claire Malone because I think it's highly probable that what someone tells a trained reporter who is trying to ferret out feelings, and what someone tells their famous ex who they don't want to have a bad opinion of them are going to be different. Like, you know what, if my exes asked me about direct quotes I have said about them I'd probably be like "Whaaaat? That's so crazy" despite absolutely saying them because there's a power imbalance and I don't want to deal with their shit. Also, "race was a factor" isn't the same as "I was turned away at the door because of the photos".
He's also absolutely trying to turn people on Claire Malone as a way of turning them off himself, which...honestly kind of makes me feel the vibe in her article was even more solid.
posted by corb at 9:46 PM on October 26, 2023 [40 favorites]
Here's the thing: why didn't the New Yorker just post the full set of on-the-record transcripts from their interviews / fact-checking with Minhaj alongside their piece? Once upon a time, we didn't have the page space to include every little bit of primary-source information backing a reported piece... but digital information is basically free. The only reason I can think of to have all that backing information, but hold it back, is to cherry-pick data to support a constructed narrative.
posted by rishabguha at 9:52 PM on October 26, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by rishabguha at 9:52 PM on October 26, 2023 [5 favorites]
As an FYI, Hasan has lost out on the Daily Show gig due to this.Good.
posted by kickingtheground at 10:14 PM on October 26, 2023 [3 favorites]
I have a very low expectation that the stories told by a standup are 100% factual. In fact I mostly assume they are fictional. The fact he was telling parables that conveyed a true story is more than I expect.
posted by ShakeyJake at 10:15 PM on October 26, 2023 [15 favorites]
posted by ShakeyJake at 10:15 PM on October 26, 2023 [15 favorites]
from their interviews / fact-checking with Minhaj alongside their piece?
Is this the norm for any publication?
posted by Going To Maine at 10:16 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
Is this the norm for any publication?
posted by Going To Maine at 10:16 PM on October 26, 2023 [6 favorites]
Is this the norm for any publication?
Not really, though outlets like the Times are getting better and better at hyperlinking relevant evidence and hosting relevant documents. But part of my underlying question here is: why not? If the goal is genuinely to inform readers, is there any reason not to hyperlink the assertion that Minhaj invited his ex-girlfriend to the show to a little footnote that says "Minhaj disputes this," and screenshots of the evidence?
posted by rishabguha at 10:24 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
Not really, though outlets like the Times are getting better and better at hyperlinking relevant evidence and hosting relevant documents. But part of my underlying question here is: why not? If the goal is genuinely to inform readers, is there any reason not to hyperlink the assertion that Minhaj invited his ex-girlfriend to the show to a little footnote that says "Minhaj disputes this," and screenshots of the evidence?
posted by rishabguha at 10:24 PM on October 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
He's saying "Oh, she said I made up racism."
Whether or not the New Yorker piece said so in so many words, the idea that Minhaj has indeed just been making shit up that never happened to him and/or misappropriating other people's stories just to promote his own brand seems to be a conclusion that's easily drawn from it.
Perfectly clear to me that it was a hit piece, and a very effective one at that. Also clear to me that if selective embellishment in service of getting to the core of a thing is deemed unacceptable then so should selective elision be, doubly so when performed by the person doing the deeming.
posted by flabdablet at 10:37 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
Whether or not the New Yorker piece said so in so many words, the idea that Minhaj has indeed just been making shit up that never happened to him and/or misappropriating other people's stories just to promote his own brand seems to be a conclusion that's easily drawn from it.
Perfectly clear to me that it was a hit piece, and a very effective one at that. Also clear to me that if selective embellishment in service of getting to the core of a thing is deemed unacceptable then so should selective elision be, doubly so when performed by the person doing the deeming.
posted by flabdablet at 10:37 PM on October 26, 2023 [8 favorites]
I think that Hasan suffers from a thing where he presents as pleading to be accepted as trustworthy and innocent with what he is saying even while there is something about his face that subconsciously reads as "I am bullshitting you". -- hippybearThis is a reaction to tiny cultural differences that borders on racism. At best it might be something attributable to a minor neural divergence, possibly on the autism spectrum.
Either way, it's a shitty way to evaluate someone. Have you tried listening to the words and exercising critical thinking?
posted by krisjohn at 10:39 PM on October 26, 2023 [35 favorites]
Everyone wants to be Isaac Chotiner now, but Chotiner goes after the big bads and Minhaj Hasan isn't that.
posted by hypnogogue at 10:41 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by hypnogogue at 10:41 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
Everyone wants to be Isaac Chotiner now, but Chotiner goes after the big bads and Minhaj Hasan isn't that.
Chotiner does interviews. Malone did a profile. I can understand why the one might be confused for the other, but the two are essentially different things.
posted by Going To Maine at 10:49 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
Chotiner does interviews. Malone did a profile. I can understand why the one might be confused for the other, but the two are essentially different things.
posted by Going To Maine at 10:49 PM on October 26, 2023 [4 favorites]
I feel like this may be an unpopular opinion but IMO, Hasan is a slick humblebraggart. Come on, opening with "I've been asked by a lot of people to give my perspective on what is happening in the [middle east]"? There are ways to convey your awareness of your position as a brown skinned muslim living in America without suggesting that this New Yorker article is stopping you from the very important work of you making your opinions on the middle east heard.
That said, I don't expect stand up comedy to be truthful either. That part of the New Yorker article always felt off to me - why is his comedy being fact checked, when it was clearly a stand up special and not his Patriot Act show? It's fine, it's funny, it's punchy. It was an OK special.
What I did find disturbing was with "Bethany" getting doxxed and harassed because of the stories he told, because the embellishment cast her and her family in an especially bad light, and I wanted to know what was up with that.
In this respect, I feel like he's done a really bad job. He talks a lot about how "Bethany" was OK with this by citing past correspondence (that of course make him look good), throws out a brief aside apologising for any hurt he caused, and... that seems to be it? Maybe I missed it, but I thought he didn't address any of the points the New Yorker article raised when they interviewed their other sources, including this "Bethany". The overall impression I'm getting, whether true or not, is that he does indeed not really give a damn about Bethany's concerns, just that he's sorry. This must have been deliberate, it can't have been a mistake, right?
(The "I REAAAAAAALLY don't care about prom, guys, I swear" also really threw me off).
posted by theony at 10:53 PM on October 26, 2023 [9 favorites]
That said, I don't expect stand up comedy to be truthful either. That part of the New Yorker article always felt off to me - why is his comedy being fact checked, when it was clearly a stand up special and not his Patriot Act show? It's fine, it's funny, it's punchy. It was an OK special.
What I did find disturbing was with "Bethany" getting doxxed and harassed because of the stories he told, because the embellishment cast her and her family in an especially bad light, and I wanted to know what was up with that.
In this respect, I feel like he's done a really bad job. He talks a lot about how "Bethany" was OK with this by citing past correspondence (that of course make him look good), throws out a brief aside apologising for any hurt he caused, and... that seems to be it? Maybe I missed it, but I thought he didn't address any of the points the New Yorker article raised when they interviewed their other sources, including this "Bethany". The overall impression I'm getting, whether true or not, is that he does indeed not really give a damn about Bethany's concerns, just that he's sorry. This must have been deliberate, it can't have been a mistake, right?
(The "I REAAAAAAALLY don't care about prom, guys, I swear" also really threw me off).
posted by theony at 10:53 PM on October 26, 2023 [9 favorites]
why didn't the New Yorker just post the full set of on-the-record transcripts from their interviews / fact-checking with Minhaj alongside their piece?
It’s work product. Honestly, Minhaj releasing audio actually damages the practice of Malone’s interview practices, which he knows, which I’m sure is half of why he did it- because he feels annoyed that even though this diminutive woman Was in front of him saying “sure”, she didn’t actually mean she agrees with him! Much, again, I imagine, like Bethany.
posted by corb at 11:19 PM on October 26, 2023 [11 favorites]
It’s work product. Honestly, Minhaj releasing audio actually damages the practice of Malone’s interview practices, which he knows, which I’m sure is half of why he did it- because he feels annoyed that even though this diminutive woman Was in front of him saying “sure”, she didn’t actually mean she agrees with him! Much, again, I imagine, like Bethany.
posted by corb at 11:19 PM on October 26, 2023 [11 favorites]
I think I've reached an internal compromise where both sides are insufferable.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:33 PM on October 26, 2023 [10 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:33 PM on October 26, 2023 [10 favorites]
Seems like Minhaj and Bethany had their disagreements, seems like they still do. Bethany didn't realize how much her parents' racism affected Minhaj, and Minhaj still doesn't seem to realize how much using that story for his stand-up affected Bethany. The one thing they don't seem to disagree about however is that Bethany's parents were racist.
That's kinda an important point that Malone leaves out. Clearly, her article is not just about a comedian fudging the details. She explicity raises the question - if this stuff is so important to him, why does he make it up? Her take is that he's lying about the important stuff, not just about the timing of the rejection, which would be a detail, but also about the motivation, which is what's important to him.
And he hasn't. He might still be a shitty boss and coworker. He's refusing to be held accountable for Bethany's plight. There might be a ton of stuff you can criticize him for. But he didn't lie about the racism.
posted by sohalt at 11:42 PM on October 26, 2023 [16 favorites]
That's kinda an important point that Malone leaves out. Clearly, her article is not just about a comedian fudging the details. She explicity raises the question - if this stuff is so important to him, why does he make it up? Her take is that he's lying about the important stuff, not just about the timing of the rejection, which would be a detail, but also about the motivation, which is what's important to him.
And he hasn't. He might still be a shitty boss and coworker. He's refusing to be held accountable for Bethany's plight. There might be a ton of stuff you can criticize him for. But he didn't lie about the racism.
posted by sohalt at 11:42 PM on October 26, 2023 [16 favorites]
Minhaj also is absolutely changing the goalposts, too. He's saying "Oh, she said I made up racism."
Malone may not have said that, but plenty of people did once “anti-woke” media and social media picked up the story. An unpleasant reality of the contemporary world is that they are pretty much inevitably siccing the hordes on each other just by having this back and forth.
posted by atoxyl at 12:05 AM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
Malone may not have said that, but plenty of people did once “anti-woke” media and social media picked up the story. An unpleasant reality of the contemporary world is that they are pretty much inevitably siccing the hordes on each other just by having this back and forth.
posted by atoxyl at 12:05 AM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
Minhaj releasing audio actually damages the practice of Malone’s interview practices
If a journalist's interview practices are such that releasing an audio of the interview "damages" them, those practices sure do not sound ethical.
Usually it's the journalist releasing a recording/transcript to back up their unflattering portrait of the interviewee. The fact that defending the journalist in this case leads to saying the recording should not have been released... speaks volumes.
I think I've reached an internal compromise where both sides are insufferable.
Sort of same. One is not suited for the specific type of comedy he aims for; the other is bad at journalism, period. I am fine with Minhaj losing out on the Daily Show gig, and wish for Malone to lose her gig at New Yorker.
posted by fatehunter at 1:10 AM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]
If a journalist's interview practices are such that releasing an audio of the interview "damages" them, those practices sure do not sound ethical.
Usually it's the journalist releasing a recording/transcript to back up their unflattering portrait of the interviewee. The fact that defending the journalist in this case leads to saying the recording should not have been released... speaks volumes.
I think I've reached an internal compromise where both sides are insufferable.
Sort of same. One is not suited for the specific type of comedy he aims for; the other is bad at journalism, period. I am fine with Minhaj losing out on the Daily Show gig, and wish for Malone to lose her gig at New Yorker.
posted by fatehunter at 1:10 AM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]
I kept watching Hasan's video waiting for him to disprove that idea he's a fabulist and it ended up hurting Bethany, but it didn't happen.
He's correct that the article ignores what he said in the interview about the understanding he came to with Bethany that her parents were racist. If he's correct and everyone agreed that Bethany's parents were racist it still doesn't give him license to lie about what happened on television without obscuring enough information to prevent Bethany being doxxed. You don't get to slander someone on television because their parents are racist.
Then he said he was lying about the white powder story to protect his staff and family. He wasn't willing to tell the truth to protect Bethany.
posted by zymil at 1:39 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
He's correct that the article ignores what he said in the interview about the understanding he came to with Bethany that her parents were racist. If he's correct and everyone agreed that Bethany's parents were racist it still doesn't give him license to lie about what happened on television without obscuring enough information to prevent Bethany being doxxed. You don't get to slander someone on television because their parents are racist.
Then he said he was lying about the white powder story to protect his staff and family. He wasn't willing to tell the truth to protect Bethany.
posted by zymil at 1:39 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
Again, what other comedian has been targeted like this, and why?
posted by eustatic at 2:02 AM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
posted by eustatic at 2:02 AM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
Again, what other comedian has been targeted like this, and why?
I mean, Mike Daisey remains a fine example. I said it in the previous thread, but once a comedian starts getting into specific political things (eg the mosque infiltrator, which bothered me) then you get held up to higher scrutiny. (Again, still haven’t seen the video, maybe he recontextualizes that and the Anthrax thing. If he didn’t, I’m still miffed at him.)
posted by Going To Maine at 2:17 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
I mean, Mike Daisey remains a fine example. I said it in the previous thread, but once a comedian starts getting into specific political things (eg the mosque infiltrator, which bothered me) then you get held up to higher scrutiny. (Again, still haven’t seen the video, maybe he recontextualizes that and the Anthrax thing. If he didn’t, I’m still miffed at him.)
posted by Going To Maine at 2:17 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
If a journalist's interview practices are such that releasing an audio of the interview "damages" them, those practices sure do not sound ethical.
Investigative reporting, and even detective reporting, is well within sound journalistic ethics. Their commitment is to the truth, not to the people they’re investigating. Nelly Bly, for example, generally honored and even the subject of a postage stamp for women’s journalism, did not owe the truth to the insane asylum staff she exposed, but rather to the public. Similarly, if reporters want to expose celebrities who lie about others and create intolerable working conditions while coasting on a “lovable rascal” persona, their job is not to tell the celebrities they are writing an unflattering story before they do so, but rather to get the celebrities comfortable enough to talk and see what falls from their lips..
posted by corb at 2:33 AM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
Investigative reporting, and even detective reporting, is well within sound journalistic ethics. Their commitment is to the truth, not to the people they’re investigating. Nelly Bly, for example, generally honored and even the subject of a postage stamp for women’s journalism, did not owe the truth to the insane asylum staff she exposed, but rather to the public. Similarly, if reporters want to expose celebrities who lie about others and create intolerable working conditions while coasting on a “lovable rascal” persona, their job is not to tell the celebrities they are writing an unflattering story before they do so, but rather to get the celebrities comfortable enough to talk and see what falls from their lips..
posted by corb at 2:33 AM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
I haven't engaged much with Minhaj's work, so don't really have the background connection to feel disappointed or outraged or a really anything regarding this particular story. But I did find the video interesting in that what comes through is that we as an audience seem to expect at least three things from comedians (and an additional one from comedians from ethnic minorities) that seem to be in tension, namely, specificity and truthfulness in their stories, anonymity for the people talked about in their stories, that the stories hit regular humorous beats, and (for ethnic minority comedians) economical provision of context for people from outside those communities. It sounds like Minhaj's process is an attempt to balance all those and that he doesn't get it right a lot of the time. However, it's also worth recognising that at least some of those failings are in response to our expectations as an audience which are almost impossible to fulfill.
posted by nangua at 3:07 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by nangua at 3:07 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
Here’s the other thing.
Didn’t come away from that New Yorker thinking he was a psycho. Came away thinking he was doing political comedy to highlight injustices in society and he justified telling crisp stories for the ends justify the means type.
Like didn’t know who Shane Gillis was and he’s trending on Netflix. So I saw his show. He’s essentially your Joe Rogan type. But he does this bit on how his girlfriend used to date a Navy Seal. He goes into a thing about now when he sees Al Queda he sort of roots for them because they are the poorly trained underdog like the schlubby him. (They got like one monkey bar and they get excited when like 1/5 rockets hit something…like he would if he was fighting a war) His girlfriend likely didn’t go from Navy Seal to him - but it does not matter - it sets a very different joke. No one blames Hasan for a joke like that.
But he thinks we busy fans were able to split the difference between him as stand up, him as Daily Show reporter, congressional testimonialist, and him as Patriot Act journalist. Each are very different things but each work if he’s fully transparent and honest.
A big is that in this crusading effort you are held to a higher standard (much like minorities usually are). To even risk inaccuracies, mixing of truths gives undue fodder to his critics - since his points are still accurate. Really hope that he gets that point of it. He is so immensely talented and his voice is needed.
posted by skepticallypleased at 4:03 AM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
Didn’t come away from that New Yorker thinking he was a psycho. Came away thinking he was doing political comedy to highlight injustices in society and he justified telling crisp stories for the ends justify the means type.
Like didn’t know who Shane Gillis was and he’s trending on Netflix. So I saw his show. He’s essentially your Joe Rogan type. But he does this bit on how his girlfriend used to date a Navy Seal. He goes into a thing about now when he sees Al Queda he sort of roots for them because they are the poorly trained underdog like the schlubby him. (They got like one monkey bar and they get excited when like 1/5 rockets hit something…like he would if he was fighting a war) His girlfriend likely didn’t go from Navy Seal to him - but it does not matter - it sets a very different joke. No one blames Hasan for a joke like that.
But he thinks we busy fans were able to split the difference between him as stand up, him as Daily Show reporter, congressional testimonialist, and him as Patriot Act journalist. Each are very different things but each work if he’s fully transparent and honest.
A big is that in this crusading effort you are held to a higher standard (much like minorities usually are). To even risk inaccuracies, mixing of truths gives undue fodder to his critics - since his points are still accurate. Really hope that he gets that point of it. He is so immensely talented and his voice is needed.
posted by skepticallypleased at 4:03 AM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
Rodney Dangerfield: quite highly respected actually.
posted by logicpunk at 4:48 AM on October 27, 2023 [12 favorites]
posted by logicpunk at 4:48 AM on October 27, 2023 [12 favorites]
To be fair, the Triple Lindy is a truly impressive manoeuvre.
posted by flabdablet at 5:08 AM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by flabdablet at 5:08 AM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
I cannot imagine why anyone would come away from even the New Yorker piece thinking that Hasan was a "psycho". It breaks my brain, honestly. Like even if THE WORST statements made about him in the New Yorker were true, they still wouldn't qualify as damning, exactly, for reasons I explained in the old thread. It was *at worst* bad judgement with low to no consequences.
But on the old thread as on this one, folks seem to be intent on hyperbolizing and exaggerating Minhaj's sins. People saying piously on here that they don't WANT to think of Hasan as a psycho (but they can't help it?) and they hope he does better and continuing to blame him for Bethany getting doxxed, even though he clearly did everything he could to protect her identity, EVEN THOUGH *SHE* HERSELF THANKED HIM FOR ALL THE STEPS HE TOOK TO PROTECT HER AND HER FAMILY.
The lie that was made up in the old thread that Bethany got DEATH threats (something not even the New Yorker piece was low enough to confabulate) is now accepted orthodoxy on MetaFilter.
Fuck.
Just... fuck.
What does a brown Muslim dude have to do before y'all will stop treating him with hysterical fear? For shame. You all are racist and islamophobic and I am beyond disgusted.
The old thread shook my faith in this community like nothing else, and this one is no better. I gotta check out and pretend this thread doesn't exist before I lose all respect for people I used to trust.
posted by MiraK at 5:14 AM on October 27, 2023 [57 favorites]
But on the old thread as on this one, folks seem to be intent on hyperbolizing and exaggerating Minhaj's sins. People saying piously on here that they don't WANT to think of Hasan as a psycho (but they can't help it?) and they hope he does better and continuing to blame him for Bethany getting doxxed, even though he clearly did everything he could to protect her identity, EVEN THOUGH *SHE* HERSELF THANKED HIM FOR ALL THE STEPS HE TOOK TO PROTECT HER AND HER FAMILY.
The lie that was made up in the old thread that Bethany got DEATH threats (something not even the New Yorker piece was low enough to confabulate) is now accepted orthodoxy on MetaFilter.
Fuck.
Just... fuck.
What does a brown Muslim dude have to do before y'all will stop treating him with hysterical fear? For shame. You all are racist and islamophobic and I am beyond disgusted.
The old thread shook my faith in this community like nothing else, and this one is no better. I gotta check out and pretend this thread doesn't exist before I lose all respect for people I used to trust.
posted by MiraK at 5:14 AM on October 27, 2023 [57 favorites]
Then he said he was lying about the white powder story to protect his staff and family.
No he said he didn't tell everyone about it.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:22 AM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
No he said he didn't tell everyone about it.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:22 AM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
But he thinks we busy fans were able to split the difference between him as stand up, him as Daily Show reporter, congressional testimonialist, and him as Patriot Act journalist. Each are very different things but each work if he’s fully transparent and honest.
If somone can't differentiate between speech on stage at a comedy show by a comedian being a comedian, and speech by that same person under oath testifying in front of congress, then I think they shouldn't be consuming media. They're probably going to get themselves hurt.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:25 AM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
If somone can't differentiate between speech on stage at a comedy show by a comedian being a comedian, and speech by that same person under oath testifying in front of congress, then I think they shouldn't be consuming media. They're probably going to get themselves hurt.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:25 AM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
He receives purported anthrax in the presence of his daughter.
He realizes in "ten seconds" it must be fake anthrax.
He reports these events to no one, because he's worried Netflix will shut down his show and put a lot of staff out of work.
I have this all correct, don't I?
I'll spare everyone my judgement about these events :-)
posted by superelastic at 5:26 AM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
He realizes in "ten seconds" it must be fake anthrax.
He reports these events to no one, because he's worried Netflix will shut down his show and put a lot of staff out of work.
I have this all correct, don't I?
I'll spare everyone my judgement about these events :-)
posted by superelastic at 5:26 AM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
Again, what other comedian has been targeted like this, and why?
I mean, Mike Daisey remains a fine example.
Not a comedian, and he got investigated for a story he told on This American Life, not a bit at the comedy celler.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:27 AM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]
I mean, Mike Daisey remains a fine example.
Not a comedian, and he got investigated for a story he told on This American Life, not a bit at the comedy celler.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:27 AM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]
You don't get to slander someone on television because their parents are racist.
He did not make a claim about Bethany, he made a claim about her mother. Which, contrary to the impression Malone tries to convey, no one has actually denied yet. It's not slander, if it's true.
Do you believe that Bethany would have received less harrassement, if he had been more accurate about the actual timeline, while making the same point about her parent's racism? I personally find that hard to imagine. As far as Bethany is concerned, this particular bit of accuracy would not have made a difference.
He might haven been too careless about protecting Bethany's anonymity. He said he made an attempt, but it clearly wasn't enough. That's a separate issue. Malone should have focussed on that, instead of implying whole-cloth-fabrication.
posted by sohalt at 5:44 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
He did not make a claim about Bethany, he made a claim about her mother. Which, contrary to the impression Malone tries to convey, no one has actually denied yet. It's not slander, if it's true.
Do you believe that Bethany would have received less harrassement, if he had been more accurate about the actual timeline, while making the same point about her parent's racism? I personally find that hard to imagine. As far as Bethany is concerned, this particular bit of accuracy would not have made a difference.
He might haven been too careless about protecting Bethany's anonymity. He said he made an attempt, but it clearly wasn't enough. That's a separate issue. Malone should have focussed on that, instead of implying whole-cloth-fabrication.
posted by sohalt at 5:44 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
instead of implying whole-cloth-fabrication
and instead of implying that woman depicted in the pixellated image Minhaj used as a prop was in fact Bethany rather than an actor.
But countering that implication would have undermined he portrait being painted of Minhaj as a greedy, reckless, heedless self-promoter. Opinion piece authors willing to muddy their own narrative to that extent are pretty thin on the ground.
posted by flabdablet at 5:59 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
and instead of implying that woman depicted in the pixellated image Minhaj used as a prop was in fact Bethany rather than an actor.
But countering that implication would have undermined he portrait being painted of Minhaj as a greedy, reckless, heedless self-promoter. Opinion piece authors willing to muddy their own narrative to that extent are pretty thin on the ground.
posted by flabdablet at 5:59 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
Not a comedian, and he got investigated for a story he told on This American Life, not a bit at the comedy celler.
Obviously mileages vary, but the line between “one person storytelling show” and “one person comedy routine” is so fine as to be nonexistent to my mind, and treating Minhaj’s specials as “bits at the comedy cellar” would seem to be strongly underselling their significance or having been written, planned, and directed. Treating a stage show adapted into a TAL episode as comparable to a Netflix special or off-Broadway performance seems perfectly reasonable. Indeed, Hassan Minhaj is probably a more important cultural figure than Mike Daisey ever has been.
posted by Going To Maine at 6:10 AM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]
Obviously mileages vary, but the line between “one person storytelling show” and “one person comedy routine” is so fine as to be nonexistent to my mind, and treating Minhaj’s specials as “bits at the comedy cellar” would seem to be strongly underselling their significance or having been written, planned, and directed. Treating a stage show adapted into a TAL episode as comparable to a Netflix special or off-Broadway performance seems perfectly reasonable. Indeed, Hassan Minhaj is probably a more important cultural figure than Mike Daisey ever has been.
posted by Going To Maine at 6:10 AM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]
Treating a stage show adapted into a TAL episode as comparable to a Netflix special or off-Broadway performance seems perfectly reasonable.
Daisey's story was about how he travelled to China and visited a Foxconn factory and described the conditions there. Minhaj's story was his own personal experience told in a comedy special. TAL fact checked Daisey's story. Do comedy specials get fact checked? No, because only a child would think every story told in a comedy routine is 100% based in fact.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:16 AM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]
Daisey's story was about how he travelled to China and visited a Foxconn factory and described the conditions there. Minhaj's story was his own personal experience told in a comedy special. TAL fact checked Daisey's story. Do comedy specials get fact checked? No, because only a child would think every story told in a comedy routine is 100% based in fact.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:16 AM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]
The “both sidesing” or “evaluating a brown man” bits of this thread … is Mefi a cesspool now?
Some of the responses here are actually shameful, and needless to say as a brown person, has me very wary of even being here.
posted by mysticreferee at 6:20 AM on October 27, 2023 [13 favorites]
Some of the responses here are actually shameful, and needless to say as a brown person, has me very wary of even being here.
posted by mysticreferee at 6:20 AM on October 27, 2023 [13 favorites]
I just wanted to say that I'd read this thread a couple of times in disbelief and was trying to shape my response. So thank you (once again) to MiraK for calling attention to this far better than I could.
posted by ambrosen at 6:25 AM on October 27, 2023 [11 favorites]
posted by ambrosen at 6:25 AM on October 27, 2023 [11 favorites]
i just get the sense that some of y'all didn't like him all that much from the get go and the new yorker article was the perfect excuse, and in your eyes no matter what he does he is forever tainted. i mean, what the shit is this?
posted by i used to be someone else at 6:32 AM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
Methinks Hasan protesteth too much...if anything the reaction just sorta underscores to me that for many, many people, stand-up comedy remains a straight white man's game, with small carveouts for poc or queer comedians they play to a specific type and stay in specific lanes.
Hasan has a face that is at once earnest even while it seems to be bullshitting you.
posted by i used to be someone else at 6:32 AM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
His rebuttal made me rethink my initial (disappointed) response to The New Yorker article. I wish he had addressed the workplace drama, but I found the description of his artistic approach compelling. There is thought/practice that goes into the theater practices that I enjoy so much, but I rarely understand or think about the mechanics underneath.
I have an extra ticket to see him in Red Bank, NJ on Sat Nov 25 if anyone wants to join...
posted by armacy at 6:51 AM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]
I have an extra ticket to see him in Red Bank, NJ on Sat Nov 25 if anyone wants to join...
posted by armacy at 6:51 AM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]
As Hasan says in the video, "There are much more important things to be concerned about." I would be interested in reading a thoughtful discussion of the trade offs that artists make when adapting anecdotes for performance, but what is the point of an in-depth fact check of a _comedy_ special if not to be a hit piece.
I suspect it was assigned to the author as such. It was interesting that in the video response Hasan never names the author, only referring to the New Yorker.
posted by being_quiet at 6:56 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
I suspect it was assigned to the author as such. It was interesting that in the video response Hasan never names the author, only referring to the New Yorker.
posted by being_quiet at 6:56 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
Minhaj's story was his own personal experience told in a comedy special... Do comedy specials get fact checked? No, because only a child would think every story told in a comedy routine is 100% based in fact.
This seems to get back to the crux of things? I mean, The New Yorker’s response is specifically that “Minhaj... selectively presents information and embellishes to make a point.” There’s agreement that Minhaj has selectively presented information across the board. The question, perhaps, is when does a comedy special reach the point where it deserves to be fact checked. As recounted in the article, the Brother Eric story, which tied back to a specific FBI informant, hits that that bar for me. I guess that makes me a child, sigh. Goo goo, ga ga, etc.
posted by Going To Maine at 7:07 AM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
This seems to get back to the crux of things? I mean, The New Yorker’s response is specifically that “Minhaj... selectively presents information and embellishes to make a point.” There’s agreement that Minhaj has selectively presented information across the board. The question, perhaps, is when does a comedy special reach the point where it deserves to be fact checked. As recounted in the article, the Brother Eric story, which tied back to a specific FBI informant, hits that that bar for me. I guess that makes me a child, sigh. Goo goo, ga ga, etc.
posted by Going To Maine at 7:07 AM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
There's a meta quality to this. The writer of the piece had something to say, and finessed the facts to make that point, the same way Minhaj did in his comedy. Of course, one is more acceptable than the other. One is a journalist, one is a comedian. I can accept that artist's sometimes change specifics of stories to make a broader (truthful) point. I cannot accept it in journalism.
I'll admit, I have long admired Hasan's work. I was heartbroken when I originally read the New Yorker's article. However, after this video, I feel I can safely return to being a fan, although a more skeptical one.
And the motives for writing the piece the way they did, feels possibly racist, and intentionally smearing, almost like their predetermined opinion was that Minaj shouldn't host The Daily Show, and the writer then went on a fishing expedition for validating reasons. This is unfortunate, because even though there are other terrific candidates, Hasan's talents make him tailor made for the job.
The whole situation is disheartening.
posted by jstncwlcx at 7:14 AM on October 27, 2023 [12 favorites]
I'll admit, I have long admired Hasan's work. I was heartbroken when I originally read the New Yorker's article. However, after this video, I feel I can safely return to being a fan, although a more skeptical one.
And the motives for writing the piece the way they did, feels possibly racist, and intentionally smearing, almost like their predetermined opinion was that Minaj shouldn't host The Daily Show, and the writer then went on a fishing expedition for validating reasons. This is unfortunate, because even though there are other terrific candidates, Hasan's talents make him tailor made for the job.
The whole situation is disheartening.
posted by jstncwlcx at 7:14 AM on October 27, 2023 [12 favorites]
The question, perhaps, is when does a comedy special reach the point where it deserves to be fact checked.
Imagine asking this question about a white comedian's comedy routine.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:23 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
Imagine asking this question about a white comedian's comedy routine.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:23 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
This is a largely embarrassing thread. I don't believe some of the people commenting in support of The New Yorker actually watched the video, particularly some of the commenters who seem to show up in every single thread whether they actually have anything to add or not.
Thank you to MiraK for this comment which really sums up the thread. And to krisjohn for this really restrained comment - I thought my eyes were going to fully leave my head reading what it's responding to.
posted by imabanana at 7:27 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
Thank you to MiraK for this comment which really sums up the thread. And to krisjohn for this really restrained comment - I thought my eyes were going to fully leave my head reading what it's responding to.
posted by imabanana at 7:27 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 7:29 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 7:29 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
I somehow missed the first thread, and was only vaguely aware that some comedian out there had done another bad thing. Which makes me glad I saw this thread, where I was introduced to a comedian who was willing to spend nearly half an hour describing not just the controversy, but his thoughtfulness, the hard work he puts into his writing, and the way feedback informs each iteration of his work.
Having now read the New Yorker article, I'm really shocked by its concern-trolling. "What if someone out there was such a fucking idiot that they thought you were testifying under oath during a comedy special? Wouldn't that make you--a PERJURER, Hasan?" I mean, yes, readers and listeners are often very lazy--it's how we get weird parasocial relationships where we think actors embody the roles they play. How we assume every novel must really be a little bit autobiographical. But, I mean, that's because we're a little bit stupid when we're really enjoying a story, it's like being drunk a little, the boundaries get blurred. None of that reflects on the storyteller, author, comedian. It's our problem, not theirs. And by shifting the responsibility onto Minhaj's shoulders, Malone has committed not just bad journalism but bad understanding.
And yeah, the racism. Malone insists that Minhaj's comedy has a moral obligation to be superhumanly careful to distinguish fact from fiction...then just happens to line up all his poor white victims whose lives are destroyed by his jokes. My heart really goes out to the...um...FBI informant?
Anyway. Good for Hasan for getting his version of the story out there. And an absolute shame that someone who does not understand what comedy is, brought him to that point.
posted by mittens at 7:46 AM on October 27, 2023 [14 favorites]
Having now read the New Yorker article, I'm really shocked by its concern-trolling. "What if someone out there was such a fucking idiot that they thought you were testifying under oath during a comedy special? Wouldn't that make you--a PERJURER, Hasan?" I mean, yes, readers and listeners are often very lazy--it's how we get weird parasocial relationships where we think actors embody the roles they play. How we assume every novel must really be a little bit autobiographical. But, I mean, that's because we're a little bit stupid when we're really enjoying a story, it's like being drunk a little, the boundaries get blurred. None of that reflects on the storyteller, author, comedian. It's our problem, not theirs. And by shifting the responsibility onto Minhaj's shoulders, Malone has committed not just bad journalism but bad understanding.
And yeah, the racism. Malone insists that Minhaj's comedy has a moral obligation to be superhumanly careful to distinguish fact from fiction...then just happens to line up all his poor white victims whose lives are destroyed by his jokes. My heart really goes out to the...um...FBI informant?
Anyway. Good for Hasan for getting his version of the story out there. And an absolute shame that someone who does not understand what comedy is, brought him to that point.
posted by mittens at 7:46 AM on October 27, 2023 [14 favorites]
Y'all remember when the world was shocked to learn the truth about Larry the Cable Guy?
posted by betaray at 7:54 AM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by betaray at 7:54 AM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
Wait, comedy routines aren't depositions??? Mind blown.
posted by Toddles at 7:57 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Toddles at 7:57 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
Left-wing comedian Alexei Sayle comments on the weirdness of left-wing comedy audiences. I must note that although he played an axe-wielding homicidal maniac on The Young ones, he is in fact not one in real life.
I also think this scene from Galaxy Quest is helpful in considering some reactions to Minaj's schtick.
posted by zaixfeep at 8:05 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
I also think this scene from Galaxy Quest is helpful in considering some reactions to Minaj's schtick.
posted by zaixfeep at 8:05 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
I am an immigrant and person of color. I understand how Minhaj struggled with making his humor about anti-Muslim racism relatable.
Many of my white friends can make each other laugh just by referring to American bands or movie quotes from the 80s and 90s. "Ted Lasso" has many one-liners that rely on this, by referring to Sour Patch Kids, Bridget Jones, Sleepless in Seattle. When a comedian is from the same racial upbringing as the audience, they have a wealth of shared context for easy jokes.
When Minhaj is telling the mosque FBI story, he can't rely on shared context. He can't get laughs using familiar Arabic phrases or call up the nostalgic feeling of going to mosque as a teen. Within a few minutes, he has to make his audience understand a foreign concept. He chose to embellish details that a non-Muslim person would understand (getting slammed onto the hood of a car).
I wish Minhaj had found a different way or said "It's just like when you...". But I understand why he used the embellishment crutch to make his story relatable.
posted by sandwich at 8:06 AM on October 27, 2023 [15 favorites]
Many of my white friends can make each other laugh just by referring to American bands or movie quotes from the 80s and 90s. "Ted Lasso" has many one-liners that rely on this, by referring to Sour Patch Kids, Bridget Jones, Sleepless in Seattle. When a comedian is from the same racial upbringing as the audience, they have a wealth of shared context for easy jokes.
When Minhaj is telling the mosque FBI story, he can't rely on shared context. He can't get laughs using familiar Arabic phrases or call up the nostalgic feeling of going to mosque as a teen. Within a few minutes, he has to make his audience understand a foreign concept. He chose to embellish details that a non-Muslim person would understand (getting slammed onto the hood of a car).
I wish Minhaj had found a different way or said "It's just like when you...". But I understand why he used the embellishment crutch to make his story relatable.
posted by sandwich at 8:06 AM on October 27, 2023 [15 favorites]
...admittedly I skipped the first NewYorker story because I did not care. Watching this video I'm stuck with - 'comedian embellishes story to make anecdote more humorous' and why is that news? Are all Mike Birbiglia's or Jim Gaffigan's 'bits' 100% truth? Because if not I'm !scandalized!
seriously, what the fuck is this?
...I'm gonna have to read the fucking article, aren't I?
sigh, fine.
posted by From Bklyn at 8:23 AM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
seriously, what the fuck is this?
...I'm gonna have to read the fucking article, aren't I?
sigh, fine.
posted by From Bklyn at 8:23 AM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
I was actually snowed by the New Yorker article and came away from it livid that this guy was undermining those of us that have experienced this kind of “macroaggression” racism. I remember finding out around the time of the terrorism at Charlottesville that a lot of Whites on the left don’t think much about this kind of thing and weigh defense against racist violence against free speech or how it will influence voters — just another thing among many things. It’s so hard to get across what racial violence is like that someone making stuff up about it just makes you want to leave to space.
I am glad for the sake of humanity that Minhaj recorded and documented all of his interactions with the New Yorker. I have no idea how this reporter or her editors could have thought this article was an accurate representation of the information they gathered.
No one would even know otherwise how the New Yorker operates. Who knows how many times they’ve done this before? The only New Yorker misconduct I’ve heard of before was one them showing his penis to colleagues.
This weirdly reminds me of when I heard that Pantera (a band with a racist member, I know) recorded every interview they conducted after a certain point because of their distrust of the media. It seemed paranoid at the time, but they were actually ahead of their time.
I will say though that Minhaj should make it clear that his standup is made from amalgamated facts in contrast to his political comedy, even if the amalgamated facts are not misrepresentative of the nature of the racism he experienced. The change in contexts may not be clear.
posted by ignignokt at 8:27 AM on October 27, 2023 [11 favorites]
I am glad for the sake of humanity that Minhaj recorded and documented all of his interactions with the New Yorker. I have no idea how this reporter or her editors could have thought this article was an accurate representation of the information they gathered.
No one would even know otherwise how the New Yorker operates. Who knows how many times they’ve done this before? The only New Yorker misconduct I’ve heard of before was one them showing his penis to colleagues.
This weirdly reminds me of when I heard that Pantera (a band with a racist member, I know) recorded every interview they conducted after a certain point because of their distrust of the media. It seemed paranoid at the time, but they were actually ahead of their time.
I will say though that Minhaj should make it clear that his standup is made from amalgamated facts in contrast to his political comedy, even if the amalgamated facts are not misrepresentative of the nature of the racism he experienced. The change in contexts may not be clear.
posted by ignignokt at 8:27 AM on October 27, 2023 [11 favorites]
I will say though that Minhaj should make it clear that his standup is made from amalgamated facts in contrast to his political comedy, even if the amalgamated facts are not misrepresentative of the nature of the racism he experienced. The change in contexts may not be clear.
I think that would be a pretty silly overcorrection. It's basically Elon Musk saying that all parody accounts on Twitter must be clearly and expressly designated as parody accounts. The fact that a stand-up comedian would embellish and elide certain details of true stories in order to maximize the emotional and comic effect should come as a surprise to no one, and I think it's deeply weird that the New Yorker decided to take down Minhaj in particular.
In fact, and I don't usually say this sort of thing, I think Minhaj has a reasonable claim for defamation against the New Yorker, given that he appears to have lost the Daily Show hosting gig because of it.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 9:14 AM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
I think that would be a pretty silly overcorrection. It's basically Elon Musk saying that all parody accounts on Twitter must be clearly and expressly designated as parody accounts. The fact that a stand-up comedian would embellish and elide certain details of true stories in order to maximize the emotional and comic effect should come as a surprise to no one, and I think it's deeply weird that the New Yorker decided to take down Minhaj in particular.
In fact, and I don't usually say this sort of thing, I think Minhaj has a reasonable claim for defamation against the New Yorker, given that he appears to have lost the Daily Show hosting gig because of it.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 9:14 AM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
In Gaffigan’s approach to comedy, he leans heavily on his own experience as a Caucasian American, telling harrowing stories of having five children, papery white skin, and mafiosos conspiring to add chocolate chips to granola bars. For many of his fans, he has become an avatar for the power of pasty fathers' representation in entertainment. But, after many weeks of trying, I had been unable to confirm some of the stories that he had told onstage. When we met on a recent afternoon, at a comedy club in Provo, Utah, Gaffigan acknowledged, for the first time, that many of the anecdotes he related in his Netflix specials were untrue. Still, he said that he stood by his work. “EVERY STORY IN MY STYLE IS BUILT AROUND A SEED OF TRUTH!!” he shrieked in his trademark silly voice. “My comedy White Russian is five per cent emotional truth—this happened—and then ninety five per cent Inside Voice. I really did dunk my bath robe belt in the toilet once.”
posted by Hot Pastrami! at 9:15 AM on October 27, 2023 [13 favorites]
posted by Hot Pastrami! at 9:15 AM on October 27, 2023 [13 favorites]
Seems strange that this is even an issue. I would never assume, even in the context of TAL style storytelling, that any of this stuff is 100% factual. I don't think that everything David Sedaris says happened exactly the way he puts it. I don't think Bret Kreischner really lived out "The Machine" the way he describes it.
Real life stories rarely ever work as cleanly as a tight narrative needs to be. And absolutely every story with a moral is an allegory.
So we're stuck with a performer who crafted modern allegories to get across the experiences of being brown and muslim in modern America. He may be a shit boss (but then again most of the high level performers/creators I've met have been kinda shitty in their own ways)
One of his stories, despite what seems to be a fair amount of care on his part, led a subject of one of his tales to be doxxed and harrassed. (which seems like a bad and near inescapable part of having a modern day parasocial keyboard army) This would be far from the first time that a storyteller has either inadvertently or purposefully had this happen and he seems upset at it. (How many other comedians would have used her real name or photos of them together to amp up the story?)
posted by drewbage1847 at 9:22 AM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]
Real life stories rarely ever work as cleanly as a tight narrative needs to be. And absolutely every story with a moral is an allegory.
So we're stuck with a performer who crafted modern allegories to get across the experiences of being brown and muslim in modern America. He may be a shit boss (but then again most of the high level performers/creators I've met have been kinda shitty in their own ways)
One of his stories, despite what seems to be a fair amount of care on his part, led a subject of one of his tales to be doxxed and harrassed. (which seems like a bad and near inescapable part of having a modern day parasocial keyboard army) This would be far from the first time that a storyteller has either inadvertently or purposefully had this happen and he seems upset at it. (How many other comedians would have used her real name or photos of them together to amp up the story?)
posted by drewbage1847 at 9:22 AM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]
I don't think Bret Kreischner really lived out "The Machine" the way he describes it.
I think this is a great example. There's a movie about it. No one believes its a true story, its so clearly bullshit. Could you imagine the New Yorker fact checking it? "Turns out, there are some holes in Kreischner's story". Like of course there is.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:26 AM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
I think this is a great example. There's a movie about it. No one believes its a true story, its so clearly bullshit. Could you imagine the New Yorker fact checking it? "Turns out, there are some holes in Kreischner's story". Like of course there is.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:26 AM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
A small fact check for something that's been mentioned a few times in this thread. The original article's claim about the prom date's real photo being used is specifically about the show's Off Broadway run, not (necessarily) how it was aired on Netflix:
It would have been better, probably, if the article mentioned the real photo was swapped out before the wider broadcast (if that's indeed how this played out), and it would have been better, probably, if this video acknowledged that it wasn't really rebutting the thing the article says (but rather the impression it gives), because it's now giving the mistaken impression that this was an obvious error the New Yorker's fact checkers should have caught -- as evidenced in this thread.
(All in all, this video makes compelling points about the inappropriateness of the original articles framing, how it doesn't provide the context of how a stand-up act works, etc., but when I pause the video to read over the interview transcripts being martialed as evidence of journalistic misbehavior on the moment-to-moment fact-checking level, most of them seem pretty...mushy, like he's not clearly saying to the reporter the thing he meant to say, and is now describing himself as having clearly said.)
posted by nobody at 9:41 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
A source with knowledge of the production said that, during the show’s Off Broadway run, Minhaj had used a real picture of the woman and her partner, with their faces blurred, projected behind him as he told the story.And then the counter-claim in this video is just about the Netflix version using a staged photo with actors.
It would have been better, probably, if the article mentioned the real photo was swapped out before the wider broadcast (if that's indeed how this played out), and it would have been better, probably, if this video acknowledged that it wasn't really rebutting the thing the article says (but rather the impression it gives), because it's now giving the mistaken impression that this was an obvious error the New Yorker's fact checkers should have caught -- as evidenced in this thread.
(All in all, this video makes compelling points about the inappropriateness of the original articles framing, how it doesn't provide the context of how a stand-up act works, etc., but when I pause the video to read over the interview transcripts being martialed as evidence of journalistic misbehavior on the moment-to-moment fact-checking level, most of them seem pretty...mushy, like he's not clearly saying to the reporter the thing he meant to say, and is now describing himself as having clearly said.)
posted by nobody at 9:41 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
Minhaj says at 10:06 in the video he provided to the New Yorker receipts that showed: 'my race was a factor in my prom rejection, I wasn't careless with Bethany's identity, and she thanked me for keeping her family's identity safe – so how could the New Yorker imply the opposite?'
In fact, someone reading the article carefully would note that the only detail it disputes about his rejection by 'Bethany' is whether 'Minhaj showed up on her doorstep the night of the dance, only to see another boy putting a corsage on her wrist' or whether 'she’d turned down Minhaj, who was then a close friend, in person, days before the dance' – which Minhaj admits is the truth. The article specifically mentions Minhaj saying 'that [Bethany's] parents didn’t want their daughter to take pictures with a brown boy, because they were concerned about what their relatives might think', and although Bethany 'disputed certain facts', this detail about her parents is notably not mentioned as one of them.
Someone paying close attention to both the New Yorker article and Minhaj's response will note that he does not rebut, let alone bring up, the allegations made in the article that '[Bethany] and her family had faced online threats and doxing for years because Minhaj had insufficiently disguised her identity' and 'during [Homecoming King's] Off Broadway run, Minhaj had used a real picture of [Bethany] and her partner, with their faces blurred, projected behind him'. Why don't these details rate a mention – it seems they're pertinent to Minhaj's claims that he went to great lengths to protect the identity of Bethany and her family?
Throughout the video Minhaj makes a big show about bringing the receipts but if he is so upset about the reporter omitting context and details that he thinks would have been clarifying, then why doesn't he release the full unedited tape of the conversation instead of merely providing us with excerpts that he has selected to help him build his case that he has been hard done by?
Even though the original New Yorker article can often read like a thinly-veiled hit job masquerading as an inquiry into the ethics of comedy, I find this video response really hard to take at face value.
(And for everyone saying that 'it's comedy, nobody's expecting it to be factual', first of all the New Yorker article actually acknowledges this, saying: 'People don’t necessarily go into standup shows expecting airtight truths. They expect laughs, perhaps some trenchant observation'. And, secondly, Minhaj makes it very clear at the end of the video that 'in political comedy, facts come first'. So being factual is in fact very important to Minhaj when he's doing a certain kind of comedy, and he trades on this image of faithfulness to the facts in one side of his practice and career. This whole problem has arisen because his audience is thus primed – much more so than the average stand-up audience – to believe what he is saying as fact when he is telling politically laden anecdotes during his 'comedic storytelling', when he is in actuality subordinating fact to 'emotional truth'.)
posted by Panthalassa at 9:48 AM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
In fact, someone reading the article carefully would note that the only detail it disputes about his rejection by 'Bethany' is whether 'Minhaj showed up on her doorstep the night of the dance, only to see another boy putting a corsage on her wrist' or whether 'she’d turned down Minhaj, who was then a close friend, in person, days before the dance' – which Minhaj admits is the truth. The article specifically mentions Minhaj saying 'that [Bethany's] parents didn’t want their daughter to take pictures with a brown boy, because they were concerned about what their relatives might think', and although Bethany 'disputed certain facts', this detail about her parents is notably not mentioned as one of them.
Someone paying close attention to both the New Yorker article and Minhaj's response will note that he does not rebut, let alone bring up, the allegations made in the article that '[Bethany] and her family had faced online threats and doxing for years because Minhaj had insufficiently disguised her identity' and 'during [Homecoming King's] Off Broadway run, Minhaj had used a real picture of [Bethany] and her partner, with their faces blurred, projected behind him'. Why don't these details rate a mention – it seems they're pertinent to Minhaj's claims that he went to great lengths to protect the identity of Bethany and her family?
Throughout the video Minhaj makes a big show about bringing the receipts but if he is so upset about the reporter omitting context and details that he thinks would have been clarifying, then why doesn't he release the full unedited tape of the conversation instead of merely providing us with excerpts that he has selected to help him build his case that he has been hard done by?
Even though the original New Yorker article can often read like a thinly-veiled hit job masquerading as an inquiry into the ethics of comedy, I find this video response really hard to take at face value.
(And for everyone saying that 'it's comedy, nobody's expecting it to be factual', first of all the New Yorker article actually acknowledges this, saying: 'People don’t necessarily go into standup shows expecting airtight truths. They expect laughs, perhaps some trenchant observation'. And, secondly, Minhaj makes it very clear at the end of the video that 'in political comedy, facts come first'. So being factual is in fact very important to Minhaj when he's doing a certain kind of comedy, and he trades on this image of faithfulness to the facts in one side of his practice and career. This whole problem has arisen because his audience is thus primed – much more so than the average stand-up audience – to believe what he is saying as fact when he is telling politically laden anecdotes during his 'comedic storytelling', when he is in actuality subordinating fact to 'emotional truth'.)
posted by Panthalassa at 9:48 AM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
his audience is thus primed – much more so than the average stand-up audience – to believe what he is saying as fact when he is telling politically laden anecdotes during his 'comedic storytelling', when he is in actuality subordinating fact to 'emotional truth'
...in much the same way as Malone's audience has been primed by her body of work as a fact-checker to read this "profile" of Minhaj as fair and balanced, when she is in actuality complaining about the subordination of fact to 'emotional truth' while doing exactly that herself in order to construct an opinion piece - a piece that drips with disdain for the idea of emotional truth even as its author lays on the very same thing almost parodically thick.
The way the last paragraph uses selective quotation to misrepresent Minhaj's position entirely, leaving the reader with the distinct impression that emotional truth is all he ever cares about ever, is particularly egregious.
posted by flabdablet at 10:19 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
...in much the same way as Malone's audience has been primed by her body of work as a fact-checker to read this "profile" of Minhaj as fair and balanced, when she is in actuality complaining about the subordination of fact to 'emotional truth' while doing exactly that herself in order to construct an opinion piece - a piece that drips with disdain for the idea of emotional truth even as its author lays on the very same thing almost parodically thick.
The way the last paragraph uses selective quotation to misrepresent Minhaj's position entirely, leaving the reader with the distinct impression that emotional truth is all he ever cares about ever, is particularly egregious.
posted by flabdablet at 10:19 AM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
What's the selective quotation in the last paragraph, sorry?
In any case, I think we agree – both journalist and comedian have questions to answer for.
posted by Panthalassa at 10:30 AM on October 27, 2023
In any case, I think we agree – both journalist and comedian have questions to answer for.
posted by Panthalassa at 10:30 AM on October 27, 2023
A small fact check for something that's been mentioned a few times in this thread. The original article's claim about the prom date's real photo being used is specifically about the show's Off Broadway run
One thing I’ve figured out here is that he was telling this story a long time before the Netflix special, and it seems that maybe it didn’t always have the reveal with the moment of reconciliation? If I’m right about that I will be fair and assume this meeting hadn’t happened yet! But knowing that the bit didn’t always have the same ending adds a little bit of nuance to my understanding of the picture, because it was that ending that made me feel like the article was not being fair to - and that people online were really not being fair to - what he was trying to say.
posted by atoxyl at 10:31 AM on October 27, 2023
One thing I’ve figured out here is that he was telling this story a long time before the Netflix special, and it seems that maybe it didn’t always have the reveal with the moment of reconciliation? If I’m right about that I will be fair and assume this meeting hadn’t happened yet! But knowing that the bit didn’t always have the same ending adds a little bit of nuance to my understanding of the picture, because it was that ending that made me feel like the article was not being fair to - and that people online were really not being fair to - what he was trying to say.
posted by atoxyl at 10:31 AM on October 27, 2023
it's now giving the mistaken impression that this was an obvious error the New Yorker's fact checkers should have caught -- as evidenced in this thread
This is exactly what I was wondering about. Thanks.
posted by praemunire at 10:39 AM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]
This is exactly what I was wondering about. Thanks.
posted by praemunire at 10:39 AM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]
He might haven been too careless about protecting Bethany's anonymity. He said he made an attempt, but it clearly wasn't enough. That's a separate issue. Malone should have focussed on that, instead of implying whole-cloth-fabrication.
Yes, but I think even the first point is debatable--fairly debatable, but debatable. It seems to me that, given that Minhaj lived in the contemporary U.S. and the events must have been in the living memory of lots of people, almost any version of the story could have been used to dox Bethany, and almost any version of the story would have incited the usual basement-dwellers to go after her for being a Woman Whose Name Was Mentioned in Public. Can he never tell this story of painful racism he experienced as a teenager as a result? I don't know. He's not, say, Kanye famous such as to have to assume that any life he touches is vulnerable to serious harm just because of the proximity and what it sets off in said basement-dwellers, you know?
As for the rest...I've been in enough discussions here about the fact that comics are generally not purporting to tell the literal truth in their standup bits. I can't help but wonder if here we're not looking in part at a problem that occurs elsewhere, where nonwhite artists are assumed to be incapable of creating personas separate from themselves, so that the "I" of a rap becomes the "I" of the rapper, and the story told in the rap must be literal truth. There's a grey area here. Maybe he went a step too far. But nothing to lose a job over, for Christ's sake.
posted by praemunire at 10:49 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
Yes, but I think even the first point is debatable--fairly debatable, but debatable. It seems to me that, given that Minhaj lived in the contemporary U.S. and the events must have been in the living memory of lots of people, almost any version of the story could have been used to dox Bethany, and almost any version of the story would have incited the usual basement-dwellers to go after her for being a Woman Whose Name Was Mentioned in Public. Can he never tell this story of painful racism he experienced as a teenager as a result? I don't know. He's not, say, Kanye famous such as to have to assume that any life he touches is vulnerable to serious harm just because of the proximity and what it sets off in said basement-dwellers, you know?
As for the rest...I've been in enough discussions here about the fact that comics are generally not purporting to tell the literal truth in their standup bits. I can't help but wonder if here we're not looking in part at a problem that occurs elsewhere, where nonwhite artists are assumed to be incapable of creating personas separate from themselves, so that the "I" of a rap becomes the "I" of the rapper, and the story told in the rap must be literal truth. There's a grey area here. Maybe he went a step too far. But nothing to lose a job over, for Christ's sake.
posted by praemunire at 10:49 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
As for the quote, if I were opposing counsel in a case trying to make the case Malone is trying to make, I would not be comfortable trimming it down so far without at least providing some context to summarize, so that it was clear that he was talking specifically about one subset of his work with different expectations than other subsets. I wouldn't be sanctioned for quoting as she did or anything, mind you, but both from personal inclination and from professional training I generally strive to present "money quotes" in such a way that the person can't try to distract by saying I took it out of context, etc.
posted by praemunire at 10:56 AM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by praemunire at 10:56 AM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
The dismissive and condescending "sure" and "OK" responses that Malone gives to Minhaj in the interview make it pretty clear she isn't really interested in anything he's saying that doesn't fit the narrative she was already creating.
posted by Clustercuss at 11:06 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Clustercuss at 11:06 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
The dismissive and condescending "sure" and "OK" responses
Depends if it's an East Coast "sure" or a West Coast "sure"
posted by soylent00FF00 at 11:33 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
Depends if it's an East Coast "sure" or a West Coast "sure"
posted by soylent00FF00 at 11:33 AM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
When I read the original article, I didn't put too much thought into it - it felt kind of weird to me to be fact-checking comedy to this extent, but it also lowered my opinion of Minhaj.
Watching the video, I found myself analyzing his response. How strong was his case? What facts was he disputing? Does "my parents have come a long way" from Bethany really prove what he's trying to prove?
But then I thought about it more, and where I've landed is: what was he supposed to do? This already cost him a dream job. There are only two options for a celebrity in this situation. The first is an apology video where he takes total ownership, promises to learn and do better, etc. People tear those apart, and doing so would solidify this as a scandal and a deserved hit to his reputation and credibility. The other option is to fight back, as strongly as he could. He did apologize. But he also marshalled whatever evidence he could find to show that he hasn't totally fictionalized his life for political ammo.
The strongest point he made, I think, was that these stories are only a few out of a large catalogue of standup material. He's exaggerated a few instances for the sake of better delivering a joke and a message. To nit-pick his response is to already accede to the premise that he deserved this level of scrutiny which is not generally applied to standup comedy. The consequences of the New Yorker article for his career are dire, and going the full-throated apology route hardly lessens them. I'm glad he pushed back, and I don't think he should have to present a foolproof case in order to continue having a career. Those are the stakes.
posted by cosmic owl at 11:39 AM on October 27, 2023 [19 favorites]
Watching the video, I found myself analyzing his response. How strong was his case? What facts was he disputing? Does "my parents have come a long way" from Bethany really prove what he's trying to prove?
But then I thought about it more, and where I've landed is: what was he supposed to do? This already cost him a dream job. There are only two options for a celebrity in this situation. The first is an apology video where he takes total ownership, promises to learn and do better, etc. People tear those apart, and doing so would solidify this as a scandal and a deserved hit to his reputation and credibility. The other option is to fight back, as strongly as he could. He did apologize. But he also marshalled whatever evidence he could find to show that he hasn't totally fictionalized his life for political ammo.
The strongest point he made, I think, was that these stories are only a few out of a large catalogue of standup material. He's exaggerated a few instances for the sake of better delivering a joke and a message. To nit-pick his response is to already accede to the premise that he deserved this level of scrutiny which is not generally applied to standup comedy. The consequences of the New Yorker article for his career are dire, and going the full-throated apology route hardly lessens them. I'm glad he pushed back, and I don't think he should have to present a foolproof case in order to continue having a career. Those are the stakes.
posted by cosmic owl at 11:39 AM on October 27, 2023 [19 favorites]
I asked myself whether I'd want the New Yorker to do a followup article where they apply this level of scrutiny to every single comedian. If people are saying that Minhaj also bears fault and this article provided newsworthy info, surely they'd welcome having every other comedian put through this useful test, and the ones who fail will lose their job.
How many of us want that followup New Yorker article?
posted by sandwich at 12:05 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
How many of us want that followup New Yorker article?
posted by sandwich at 12:05 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
Yeah the most appropriate analogy that comes to mind here is "But her emails." Everybody's doing it, it's technically wrong, the level of scrutiny and manufactured outrage is insanely disproportional and selectively applied, the motives and outcomes are pure white supremacy.
posted by MiraK at 12:08 PM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by MiraK at 12:08 PM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]
What's the selective quotation in the last paragraph, sorry?
The quote as published:
posted by flabdablet at 12:28 PM on October 27, 2023 [27 favorites]
The quote as published:
He appeared unwilling to engage with the idea that his position in the comedic landscape is unique, or that the host of a comedy news show might be held to more stringent standards of accuracy across his body of work. When it came to his stage shows, he told me, “the emotional truth is first. The factual truth is secondary.”Transcript of the interview segment from which that quote was pulled, per Minhaj:
Hasan: When people see a "Hasan Minhaj" show, there's two different expectations. There's the "Hasan Minhaj" you see, maybe here at the Comedy Cellar, where there is an implicit agreement between the audience like we're going down into a basement, like we're about to see a 1-hour comedy show that feels like there's an emotional roller coaster ride...It is perfectly clear that what Minhaj is talking about here is exactly the contrasting expectations for factuality in standup comedy vs political commentary. Quoting only the last sentence, and not even the sentence at that, to support a contention that he's "unwilling to engage" with these issues, and thinks that any time he's on stage, facts don't matter? Deeply dishonest reporting.
Reporter: Sure.
Hasan: Then there's "Hasan Minhaj", the guy you've seen on The Daily Show as a correspondent or the guy from Patriot Act on Netflix, which is I am not the primary character. The news story is the primary character.
With the latter, the truth comes first; comedy sometimes comes second to make the infotainment, the sugar on the medicine. In this [stand up comedy] the emotional truth is first, the factual truth is secondary.
posted by flabdablet at 12:28 PM on October 27, 2023 [27 favorites]
When it came to his stage shows, he told me, “the emotional truth is first. The factual truth is secondary.”
Think how this line would read if it was:
'When it came to his stage shows, he told me, “the emotional truth is first. The factual truth is secondary.” For his political shows and commentary, its the opposite.'
Why didn't the New Yorker do something like that? Its so clearly intended to mislead.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 12:41 PM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]
Think how this line would read if it was:
'When it came to his stage shows, he told me, “the emotional truth is first. The factual truth is secondary.” For his political shows and commentary, its the opposite.'
Why didn't the New Yorker do something like that? Its so clearly intended to mislead.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 12:41 PM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]
Without rehashing my comment in the prior thread, Minhaj is getting particularly scrutinized because he's doing something different from most comedians, and his subject matter makes the stakes higher.
It matters more whether a story about racism is true than whether the story about some bro's college shenanigans is true, and it's simplistic to dismiss all criticism of Minhaj as Islamophobia or "pure white supremacy" just because no one's fact-checking Bret Kreischner.
After watching his response, my take is that he makes a semi-convincing case rebutting the prom-night criticism (though it seems relevant to know more about what Bethany later told The New Yorker, since it appears to be different from what she emailed Minhaj), and basically owns the exaggeration on the other two incidents, with explanations. Those explanations make sense, but they don't resolve the fundamental conflict that an audience expects stories about things that matter to be true, unlike stories about that time you got really high.
posted by pwe at 12:55 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
It matters more whether a story about racism is true than whether the story about some bro's college shenanigans is true, and it's simplistic to dismiss all criticism of Minhaj as Islamophobia or "pure white supremacy" just because no one's fact-checking Bret Kreischner.
After watching his response, my take is that he makes a semi-convincing case rebutting the prom-night criticism (though it seems relevant to know more about what Bethany later told The New Yorker, since it appears to be different from what she emailed Minhaj), and basically owns the exaggeration on the other two incidents, with explanations. Those explanations make sense, but they don't resolve the fundamental conflict that an audience expects stories about things that matter to be true, unlike stories about that time you got really high.
posted by pwe at 12:55 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
it just strikes me as weird that a bunch of non-poc, people that don't face the same islamophobic bullshit are arguing about how a brown dude person speaks to the marginalization they face.
on a different note, i pity kumail when the new yorker does an exposé on how "the big sick" didn't play out exactly as it did in the movie. damn lying bastard wasn't an uber driver at the time because uber wasn't even a thing.
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:03 PM on October 27, 2023 [16 favorites]
on a different note, i pity kumail when the new yorker does an exposé on how "the big sick" didn't play out exactly as it did in the movie. damn lying bastard wasn't an uber driver at the time because uber wasn't even a thing.
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:03 PM on October 27, 2023 [16 favorites]
an audience expects stories about things that matter to be true, unlike stories about that time you got really high.
Yes, thank you so much. I've been struggling to put my objections to this into words all day and you've just done it beautifully.
If somebody's doing both documentary-style factual stuff and comedy cellar broad stuff that's not meant to be taken as the literal truth, the difference needs to be made clear to the audience. I, for one, swallowed that FBI informant story hook line and sinker and am quite annoyed to find he made it all up, just as I was irritated when Michael Moore pulled similar bullshit in his "documentaries." If you don't make the line clear to the audience, then your "emotional truth" fictions undermine true stories. And you absolutely can't claim that "it was the truth, just my truth" if it involves and potentially harms real people who don't have your access to a massive stage and you don't give them veto power over the fictions you tell about them on that stage.
It was entirely unnecessary to embellish the racistprommom story in a manner that made a real life person seem to have been galaxies more cruel and obliviously heartless than she was. Did "Bethany" fail to clue him in and allow him to get all dressed up in his tux and show up at her door only to watch her get corsage-ed by a white boy and whisked off in a limo and then have to stand there in his finery listening to her mother explain that he wasn't the right color to be in pictures with her daughter? No, she did not, and there was no reason to tell people she did. The emotional truth of what actually happened is right there in the actual true story, perfectly accessible and perfectly excruciating just as it actually happened. The mom comes off just as awful as she clearly was. There was no need to put "Bethany" at risk by making her look like a total shitheel and then showing that picture.
The part of the rebuttal that points out the thing the article did wrong, namely imply that there was no racism and the entire thing was him overreacting to a girl wanting to go to prom with another boy, was fine and necessary. He should have focused on that, because that was actually dishonest and unfair. The rest of it, though, is much murkier.
The charge about Bethany and groom's actual image being used in the off Broadway show he doesn't actually refute, and it seems like he would actually refute it, were it false. Instead he employs the supersneaky, "Even in the Netflix special I don't use any real photos of Bethany or her family. Those are actors and their faces are blurred." That "even" is carrying a hefty load. Unless the photo you used in the off Broadway show, which is the photo the article is referencing, was not actually of Bethany and groom, this is a clear lie of omission. Which in a 20-minute "why The New Yorker is wrong and emotional truths are okay in some cases" video is really undermining your credibility. You can argue that what happens in a comedy cellar isn't strict reporting, and I can mostly buy that, but that argument absolutely doesn't extend to your rebuttal video claiming you did not doxx somebody. There you really need to use verifiable facts only, no fudging.
Because if the photo is fudged, what about the rest of the "receipts?" Are you lying throughout?
When did that "Bethany exonerates me" e-mail exchange happen in relation to the Netflix special, the doxxing, and the harassment?
Was that the entire e-mail exchange?
What about all the things "Bethany" says in Malone's article in paraphrase? Per the article, she "now believes" she got invited to the show because Minhaj wanted to humiliate her, for instance. If Malone made all that up, well, then that makes Malone the "psycho." (Like, she'd really have to be a malevolent sociopath. Whereas Minhaj just looks like a thoughtless and reckless jerk too in love with his own material to listen to people telling him he needs to kill his darlings.) Convenient how we can't look into it further by getting Bethany's POV in her own words because Bethany has already had a snootful of unpleasant exposure and is now trying to hide from all this bullshit.
Furthermore, it is a really bad idea to say a specific real actual human person hired as an FBI informant went to a specific real actual mosque when that person did not go to that mosque and when in fact there does not seem to be solid evidence that any FBI informants ever infiltrated that mosque. (Asshole white guys were shitty to Muslim kids on the basketball court does not translate to it was the FBI.) The guy you named was not there. He did not do to you what you said he did to you. Does the fact that he was at other mosques and did the shit you said he did to you to other people mean it's sufficiently emotionally true that he did it to you that you don't have to make that clear in your Netflix special? NO! You have to tell the actual literal factual truth when you're talking about real humans in the real world.
It does not exonerate you that after the fact you went and got forgiveness/approval from an actual person to whom much much worse things actually happened. It's still ruinously stupid to tell lies about this. For one, it's stolen valor. You didn't actually do this suffering. The person who suffered has the right to tell this story, not you. For another thing, this horrible asshole--and the horrible asshole institution that is the FBI--now has a legitimate complaint to make against you for claiming he harmed you physically by throwing you against a cop car. The FBI and their hired informant harmed you and all Muslim people emotionally by doing this shit in other mosques to other Muslims; the random, probably not-FBI asshole white guys harmed you physically by throwing you to the ground on the basketball court. That's the actual, messy, far more interesting truth, both literally and emotionally, and I submit that you should have just fucking told it instead of making up some Spiderman Saves the Day bullshit where the famous malefactor came to your mosque and you and you alone recognized that he was a baddie.
Also, if you've had the good sense to hire fact checkers specifically to prevent you from saying dangerously untrue stuff, don't then refuse to listen to those people. Don't kick your own fact checkers out of your writers' room and make them sit in the hall like badly behaved schoolchildren for doing what you hired them to do, namely try to prevent you from screwing yourself out of your own cool Daily Show gig by skirting the truth in a way that's potentially actionable.
Again, and above all, do not, in your video trying to recover from all of the above, continue to fudge facts in the exact manner the fact checkers hired by you and the one writing for The New Yorker have been trying to point out is dangerous.
posted by Don Pepino at 1:04 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
Yes, thank you so much. I've been struggling to put my objections to this into words all day and you've just done it beautifully.
If somebody's doing both documentary-style factual stuff and comedy cellar broad stuff that's not meant to be taken as the literal truth, the difference needs to be made clear to the audience. I, for one, swallowed that FBI informant story hook line and sinker and am quite annoyed to find he made it all up, just as I was irritated when Michael Moore pulled similar bullshit in his "documentaries." If you don't make the line clear to the audience, then your "emotional truth" fictions undermine true stories. And you absolutely can't claim that "it was the truth, just my truth" if it involves and potentially harms real people who don't have your access to a massive stage and you don't give them veto power over the fictions you tell about them on that stage.
It was entirely unnecessary to embellish the racistprommom story in a manner that made a real life person seem to have been galaxies more cruel and obliviously heartless than she was. Did "Bethany" fail to clue him in and allow him to get all dressed up in his tux and show up at her door only to watch her get corsage-ed by a white boy and whisked off in a limo and then have to stand there in his finery listening to her mother explain that he wasn't the right color to be in pictures with her daughter? No, she did not, and there was no reason to tell people she did. The emotional truth of what actually happened is right there in the actual true story, perfectly accessible and perfectly excruciating just as it actually happened. The mom comes off just as awful as she clearly was. There was no need to put "Bethany" at risk by making her look like a total shitheel and then showing that picture.
The part of the rebuttal that points out the thing the article did wrong, namely imply that there was no racism and the entire thing was him overreacting to a girl wanting to go to prom with another boy, was fine and necessary. He should have focused on that, because that was actually dishonest and unfair. The rest of it, though, is much murkier.
The charge about Bethany and groom's actual image being used in the off Broadway show he doesn't actually refute, and it seems like he would actually refute it, were it false. Instead he employs the supersneaky, "Even in the Netflix special I don't use any real photos of Bethany or her family. Those are actors and their faces are blurred." That "even" is carrying a hefty load. Unless the photo you used in the off Broadway show, which is the photo the article is referencing, was not actually of Bethany and groom, this is a clear lie of omission. Which in a 20-minute "why The New Yorker is wrong and emotional truths are okay in some cases" video is really undermining your credibility. You can argue that what happens in a comedy cellar isn't strict reporting, and I can mostly buy that, but that argument absolutely doesn't extend to your rebuttal video claiming you did not doxx somebody. There you really need to use verifiable facts only, no fudging.
Because if the photo is fudged, what about the rest of the "receipts?" Are you lying throughout?
When did that "Bethany exonerates me" e-mail exchange happen in relation to the Netflix special, the doxxing, and the harassment?
Was that the entire e-mail exchange?
What about all the things "Bethany" says in Malone's article in paraphrase? Per the article, she "now believes" she got invited to the show because Minhaj wanted to humiliate her, for instance. If Malone made all that up, well, then that makes Malone the "psycho." (Like, she'd really have to be a malevolent sociopath. Whereas Minhaj just looks like a thoughtless and reckless jerk too in love with his own material to listen to people telling him he needs to kill his darlings.) Convenient how we can't look into it further by getting Bethany's POV in her own words because Bethany has already had a snootful of unpleasant exposure and is now trying to hide from all this bullshit.
Furthermore, it is a really bad idea to say a specific real actual human person hired as an FBI informant went to a specific real actual mosque when that person did not go to that mosque and when in fact there does not seem to be solid evidence that any FBI informants ever infiltrated that mosque. (Asshole white guys were shitty to Muslim kids on the basketball court does not translate to it was the FBI.) The guy you named was not there. He did not do to you what you said he did to you. Does the fact that he was at other mosques and did the shit you said he did to you to other people mean it's sufficiently emotionally true that he did it to you that you don't have to make that clear in your Netflix special? NO! You have to tell the actual literal factual truth when you're talking about real humans in the real world.
It does not exonerate you that after the fact you went and got forgiveness/approval from an actual person to whom much much worse things actually happened. It's still ruinously stupid to tell lies about this. For one, it's stolen valor. You didn't actually do this suffering. The person who suffered has the right to tell this story, not you. For another thing, this horrible asshole--and the horrible asshole institution that is the FBI--now has a legitimate complaint to make against you for claiming he harmed you physically by throwing you against a cop car. The FBI and their hired informant harmed you and all Muslim people emotionally by doing this shit in other mosques to other Muslims; the random, probably not-FBI asshole white guys harmed you physically by throwing you to the ground on the basketball court. That's the actual, messy, far more interesting truth, both literally and emotionally, and I submit that you should have just fucking told it instead of making up some Spiderman Saves the Day bullshit where the famous malefactor came to your mosque and you and you alone recognized that he was a baddie.
Also, if you've had the good sense to hire fact checkers specifically to prevent you from saying dangerously untrue stuff, don't then refuse to listen to those people. Don't kick your own fact checkers out of your writers' room and make them sit in the hall like badly behaved schoolchildren for doing what you hired them to do, namely try to prevent you from screwing yourself out of your own cool Daily Show gig by skirting the truth in a way that's potentially actionable.
Again, and above all, do not, in your video trying to recover from all of the above, continue to fudge facts in the exact manner the fact checkers hired by you and the one writing for The New Yorker have been trying to point out is dangerous.
posted by Don Pepino at 1:04 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
yes it's a real shame he didn't talk about bigotry the right way
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:16 PM on October 27, 2023 [13 favorites]
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:16 PM on October 27, 2023 [13 favorites]
>it's stolen valor. You didn't actually do this suffering.
This is offensive. I believe Hasan Minhaj when he says he personally did the exact same suffering, except in a less storifiable way.
>The person who suffered has the right to tell this story, not you.
(1) The literal person who suffered the exact thing literally expressed support for Hasan's right to tell this story and literally thanked him for telling it right. You don't get to police this for him, or for Hasan.
(2) Hasan has every right to tell the story of his own community. Especially given how few brown muslim men are allowed to be famous comics on TV. You and I are not brown Muslims. You and I have zero - less than zero - right to tell him what his boundaries and limits should be when it comes to telling stories of his community.
> For another thing, this horrible asshole--and the horrible asshole institution that is the FBI--now has a legitimate complaint to make against you for claiming he harmed you physically by throwing you against a cop car.
Holy shit, no, they do not.
posted by MiraK at 1:16 PM on October 27, 2023 [18 favorites]
This is offensive. I believe Hasan Minhaj when he says he personally did the exact same suffering, except in a less storifiable way.
>The person who suffered has the right to tell this story, not you.
(1) The literal person who suffered the exact thing literally expressed support for Hasan's right to tell this story and literally thanked him for telling it right. You don't get to police this for him, or for Hasan.
(2) Hasan has every right to tell the story of his own community. Especially given how few brown muslim men are allowed to be famous comics on TV. You and I are not brown Muslims. You and I have zero - less than zero - right to tell him what his boundaries and limits should be when it comes to telling stories of his community.
> For another thing, this horrible asshole--and the horrible asshole institution that is the FBI--now has a legitimate complaint to make against you for claiming he harmed you physically by throwing you against a cop car.
Holy shit, no, they do not.
posted by MiraK at 1:16 PM on October 27, 2023 [18 favorites]
The person who suffered has the right to tell this story, not you.
time to come for sarah mclachlan then, i mean, she didn't suffer anything those poor dogs did
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:27 PM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]
time to come for sarah mclachlan then, i mean, she didn't suffer anything those poor dogs did
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:27 PM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]
>making up some Spiderman Saves the Day bullshit where the famous malefactor came to your mosque and you and you alone recognized that he was a baddie.
I 100% believe Hasan when he says this *kind* of infiltration happened at his mosque. I 100% believe him when he says there was paranoia that he was experiencing but his parents, being more disconnected from ground realities, were totally in denial about. I 100% believe him when he describes that moment of his parent being confronted with a vindication of Hasan's paranoia and still not getting it. I am not a muslim and I wasn't even in America as a teen/young adult, but oh my GOD do I relate to this aspect of Minhaj's story. It rang so true to my life with my desi parents, even though I am so removed from his context: I can only imagine how necessary and validating this story was and is for Muslim Americans of Hasan's generation to hear.
posted by MiraK at 1:29 PM on October 27, 2023 [14 favorites]
I 100% believe Hasan when he says this *kind* of infiltration happened at his mosque. I 100% believe him when he says there was paranoia that he was experiencing but his parents, being more disconnected from ground realities, were totally in denial about. I 100% believe him when he describes that moment of his parent being confronted with a vindication of Hasan's paranoia and still not getting it. I am not a muslim and I wasn't even in America as a teen/young adult, but oh my GOD do I relate to this aspect of Minhaj's story. It rang so true to my life with my desi parents, even though I am so removed from his context: I can only imagine how necessary and validating this story was and is for Muslim Americans of Hasan's generation to hear.
posted by MiraK at 1:29 PM on October 27, 2023 [14 favorites]
then your "emotional truth" fictions undermine true stories
Bluntly, the people who weren't going to believe the literally true stories didn't need this incident to make them not believe the literally true stories. I used to think there was some merit to this kind of argument, but then I realized that bigots generally don't require any actual evidence for their positions.
Does not knowing whether a story a comedian is telling is literally true create some uncertainty in the comedian-audience relationship that might affect or diminish one's own reaction to the story? Yes, quite possibly it might. I don't even think that's an unfair reaction, if that's how you feel (that you need it to be literally true for a certain emotional reaction). But then that becomes a matter of artistic impact, not ethics--which in other contexts (in journalism, in court, before Congress) it really might be.
posted by praemunire at 1:30 PM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
Bluntly, the people who weren't going to believe the literally true stories didn't need this incident to make them not believe the literally true stories. I used to think there was some merit to this kind of argument, but then I realized that bigots generally don't require any actual evidence for their positions.
Does not knowing whether a story a comedian is telling is literally true create some uncertainty in the comedian-audience relationship that might affect or diminish one's own reaction to the story? Yes, quite possibly it might. I don't even think that's an unfair reaction, if that's how you feel (that you need it to be literally true for a certain emotional reaction). But then that becomes a matter of artistic impact, not ethics--which in other contexts (in journalism, in court, before Congress) it really might be.
posted by praemunire at 1:30 PM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
yes it's a real shame he didn't talk about bigotry the right wayThis really is the deepest, most interesting take out there, isn't it? The point is not tone-policing Minhaj's telling his and his community's story of racism and discrimination. The point is that when you mislead an audience in telling that story, and the audience finds out, that audience is going to care in a way that they wouldn't if you misled them about the terribleness of your flight from Cleveland.
That's why he's getting flak -- he's telling a more important story than Dane Cook or [insert nearly any other comedian] is, so it matters more whether or not it's true.
posted by pwe at 1:50 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
yes it's a real shame i didn't have the deepest, most interesting take on a site dominated by white people in this thread filled with comments like
"Hasan has a face that is at once earnest even while it seems to be bullshitting you."posted by i used to be someone else at 1:54 PM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
The point is that when you mislead an audience in telling that story, and the audience finds out, that audience is going to care in a way that they wouldn't if you misled them about the terribleness of your flight from Cleveland.more seriously i'd believe this if people actually listened and platformed the people most hit by marginalization, but we don't do any of that, do we? instead the media decides to pluck a select few who play the game, and so long as they follow the rules exactly the right way they get a platform and when it's convenient to push them out, why not?
do i believe most of the people who were skeptical that there's a problem with islamophobia would have somehow thought otherwise if hasan had been telling the whole, unvarnished, 100% truth, mining his suffering and tragedy for the white liberal gaze to coo about and Witness and think themselves so woke and so with it to have heard him talk about it the right way?
not on his fucking life, not on your fucking life, not on mine.
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:00 PM on October 27, 2023 [11 favorites]
I don’t think it would be hard to come up with an example of a story that almost anyone would find to be over the line. You can’t get away with making up that you got anthrax from a letter and almost died. But if you’re telling a story of an unnerving incident with a white powder and you exaggerate your response to play up how scary it was, is that the same? Personally I find the some of the edits he made to his stories discomfiting and think it would be better not to, but I don’t think it’s unforgivable, either.
posted by atoxyl at 2:01 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 2:01 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
That's why he's getting flak -- he's telling a more important story than Dane Cook or [insert nearly any other comedian] is, so it matters more whether or not it's true.We allow so much allegorical telling of "history" everywhere, including history classes - why does it matter that a guy telling stories about something that I think most of agree is true - that folks of color, folks of different faiths get hit with a thousand different forms of shittiness. Is the larger fact any less true because it didn't happen directly to him, but to a member of his mosque? Was he scared shitless about the anthrax thing and used hyperbole to convey his level of "holy shit" Does it substantially change that his nearly prom date's family were shitty because he's brown?
We use allegory and narrative restructuring all the time as tools to convey a bigger message all the time. Take one of my favorite movies - Glory - Shaw wasn't as heroic as the story paints him. Nobody was flogged. The soldiers received good gear and the pay dispute was handled through the chain of command, not a public protest. But all of that is built into the story for narrative purposes of conveying the message about the courage of those men. And that movie gets used constantly in history classes to tell a "true American story"
posted by drewbage1847 at 2:11 PM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
I think I'm going to have to watch his standup shows now because my initial response to so much of this is "but this is a standup show not a documentary, why would you believe this actually happened?" but clearly it is tripping enough people up that there must be something there. At the very least Hasan will get a slight boost to his Netflix viewing figures in addition to the view I gave his response on YouTube.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 2:13 PM on October 27, 2023
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 2:13 PM on October 27, 2023
Did you hear? Rodney Dangerfield sometimes did get respect! The nerve of that guy!
posted by SPrintF at 2:14 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by SPrintF at 2:14 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
Alright, coming back to this and doing a third re-read and rewatch of the video:
I think in this case, Minhaj got really screwed over by this journalist, and the journalist is out for a bad faith article. She came in clearly with the idea that Minhaj is not a credible person and should not be on The Daily Show, because he cannot do fact-based comedy, and then proceeds to interview him in a way to collect quotes to support this as a flimsy base. Why couldn't she just give him a straight question of, "How would you separate fact and reality in your comedy when hosting The Daily Show?" But no, she clearly wanted to take him down. Why didn't she just focus on the shitty workplace environment if she wanted to make a more credible case?
The second re-watch and my second comment in the thread, I got the impression of Minhaj as a liar because of him trying to do emotional appeals about whether the article calls him a psycho, and then trying to furiously show receipts that he isn't and the way he has gone around it. I felt compelled to say he was a liar in that second one, because it really rubbed me the wrong way that he was trying to do an emotional appeal for something that I didn't find really valid, and I regret writing that now and putting it on MeFi, but that's what it is.
But I think that's the POC double-bind -- if you defend yourself in not exactly the right way, I think you will be discredited, and I admit having internalized that whiteness as well in making that second judgment, and I don't think he's a liar.
I also do think that this is the weird part of stand-up comedy that one is supposed to appeal to the audience in having emotional stories about POC suffering...and then the fact that POC suffering is not sufficiently true, white people are now angry? How come only white people are allowed to embellish or mix stories together? Are you supposed to have a disclaimer before each show that coincidences to real life people or situations are fake? Do white comedians have to do that too?
1) Is Hasan Minhaj put underneath a microscope because he is a visibly brown Muslim man? Absolutely. Does this fall into the category of POC entertainers being put under huge amounts of scrutiny that white entertainers are not put under? Definitely.
2) Was this article poorly written and misleading and does not pass several smell-checks when it comes to clear and direct writing? Yes.
3) Is it true that Minhaj also did not completely tell truthful stories in this standup? Yes. Is he supposed to?
As a QTPOC writer myself, I've experienced the unbearable amounts of insane scrutiny from other white writers that I've never seen my white compatriots ever receive, because they will do anything to discredit white supremacy as a thing that exists. I definitely don't feel comfortable publishing creative nonfiction or memoir or doing standup because I feel I have to be a reporter. White consumers of my work treated one of my works as actual history, and I stopped work on a project because I could not get them to stop viewing it as such. Honestly, maybe white consumers should check themselves on their entitlement to POC narratives...
posted by yueliang at 2:16 PM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
I think in this case, Minhaj got really screwed over by this journalist, and the journalist is out for a bad faith article. She came in clearly with the idea that Minhaj is not a credible person and should not be on The Daily Show, because he cannot do fact-based comedy, and then proceeds to interview him in a way to collect quotes to support this as a flimsy base. Why couldn't she just give him a straight question of, "How would you separate fact and reality in your comedy when hosting The Daily Show?" But no, she clearly wanted to take him down. Why didn't she just focus on the shitty workplace environment if she wanted to make a more credible case?
The second re-watch and my second comment in the thread, I got the impression of Minhaj as a liar because of him trying to do emotional appeals about whether the article calls him a psycho, and then trying to furiously show receipts that he isn't and the way he has gone around it. I felt compelled to say he was a liar in that second one, because it really rubbed me the wrong way that he was trying to do an emotional appeal for something that I didn't find really valid, and I regret writing that now and putting it on MeFi, but that's what it is.
But I think that's the POC double-bind -- if you defend yourself in not exactly the right way, I think you will be discredited, and I admit having internalized that whiteness as well in making that second judgment, and I don't think he's a liar.
I also do think that this is the weird part of stand-up comedy that one is supposed to appeal to the audience in having emotional stories about POC suffering...and then the fact that POC suffering is not sufficiently true, white people are now angry? How come only white people are allowed to embellish or mix stories together? Are you supposed to have a disclaimer before each show that coincidences to real life people or situations are fake? Do white comedians have to do that too?
1) Is Hasan Minhaj put underneath a microscope because he is a visibly brown Muslim man? Absolutely. Does this fall into the category of POC entertainers being put under huge amounts of scrutiny that white entertainers are not put under? Definitely.
2) Was this article poorly written and misleading and does not pass several smell-checks when it comes to clear and direct writing? Yes.
3) Is it true that Minhaj also did not completely tell truthful stories in this standup? Yes. Is he supposed to?
As a QTPOC writer myself, I've experienced the unbearable amounts of insane scrutiny from other white writers that I've never seen my white compatriots ever receive, because they will do anything to discredit white supremacy as a thing that exists. I definitely don't feel comfortable publishing creative nonfiction or memoir or doing standup because I feel I have to be a reporter. White consumers of my work treated one of my works as actual history, and I stopped work on a project because I could not get them to stop viewing it as such. Honestly, maybe white consumers should check themselves on their entitlement to POC narratives...
posted by yueliang at 2:16 PM on October 27, 2023 [17 favorites]
There's a lot of energy being wasted here trying to figure out what actually happened in a second-rate comic's life. Yes facts are important and I can see why someone who was into Minaj may be dismayed at these revelations but there's no greater good being done by this article, and in fact is likely going to lead to worse outcomes for BIPOC people.
I wish Clare had used her journalistic talents, the significant status she has as a staff writer at the New Yorker, and her social capital as a white person journalist to dig into something important as opposed to telling us, in beautiful prose, and backed up by the New Yorker's incredible fact checking team, that a somewhat-funny brown person was not quite as put upon by racists as he let on.
I'm looking forward to her next think piece where she puts it out there that Dave Chappelle never had a friend named Timmy.
posted by sid at 2:22 PM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]
I wish Clare had used her journalistic talents, the significant status she has as a staff writer at the New Yorker, and her social capital as a white person journalist to dig into something important as opposed to telling us, in beautiful prose, and backed up by the New Yorker's incredible fact checking team, that a somewhat-funny brown person was not quite as put upon by racists as he let on.
I'm looking forward to her next think piece where she puts it out there that Dave Chappelle never had a friend named Timmy.
posted by sid at 2:22 PM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]
funny you mention chappelle. bigots and the bigot-adjacent make much hay out of the fact that he claimed to have been friends with a trans woman, which is why he's allowed to talk shit about us.
apparently that wasn't quite true, the whole "i have a tranny friend" bit, but there's no new yorker article on that.
he did get booed recently for saying something positive about the palestinians though, so maybe one's a-comin' soon.
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:27 PM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]
apparently that wasn't quite true, the whole "i have a tranny friend" bit, but there's no new yorker article on that.
he did get booed recently for saying something positive about the palestinians though, so maybe one's a-comin' soon.
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:27 PM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]
The emotional truth of what actually happened is right there in the actual true story, perfectly accessible and perfectly excruciating just as it actually happened.
You know what's not in the true story just as it actually happened? THE HUMOR. It's not a funny story, it's just a sad one. All three of these stories - the true versions of these versions - are just sad and awful. Minhaj, in the video (around 12:00), even talks about how earlier versions of the FBI informant story that he performed in clubs didn't work; this is a process comedians call "workshopping" and I have zero doubt that all three of these stories were extensively workshopped by Minhaj to get them to a point where they consistently got laughs and kept the audience engaged and along for the ride, long before anybody on Metafilter ever heard any of them.
So let's be clear: everyone who is angry or upset at Hasan Minhaj for embellishing these stories is putting him in a perfect damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't double bind. If he embellishes the stories he's being DISHONEST about something IMPORTANT (dun dun dun!). If he doesn't embellish the stories - well, then they're not funny, and either those stories don't make it into his comedy special where being funny is Literally The Job, or more likely, Minhaj gets judged to be too preachy and not funny enough to be granted the opportunity to make a comedy special in the first place. Either way these stories are never heard at all, embellished or otherwise. That's a point he stresses about the FBI informant story - it didn't happen exactly like that to him, but it did happen to someone he knows and he cared about getting the story out there. And the only way that story gets out there - at all - is if it's funny. If it can be made to be funny. Hasan Minhaj, thankfully, understands that. Would that more people on Metafilter did.
posted by mstokes650 at 2:35 PM on October 27, 2023 [23 favorites]
You know what's not in the true story just as it actually happened? THE HUMOR. It's not a funny story, it's just a sad one. All three of these stories - the true versions of these versions - are just sad and awful. Minhaj, in the video (around 12:00), even talks about how earlier versions of the FBI informant story that he performed in clubs didn't work; this is a process comedians call "workshopping" and I have zero doubt that all three of these stories were extensively workshopped by Minhaj to get them to a point where they consistently got laughs and kept the audience engaged and along for the ride, long before anybody on Metafilter ever heard any of them.
So let's be clear: everyone who is angry or upset at Hasan Minhaj for embellishing these stories is putting him in a perfect damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't double bind. If he embellishes the stories he's being DISHONEST about something IMPORTANT (dun dun dun!). If he doesn't embellish the stories - well, then they're not funny, and either those stories don't make it into his comedy special where being funny is Literally The Job, or more likely, Minhaj gets judged to be too preachy and not funny enough to be granted the opportunity to make a comedy special in the first place. Either way these stories are never heard at all, embellished or otherwise. That's a point he stresses about the FBI informant story - it didn't happen exactly like that to him, but it did happen to someone he knows and he cared about getting the story out there. And the only way that story gets out there - at all - is if it's funny. If it can be made to be funny. Hasan Minhaj, thankfully, understands that. Would that more people on Metafilter did.
posted by mstokes650 at 2:35 PM on October 27, 2023 [23 favorites]
> I don't think Hasan Minaj is a very good comic.
> Minaj
> second-rate comic
> a somewhat-funny brown person
Jeez, dude, give it a rest. You're coming off like a guy saying over and over that he finds a female celebrity ugly, ya know?
PS: meanwhile you take the time to note that the journalist's prose is "beautiful". SMH, with friends like these...
posted by MiraK at 2:47 PM on October 27, 2023 [16 favorites]
> Minaj
> second-rate comic
> a somewhat-funny brown person
Jeez, dude, give it a rest. You're coming off like a guy saying over and over that he finds a female celebrity ugly, ya know?
PS: meanwhile you take the time to note that the journalist's prose is "beautiful". SMH, with friends like these...
posted by MiraK at 2:47 PM on October 27, 2023 [16 favorites]
The emotional truth of what actually happened is right there in the actual true story, perfectly accessible and perfectly excruciating just as it actually happened.
the embellishment isn't unique to hasan minhaj, either. in hannah gadsby's first netflix special, nanette, she tells a humorous story about coming out to her mother, and another how some dude was all aggro because he thought she was hitting on his lady friend until he realized hannah gadsby was a woman. she could have left it at that, because the emotional truth was there. but of course, later on in the special she strips away the humor and says that's not how either of the actual story goes, but then that's also the point so many dudes check out and then angrily say the show wasn't a comedy show at all. she states in previous sets she didn't tell the whole truth, just the embellished stories; had she, she might have never gotten the platform she did.
daniel sloss got a lot of fawning press recently in the wake of the revelations surrounding russell brand for his bit at the end of his 2019 special, x. do we think that entire section played out exactly as he narrated it? are we assuming that there was absolutely no embellishment?
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:48 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
the embellishment isn't unique to hasan minhaj, either. in hannah gadsby's first netflix special, nanette, she tells a humorous story about coming out to her mother, and another how some dude was all aggro because he thought she was hitting on his lady friend until he realized hannah gadsby was a woman. she could have left it at that, because the emotional truth was there. but of course, later on in the special she strips away the humor and says that's not how either of the actual story goes, but then that's also the point so many dudes check out and then angrily say the show wasn't a comedy show at all. she states in previous sets she didn't tell the whole truth, just the embellished stories; had she, she might have never gotten the platform she did.
daniel sloss got a lot of fawning press recently in the wake of the revelations surrounding russell brand for his bit at the end of his 2019 special, x. do we think that entire section played out exactly as he narrated it? are we assuming that there was absolutely no embellishment?
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:48 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
The emotional truth of what actually happened is right there in the actual true story, perfectly accessible and perfectly excruciating just as it actually happened.
and, if i'm going to be honest, i do not for one moment believe that most actual true stories are "perfectly accessible" "just as [they] actually happened".
because if they were, maybe people wouldn't be happy to speak over trans people on the regular. maybe people wouldn't argue with women about whether something was really misogyny or sexism. maybe people wouldn't argue with asians about whether an accent or a lunchbox moment or slanty-eyes or a recurring pattern of speeding tickets against primarily asian drivers in doraville, georgia, between 1995-2005 was racist. maybe people wouldn't argue with black people about the racist nature of jim crow, about modern policing patterns, about media stereotyping, or about how fucked up plantation weddings are. maybe people wouldn't be ignoring gazans talking about pieces of people's bodies raining down on them after a bomb hits another apartment building. maybe people wouldn't be pretending that antisemitism isn't actually a thing.
if those stories were told exactly as they were, we wouldn't have entire industries of cishet white writers, cishet white actors, cishet white directors, cishet white producers, giving each other blowjobs over how great their work is about other people's stories (embellished, of course) and getting awarded for it.
and the sick thing is that those embellished interpretations are what usually allows the marginalized to get some air. not much, maybe about an hour's worth here and there, but still.
but yes, i should be mad that some non-white guy did the embellishing this time, about his people.
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:58 PM on October 27, 2023 [10 favorites]
and, if i'm going to be honest, i do not for one moment believe that most actual true stories are "perfectly accessible" "just as [they] actually happened".
because if they were, maybe people wouldn't be happy to speak over trans people on the regular. maybe people wouldn't argue with women about whether something was really misogyny or sexism. maybe people wouldn't argue with asians about whether an accent or a lunchbox moment or slanty-eyes or a recurring pattern of speeding tickets against primarily asian drivers in doraville, georgia, between 1995-2005 was racist. maybe people wouldn't argue with black people about the racist nature of jim crow, about modern policing patterns, about media stereotyping, or about how fucked up plantation weddings are. maybe people wouldn't be ignoring gazans talking about pieces of people's bodies raining down on them after a bomb hits another apartment building. maybe people wouldn't be pretending that antisemitism isn't actually a thing.
if those stories were told exactly as they were, we wouldn't have entire industries of cishet white writers, cishet white actors, cishet white directors, cishet white producers, giving each other blowjobs over how great their work is about other people's stories (embellished, of course) and getting awarded for it.
and the sick thing is that those embellished interpretations are what usually allows the marginalized to get some air. not much, maybe about an hour's worth here and there, but still.
but yes, i should be mad that some non-white guy did the embellishing this time, about his people.
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:58 PM on October 27, 2023 [10 favorites]
Anyway, if you’re consuming stand up and expect the comedy routine to be a 100% reflection of what actually happened, you’re a fool and misinterpreting things.
You're telling me Stewart Lee did not, in fact, vomit into the gaping anus of Christ? Better send in the New Yorker!
Also, Christ, some of y'all making me remember the joyful Islamophobia of the aughts like it was, oh, thirty seconds ago.
posted by klanawa at 3:03 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
You're telling me Stewart Lee did not, in fact, vomit into the gaping anus of Christ? Better send in the New Yorker!
Also, Christ, some of y'all making me remember the joyful Islamophobia of the aughts like it was, oh, thirty seconds ago.
posted by klanawa at 3:03 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]
Holy shit, no, they do not.
The FBI shouldn't exist in the first place, and anyone affiliated with it who had anything to do with this project should be under the jail and not one of them has a leg to stand on morally. (And if I'm honest, if that particular FBI informant guy had a sad because of this, then yay.) Despite all of that they do now have a reason to whine that they've been lied about, should they want to do that for some reason. They probably will not because they do not GAF because they're not at all vulnerable because Minhaj is of course right that barely anyone is paying attention and thus few people even know the FBI did (/do? probably. They probably still do) this stuff. What will bringing attention to the FBI's malevolent infiltrations and then being discovered to have been inventing the particulars of them do to understanding of the problem among the set of people who didn't know about it before, learned about it in his Netflix show, then learned that it didn't happen to him, after all? Who knows, but probably some of them will not know whether to believe it and some of those will be inclined to forget about it and return to a complacent ignorance. Which is so unnecessary because he could've simply told one of many true stories that happened to real people and provided his audience the literal and the emotional truth.
you need it to be literally true for a certain emotional reaction). But then that becomes a matter of artistic impact, not ethics--which in other contexts (in journalism, in court, before Congress) it really might be.
I don't need stuff to be literally true to react to it; if I did, fiction wouldn't work for me. I couldn't watch movies effectively. What does this even mean? I want writers who purport to be telling the truth--which Minhaj absolutely was in that Netflix special--to be in good faith doing their best to tell me stuff that is true. And not even all the time--I don't particularly mind getting fooled when it doesn't matter. Whoever that guy was that was writing for Harper's for a while and then was discovered to have been making it all up? Stephen Glass, I think? He had the long and completely made up story about telephone psychics. It completely took me in, and then I found out it was all bullshit and it was hilarious. The psychic thing was entertaining and it wasn't about something horrific that I needed to know the truth about to, like, decide whether I'm looking at this country's equivalent to the Reichstag fire and it's about time to emigrate.
For a while there everybody was getting slammed for writing hoax memoirs. I didn't get torqued about any of those because none of them particularly mattered. There was the Million Little Pieces guy with the very bad rehab story. There was the one where the NYTimes reporter won the Pullitzer for the invented child heroin addict: no harm no foul; there is heroin addiction in the world, no doubt some of the addicts are appealing children; none were to hand, so she invented an appealing child heroin addict. I actually don't know with that one, not having read it, but it didn't seem as egregious as this because of the whole real people part. She didn't take a real person and fictionalize an episode in their life for an enormous audience and get that person harassed. She didn't take horrible "not-in-our-name" type of crime-against-humanity-approaching abuse being perpetrated by real people in the FBI in "the wake of 9/11" and make herself the hero of the story.
"That's a point he stresses about the FBI informant story - it didn't happen exactly like that to him, but it did happen to someone he knows and he cared about getting the story out there. And the only way that story gets out there - at all - is if it's funny. If it can be made to be funny. Hasan Minhaj, thankfully, understands that."
Okay, sure: make it funny. Why is it funnier if it happens to him? All he has to do is say "So my friend, we'll call him Ralph," switch out "I" and "me" and "my" for "he," "him," and "his," toss in a "details have been changed to protect anonymity," make sure not to name any real people if they didn't actually figure in the story, and voila, same story, still funny, just not a misleading, self-aggrandizing fiction.
"in hannah gadsby's first netflix special, nanette, she tells a humorous story about coming out to her mother, and another how some dude was all aggro because he thought she was hitting on his lady friend until he realized hannah gadsby was a woman. she could have left it at that, because the emotional truth was there. but of course, later on in the special she strips away the humor and says that's not how either of the actual story goes, but then that's also the point so many dudes check out and then angrily say the show wasn't a comedy show at all. she states in previous sets she didn't tell the whole truth, just the embellished stories; had she, she might have never gotten the platform she did."
But Nanette is so good precisely because it's true. And when it was embellished for the lols, it was her own story she was fictionalizing; she was not playing with other people's stories. And she famously quit doing that because, she realized, the fictionalizing to make it comfortable for people was bad for her and bad, she began to see, for all people like her. Which is the entire point of Nanette. And Nanette, uncomfortable as it was, was how everyone on the globe got to know who Hannah Gadsby is. This seems rather to support than contradict what I am trying to say, namely that it's better to stick to the truth when you're dealing with stuff that really matters, that your overall performance can hit huge even if parts of it are both true and sad, and embellishments and hyperbole should not be used to jooj up your act if the story you're telling is not just about you and the embellishments in it are liable to hurt real people in the real world, like "Bethany."
posted by Don Pepino at 3:31 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
The FBI shouldn't exist in the first place, and anyone affiliated with it who had anything to do with this project should be under the jail and not one of them has a leg to stand on morally. (And if I'm honest, if that particular FBI informant guy had a sad because of this, then yay.) Despite all of that they do now have a reason to whine that they've been lied about, should they want to do that for some reason. They probably will not because they do not GAF because they're not at all vulnerable because Minhaj is of course right that barely anyone is paying attention and thus few people even know the FBI did (/do? probably. They probably still do) this stuff. What will bringing attention to the FBI's malevolent infiltrations and then being discovered to have been inventing the particulars of them do to understanding of the problem among the set of people who didn't know about it before, learned about it in his Netflix show, then learned that it didn't happen to him, after all? Who knows, but probably some of them will not know whether to believe it and some of those will be inclined to forget about it and return to a complacent ignorance. Which is so unnecessary because he could've simply told one of many true stories that happened to real people and provided his audience the literal and the emotional truth.
you need it to be literally true for a certain emotional reaction). But then that becomes a matter of artistic impact, not ethics--which in other contexts (in journalism, in court, before Congress) it really might be.
I don't need stuff to be literally true to react to it; if I did, fiction wouldn't work for me. I couldn't watch movies effectively. What does this even mean? I want writers who purport to be telling the truth--which Minhaj absolutely was in that Netflix special--to be in good faith doing their best to tell me stuff that is true. And not even all the time--I don't particularly mind getting fooled when it doesn't matter. Whoever that guy was that was writing for Harper's for a while and then was discovered to have been making it all up? Stephen Glass, I think? He had the long and completely made up story about telephone psychics. It completely took me in, and then I found out it was all bullshit and it was hilarious. The psychic thing was entertaining and it wasn't about something horrific that I needed to know the truth about to, like, decide whether I'm looking at this country's equivalent to the Reichstag fire and it's about time to emigrate.
For a while there everybody was getting slammed for writing hoax memoirs. I didn't get torqued about any of those because none of them particularly mattered. There was the Million Little Pieces guy with the very bad rehab story. There was the one where the NYTimes reporter won the Pullitzer for the invented child heroin addict: no harm no foul; there is heroin addiction in the world, no doubt some of the addicts are appealing children; none were to hand, so she invented an appealing child heroin addict. I actually don't know with that one, not having read it, but it didn't seem as egregious as this because of the whole real people part. She didn't take a real person and fictionalize an episode in their life for an enormous audience and get that person harassed. She didn't take horrible "not-in-our-name" type of crime-against-humanity-approaching abuse being perpetrated by real people in the FBI in "the wake of 9/11" and make herself the hero of the story.
"That's a point he stresses about the FBI informant story - it didn't happen exactly like that to him, but it did happen to someone he knows and he cared about getting the story out there. And the only way that story gets out there - at all - is if it's funny. If it can be made to be funny. Hasan Minhaj, thankfully, understands that."
Okay, sure: make it funny. Why is it funnier if it happens to him? All he has to do is say "So my friend, we'll call him Ralph," switch out "I" and "me" and "my" for "he," "him," and "his," toss in a "details have been changed to protect anonymity," make sure not to name any real people if they didn't actually figure in the story, and voila, same story, still funny, just not a misleading, self-aggrandizing fiction.
"in hannah gadsby's first netflix special, nanette, she tells a humorous story about coming out to her mother, and another how some dude was all aggro because he thought she was hitting on his lady friend until he realized hannah gadsby was a woman. she could have left it at that, because the emotional truth was there. but of course, later on in the special she strips away the humor and says that's not how either of the actual story goes, but then that's also the point so many dudes check out and then angrily say the show wasn't a comedy show at all. she states in previous sets she didn't tell the whole truth, just the embellished stories; had she, she might have never gotten the platform she did."
But Nanette is so good precisely because it's true. And when it was embellished for the lols, it was her own story she was fictionalizing; she was not playing with other people's stories. And she famously quit doing that because, she realized, the fictionalizing to make it comfortable for people was bad for her and bad, she began to see, for all people like her. Which is the entire point of Nanette. And Nanette, uncomfortable as it was, was how everyone on the globe got to know who Hannah Gadsby is. This seems rather to support than contradict what I am trying to say, namely that it's better to stick to the truth when you're dealing with stuff that really matters, that your overall performance can hit huge even if parts of it are both true and sad, and embellishments and hyperbole should not be used to jooj up your act if the story you're telling is not just about you and the embellishments in it are liable to hurt real people in the real world, like "Bethany."
posted by Don Pepino at 3:31 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
> Despite all of that they [the FBI] do now have a reason to whine that they've been lied about
They aren't whining, though. YOU are, on their behalf, for some unfathomable reason. They haven't said a goddamn word.
Though if they eventually choose to, it's going to be hard not to remember who thought up this bogus complaint for them, who legitimized their whining before they had even thought to whine, who essentially sicced the FBI on a brown Muslim comedian hot on the heels of an internet pile-on that followed a targeted hit job by the great White New Yorker itself.
I repeat, with friends like these...
posted by MiraK at 3:36 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
They aren't whining, though. YOU are, on their behalf, for some unfathomable reason. They haven't said a goddamn word.
Though if they eventually choose to, it's going to be hard not to remember who thought up this bogus complaint for them, who legitimized their whining before they had even thought to whine, who essentially sicced the FBI on a brown Muslim comedian hot on the heels of an internet pile-on that followed a targeted hit job by the great White New Yorker itself.
I repeat, with friends like these...
posted by MiraK at 3:36 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
This discussion reminds me of Sally Mann's book "Hold Still: A Memoir with Photographs." She talks about how people want to treat her photographs as if they are documenting reality, because they seem real when, in fact, they are staged. She talks about being criticized for "exploiting" her children when they were willing participants in the staging of the photographs.
It's real for the viewer because the emotions they feel are real.
There's a scene where her daughter is at a gallery opening and is approached by someone to ask about emotional content and wants to know more about the reality of the photograph. The daughter can't connect with the viewer because when she looks at the photo, she just remembers posing for it for her mother.
But maybe that story is made up, too.
posted by betaray at 3:41 PM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
It's real for the viewer because the emotions they feel are real.
There's a scene where her daughter is at a gallery opening and is approached by someone to ask about emotional content and wants to know more about the reality of the photograph. The daughter can't connect with the viewer because when she looks at the photo, she just remembers posing for it for her mother.
But maybe that story is made up, too.
posted by betaray at 3:41 PM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
But Nanette is so good precisely because it's true. And when it was embellished for the lols, it was her own story she was fictionalizing; she was not playing with other people's stories. And she famously quit doing that because, she realized, the fictionalizing to make it comfortable for people was bad for her and bad, she began to see, for all people like her. Which is the entire point of Nanette. And Nanette, uncomfortable as it was, was how everyone on the globe got to know who Hannah Gadsby is. This seems rather to support than contradict what I am trying to say, namely that it's better to stick to the truth when you're dealing with stuff that really matters
No, you're missing the point. The point is: back when Hannah Gadsby *wasn't* telling the "true" story in her stand up performances, do you think journalists should have gone after her and fact checked her stories and smeared her with hot pieces and she and ensured that she was denied other, better, bigger gigs on that basis?
(and oh, it's not true that she wasn't telling other people's stories, there was that aggro guy and even more obvious, there was her mom! About whom she used to tell a pretty unflattering story!)
Should journalists have gone after her? Stopped her from doing Nanette, because that was a show about truth, and she had proved she can't be trusted to tell it?
This is the point being made about Hannah Gadsby. Her old standup performances are to Nanette as Homecoming King is to (maybe possibly) Minhaj heading up The Daily Show.
If she had been policed as the way Hasan is being policed now, there would be no Nanette. But not only do we easily recognize how damaging that would have been for her, we also recognize how ridiculous it would have been. Those stories she was telling were true by the standards of her medium, or true enough. Come now. Not all comedians can aspire to the standards of, say, Louis CK, right? The guy who went on stage and confessed over and over to sexually assaulting people?? And was never believed because THEN we somehow "knew" he was just doing a schtick? 🙄
posted by MiraK at 3:56 PM on October 27, 2023 [11 favorites]
No, you're missing the point. The point is: back when Hannah Gadsby *wasn't* telling the "true" story in her stand up performances, do you think journalists should have gone after her and fact checked her stories and smeared her with hot pieces and she and ensured that she was denied other, better, bigger gigs on that basis?
(and oh, it's not true that she wasn't telling other people's stories, there was that aggro guy and even more obvious, there was her mom! About whom she used to tell a pretty unflattering story!)
Should journalists have gone after her? Stopped her from doing Nanette, because that was a show about truth, and she had proved she can't be trusted to tell it?
This is the point being made about Hannah Gadsby. Her old standup performances are to Nanette as Homecoming King is to (maybe possibly) Minhaj heading up The Daily Show.
If she had been policed as the way Hasan is being policed now, there would be no Nanette. But not only do we easily recognize how damaging that would have been for her, we also recognize how ridiculous it would have been. Those stories she was telling were true by the standards of her medium, or true enough. Come now. Not all comedians can aspire to the standards of, say, Louis CK, right? The guy who went on stage and confessed over and over to sexually assaulting people?? And was never believed because THEN we somehow "knew" he was just doing a schtick? 🙄
posted by MiraK at 3:56 PM on October 27, 2023 [11 favorites]
David Sedaris says happened exactly the way he puts it.
David Sedaris has actually been called out for exactly this type of embellishment.
posted by bq at 3:57 PM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
David Sedaris has actually been called out for exactly this type of embellishment.
posted by bq at 3:57 PM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]
Yeah, some of the comments in this thread are disappointing, to say the least - as will soon be clear, I think there is room to still be critical of Minhaj, but those can be made without calling him "a somewhat-funny brown person." Flagged.
Having followed Minhaj's work for years, read the New Yorker piece, and now finally watched his rebuttal, like others I'm left with reduced trust in both Minhaj and Malone, though I appreciate that Minhaj has actually apologized and promised to revise his approach a bit. Malone meanwhile isn't moving an inch. Malone clearly had a pre-agenda while doing the reporting – I am curious what exactly her assignment was – if the assignment was "what kind of host would Minhaj be of The Daily Show" it would have made more sense just to focus on his work on Patriot Act. Her framing of what he says about "emotional truth" is the most disingenuous bit of her reporting - he clearly makes a distinction of what he views as OK to do in a stage show than on Patriot Act. And it's clear Minhaj did more than Malone acknowledges to protect Bethany's identity, even if people did eventually doxx her. I'm not sure that's his fault though - I mean, Internet stalkers are going to stalk, there is a limit to how much he could protect her identity.
If he doesn't embellish the stories - well, then they're not funny
Well, not quite - he's not one of those comics where it's punch line after punch line - like many stand ups, he alternates between funny bits and bits that are intended to evoke other emotions, including sadness. The story about prom isn't supposed to funny - it's a sad story. And it would be sad if he had told like it had actually happened.
So, I first learned of Minhaj by listening to an interview he did on You Made it Weird, a podcast of interviews with comedians by another comedian. It includes a lot of "shop talk" about the process of comedy. I just re-listened to the bit where Minhaj tells the story of prom - I recall this because this got me to watch the Netflix special. Anyhow, in this interview he describes it a bit oddly - it's hard for me to tell, he either says 4-8 hours before or 48hrs before, but then repeats the lie that found out he wasn't going to prom at her doorstep, in his "J.C. Penny suit" at the very moment another boy is putting a corsage on Bethany. This is similar to the version in the special. Again, this is a podcast where comedians discuss craft - this is a place where I'd expect a comedian to admit to embellishment, not just repeat it as fact. (People interested can listen here, roughly 53:30-59:00, content warning that Minhaj uses the slur against Muslims that contains the N-word)
The anthrax powder bit I'm less bothered by - he was mailed white powder, it did get on his daughter - that he determined that his daughter didn't actually need to be taken to the hospital doesn't change the fact that a scary thing did indeed happen to him. With the mosque story, I'm also less bothered by it, though agree he would have sacrificed nothing if he had just taken himself out of it, and introduced the guy who it actually happened to.
Anyway, do I think what he's done in the worst thing in the world? No. But do I prefer comedians who present themselves as truth-tellers (as opposed to those that are more punch-line based) to be honest about where they embellishing, at least when it comes to topics of political/social importance? Yeah. I'll still watch his stuff, he's talented at the craft of putting together an hour of standup that blends humor with deeper reflections on society - but I hope he is more careful in the future, as he says he plans to be.
posted by coffeecat at 4:09 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
Having followed Minhaj's work for years, read the New Yorker piece, and now finally watched his rebuttal, like others I'm left with reduced trust in both Minhaj and Malone, though I appreciate that Minhaj has actually apologized and promised to revise his approach a bit. Malone meanwhile isn't moving an inch. Malone clearly had a pre-agenda while doing the reporting – I am curious what exactly her assignment was – if the assignment was "what kind of host would Minhaj be of The Daily Show" it would have made more sense just to focus on his work on Patriot Act. Her framing of what he says about "emotional truth" is the most disingenuous bit of her reporting - he clearly makes a distinction of what he views as OK to do in a stage show than on Patriot Act. And it's clear Minhaj did more than Malone acknowledges to protect Bethany's identity, even if people did eventually doxx her. I'm not sure that's his fault though - I mean, Internet stalkers are going to stalk, there is a limit to how much he could protect her identity.
If he doesn't embellish the stories - well, then they're not funny
Well, not quite - he's not one of those comics where it's punch line after punch line - like many stand ups, he alternates between funny bits and bits that are intended to evoke other emotions, including sadness. The story about prom isn't supposed to funny - it's a sad story. And it would be sad if he had told like it had actually happened.
So, I first learned of Minhaj by listening to an interview he did on You Made it Weird, a podcast of interviews with comedians by another comedian. It includes a lot of "shop talk" about the process of comedy. I just re-listened to the bit where Minhaj tells the story of prom - I recall this because this got me to watch the Netflix special. Anyhow, in this interview he describes it a bit oddly - it's hard for me to tell, he either says 4-8 hours before or 48hrs before, but then repeats the lie that found out he wasn't going to prom at her doorstep, in his "J.C. Penny suit" at the very moment another boy is putting a corsage on Bethany. This is similar to the version in the special. Again, this is a podcast where comedians discuss craft - this is a place where I'd expect a comedian to admit to embellishment, not just repeat it as fact. (People interested can listen here, roughly 53:30-59:00, content warning that Minhaj uses the slur against Muslims that contains the N-word)
The anthrax powder bit I'm less bothered by - he was mailed white powder, it did get on his daughter - that he determined that his daughter didn't actually need to be taken to the hospital doesn't change the fact that a scary thing did indeed happen to him. With the mosque story, I'm also less bothered by it, though agree he would have sacrificed nothing if he had just taken himself out of it, and introduced the guy who it actually happened to.
Anyway, do I think what he's done in the worst thing in the world? No. But do I prefer comedians who present themselves as truth-tellers (as opposed to those that are more punch-line based) to be honest about where they embellishing, at least when it comes to topics of political/social importance? Yeah. I'll still watch his stuff, he's talented at the craft of putting together an hour of standup that blends humor with deeper reflections on society - but I hope he is more careful in the future, as he says he plans to be.
posted by coffeecat at 4:09 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]
Yeah, some of the comments in this thread are disappointing, to say the least - as will soon be clear, I think there is room to still be critical of Minhaj, but those can be made without calling him "a somewhat-funny brown person." Flagged.
Not sure why you think my taste in humour is flag worthy? Did you actually read my comment? I make it quite clear that I think the New Yorker article is way off the mark.
Are you suggesting that calling a brown person 'brown' is somehow offensive? Because... as a brown person I find that offensive.
posted by sid at 6:27 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
It's offensive to say things like "a somewhat funny brown man"
I mentioned the colour of his skin because it seems there is a racial component to the reporting here. I don't think there would be such a deep dive into the facts if he weren't brown and Muslim.
posted by sid at 6:57 PM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
I mentioned the colour of his skin because it seems there is a racial component to the reporting here. I don't think there would be such a deep dive into the facts if he weren't brown and Muslim.
posted by sid at 6:57 PM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
Mod note: A few deleted. Don't attack other members; don't make assumptions about the personal ethnic or religious backgrounds of other members, and please speak for yourself, allow others to express themselves, and avoid turning the conversation into a discussion or argument with specific people.
posted by taz (staff) at 10:41 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by taz (staff) at 10:41 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]
Guys! Guys! Last night I was watching this movie on Netflix, No Hard Feelings, and guess who was in it? Hasan Minhaj--except he kept calling himself Doug Khan! And get this, he said he was a real-estate agent! I just don't know how I can ever trust him again.
posted by mittens at 5:55 AM on October 28, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by mittens at 5:55 AM on October 28, 2023 [2 favorites]
Minhaj releasing audio actually damages the practice of Malone’s interview practices, which he knows, which I’m sure is half of why he did it
I really don't get the above at all. It's perfectly normal and accepted journalistic practice to release audio when there's a dispute about how an interview has been presented. That's basically the best thing anyone can do as a subject to correct the record in an era where the imbalance of the old adage "don't ever get into a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel" has been at least somewhat countered.
I'm fine with criticizing Minhaj for any distortions of real people and events in his stand-up that you see (don't get me started on David Sedaris's stories about his sister, ugh), but criticizing him for releasing the audio of an interview that he feels distorted his positions is absurd.
posted by mediareport at 11:13 AM on October 28, 2023 [8 favorites]
I really don't get the above at all. It's perfectly normal and accepted journalistic practice to release audio when there's a dispute about how an interview has been presented. That's basically the best thing anyone can do as a subject to correct the record in an era where the imbalance of the old adage "don't ever get into a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel" has been at least somewhat countered.
I'm fine with criticizing Minhaj for any distortions of real people and events in his stand-up that you see (don't get me started on David Sedaris's stories about his sister, ugh), but criticizing him for releasing the audio of an interview that he feels distorted his positions is absurd.
posted by mediareport at 11:13 AM on October 28, 2023 [8 favorites]
David Sedaris is a good example, imo. For me he represents the farthest, bitterest end of the continuum of very-not-okay outing of real people for "material." He's a way better example than Hannah Gadsby, who does not seem to have done anything remotely similar.
I used to buy every David Sedaris book the instant it came out and read with delight all the stories about the fun, raucous Sedaris fam. Then like twenty years in +/- I get a little hint with that "teaching the parrot to say 'forgive me'" story that maybe not every sibling is cool with everything he writes about them. Then Tiffany dies and the scales fall completely. Having written only one essay about her in his decades-long career, roughly fifteen minutes after she's in the ground he publishes that scathing "Now We Are Five" thing in The New Yorker, and I learn that Tiffany forbade him to write about her because he made uncharitable fun of her in the one essay he did write with her in it while she was alive. So he waits 'til she's dead and does precisely what she begged him not to do. She said don't write about her; she just wanted to be a private citizen with a private life. She didn't want me and millions more of his vast and adoring audience to know her personal details. Now I know all this stuff she expressly didn't want me to know. It's like I've been drafted against my will into an army of scapegoaters Tiffany dealt with her whole life. I'd always loved him and always found him hilarious, but that betrayal killed the whole thing dead for me instantly. I haven't bought a book of his since, and I never will. He did all that on purpose and eyes open in a way that's outright malicious; Minhaj is a saint, compared, because he seems to have blundered into the stuff he did from not thinking it through. David Sedaris had decades to think and he did what he did. Dead to me forever.
posted by Don Pepino at 11:30 AM on October 28, 2023 [3 favorites]
I used to buy every David Sedaris book the instant it came out and read with delight all the stories about the fun, raucous Sedaris fam. Then like twenty years in +/- I get a little hint with that "teaching the parrot to say 'forgive me'" story that maybe not every sibling is cool with everything he writes about them. Then Tiffany dies and the scales fall completely. Having written only one essay about her in his decades-long career, roughly fifteen minutes after she's in the ground he publishes that scathing "Now We Are Five" thing in The New Yorker, and I learn that Tiffany forbade him to write about her because he made uncharitable fun of her in the one essay he did write with her in it while she was alive. So he waits 'til she's dead and does precisely what she begged him not to do. She said don't write about her; she just wanted to be a private citizen with a private life. She didn't want me and millions more of his vast and adoring audience to know her personal details. Now I know all this stuff she expressly didn't want me to know. It's like I've been drafted against my will into an army of scapegoaters Tiffany dealt with her whole life. I'd always loved him and always found him hilarious, but that betrayal killed the whole thing dead for me instantly. I haven't bought a book of his since, and I never will. He did all that on purpose and eyes open in a way that's outright malicious; Minhaj is a saint, compared, because he seems to have blundered into the stuff he did from not thinking it through. David Sedaris had decades to think and he did what he did. Dead to me forever.
posted by Don Pepino at 11:30 AM on October 28, 2023 [3 favorites]
And here's a breakdown of how indolent she was when it come to reporting on low-income schools in New York.
I typed up something longer about the weird tangle of a blog rant that link leads to, but decided it was probably all too much of a derail. So...just advice to click through before absorbing any judgment from the summary given.
posted by nobody at 2:54 PM on October 28, 2023
I typed up something longer about the weird tangle of a blog rant that link leads to, but decided it was probably all too much of a derail. So...just advice to click through before absorbing any judgment from the summary given.
posted by nobody at 2:54 PM on October 28, 2023
David Sedaris may be hilarious, but he is and always has been kind of a jerk. There was a Slate article recently where someone told them a dirty story about themselves and he immediately wrote it down and shared it with others. (Now I'm glad that when I've met him, I said very little.) Dude is compelled to do it. And at this point, Tiffany can no longer object or be hurt by him, so... might as well? I guess? Why protect her now? What good would it do?
I do recall that he said that Tiffany objected to him talking about her, and then also complained when he didn't, so fuck if I know on that one.
I will note that if you are a person who writes about your own life, to some degree it's hard to not mention things and people that affect you. But also I don't think the Sedaris family in general has ever understood Tiffany or her pain or figured out how to deal with it, and probably vice versa as well.
posted by jenfullmoon at 5:08 PM on October 28, 2023 [1 favorite]
I do recall that he said that Tiffany objected to him talking about her, and then also complained when he didn't, so fuck if I know on that one.
I will note that if you are a person who writes about your own life, to some degree it's hard to not mention things and people that affect you. But also I don't think the Sedaris family in general has ever understood Tiffany or her pain or figured out how to deal with it, and probably vice versa as well.
posted by jenfullmoon at 5:08 PM on October 28, 2023 [1 favorite]
an audience expects stories about things that matter to be true
One of the stories in my stage magic show is based on a story my mum told me about my grandfather, who was a Customs agent in the times of East Pakistan, having a run-in with legendary Indian magician P. C. Sorcar. In her story, my grandfather demanded that P. C. Sorcar perform a magic trick before he'd sign his custom papers off; P. C. Sorcar's trick was to make the customs papers magically sign off on their own.
In the version I tell on stage, it's a passport. Customs papers aren't that interesting visually - and besides, I have no idea how I'd source a pre Liberation War bureaucratic document. Also, in Australia trying to do a story about customs would bring up quarantine - dude's not getting his magic props confiscated for being organic matter.
But this was part of a longer piece about immigration, and people understand passports. There's an existing magic trick with colouring books that can be adapted to a passport. The point of the story, about immigrant and border trauma, still stands even if the central document is different. (Besides, both my grandfather and P. C. Sorcar are long dead, so good luck fact-checking this).
The story took a weird dimension when I was enroute to the US to be part of a Sister Spit tour to perform this show - only to be detained at LAX for 2 hours under suspicion of "working illegally". They forced me to perform spoken word before they'd let me go. The ending of the immigration story just became me recounting that situation - not really in any kind of poetic way, just straight up facts because WTF and it was so fresh that I barely could comprehend it, let alone turn it into art.
But if I was to do the story again - it probably wouldn't be a 10000% accurate recounting of what happened at that detention centre, mainly because it's been a few years. I'm sure if you asked Homeland Security for a fact check they'll tell you something different! But the terror and the dismay and the confusion I felt that day was very real, even if I'd have to change a detail to get those feelings across.
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:51 AM on October 29, 2023 [16 favorites]
One of the stories in my stage magic show is based on a story my mum told me about my grandfather, who was a Customs agent in the times of East Pakistan, having a run-in with legendary Indian magician P. C. Sorcar. In her story, my grandfather demanded that P. C. Sorcar perform a magic trick before he'd sign his custom papers off; P. C. Sorcar's trick was to make the customs papers magically sign off on their own.
In the version I tell on stage, it's a passport. Customs papers aren't that interesting visually - and besides, I have no idea how I'd source a pre Liberation War bureaucratic document. Also, in Australia trying to do a story about customs would bring up quarantine - dude's not getting his magic props confiscated for being organic matter.
But this was part of a longer piece about immigration, and people understand passports. There's an existing magic trick with colouring books that can be adapted to a passport. The point of the story, about immigrant and border trauma, still stands even if the central document is different. (Besides, both my grandfather and P. C. Sorcar are long dead, so good luck fact-checking this).
The story took a weird dimension when I was enroute to the US to be part of a Sister Spit tour to perform this show - only to be detained at LAX for 2 hours under suspicion of "working illegally". They forced me to perform spoken word before they'd let me go. The ending of the immigration story just became me recounting that situation - not really in any kind of poetic way, just straight up facts because WTF and it was so fresh that I barely could comprehend it, let alone turn it into art.
But if I was to do the story again - it probably wouldn't be a 10000% accurate recounting of what happened at that detention centre, mainly because it's been a few years. I'm sure if you asked Homeland Security for a fact check they'll tell you something different! But the terror and the dismay and the confusion I felt that day was very real, even if I'd have to change a detail to get those feelings across.
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:51 AM on October 29, 2023 [16 favorites]
Why is it funnier if it happens to him? All he has to do is say "So my friend, we'll call him Ralph," switch out "I" and "me" and "my" for "he," "him," and "his," toss in a "details have been changed to protect anonymity," make sure not to name any real people if they didn't actually figure in the story, and voila, same story, still funny, just not a misleading, self-aggrandizing fiction
Wow, it’s almost like you’re not a performer and don't know jack shit about how professional storytelling comedy works. To clue you in: No, it is not just as funny and no it doesn’t work just as well. Even a humorous retelling someone else’s experience to a group of friends can fall a little flat at best, and at worst you can be accused of telling someone else’s funny story. Are we so hopelessly naive that we expect every funny story told in the first person by a comedian is 100% factually true and 100% drawn from the storyteller’s own life experiences? That storytelling comedians just so happen to have lots of weird and funny things happen all the time in their lives, to such an extent that they have a fresh crop of 100% true personal experiences to fill up a comedy special with new material every few years?
Minhaj amplified and embellished a few stories that, from what I can tell, are essentially true at their core, in order to make them work better as stories and comedy. This is the done thing. And he recast himself in another person’s experience so he could more effectively and humorously tell a story that has relevance to his cultural experience as part of his act. This sort of thing is also done frequently. The only thing he’s done that I think he should apologize for is not changing the stories enough, not moving them even further from the truth of his own personal experiences in order to protect people like Bethany from any potential blowback.
posted by slkinsey at 7:59 AM on October 29, 2023 [7 favorites]
Wow, it’s almost like you’re not a performer and don't know jack shit about how professional storytelling comedy works. To clue you in: No, it is not just as funny and no it doesn’t work just as well. Even a humorous retelling someone else’s experience to a group of friends can fall a little flat at best, and at worst you can be accused of telling someone else’s funny story. Are we so hopelessly naive that we expect every funny story told in the first person by a comedian is 100% factually true and 100% drawn from the storyteller’s own life experiences? That storytelling comedians just so happen to have lots of weird and funny things happen all the time in their lives, to such an extent that they have a fresh crop of 100% true personal experiences to fill up a comedy special with new material every few years?
Minhaj amplified and embellished a few stories that, from what I can tell, are essentially true at their core, in order to make them work better as stories and comedy. This is the done thing. And he recast himself in another person’s experience so he could more effectively and humorously tell a story that has relevance to his cultural experience as part of his act. This sort of thing is also done frequently. The only thing he’s done that I think he should apologize for is not changing the stories enough, not moving them even further from the truth of his own personal experiences in order to protect people like Bethany from any potential blowback.
posted by slkinsey at 7:59 AM on October 29, 2023 [7 favorites]
That is a really good point slkinsey! The article subjects Minaj to a classic, impossible double standard. On the one hand, he is a liar because he changed too many details in the story he told. On the other, he doxxed his friend because he didn't change enough details in the story he told!
posted by being_quiet at 9:11 AM on October 29, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by being_quiet at 9:11 AM on October 29, 2023 [5 favorites]
Gene Weingarten's Substack on the topic.
He is not just a standup comic, he is a social critic and an advocate for Muslims. He wants to change people’s opinions. Nothing wrong with any of that. But his duty to the truth — the literal truth — is far greater in that role, because he is passionately trying to persuade people to feel a certain way. He cannot mess with the facts to make them more dramatic or evoke more sympathy. That makes him simply a liar and a con man.
These are not incidental factual manipulations. Saying he was roughed up by a cop is not remotely the same as being harassed on a basketball court by people he thought might have been cops.
On the broader question: Should a comedian ever lie when relating an anecdote he claims to be true? I am a hard-ass on this subject. My answer is “never in a material way.” Make up an anecdote whole cloth? No way. Change a detail to change the nature of the story ? No way. Invent dialogue that did not happen? No way.
Why? Because the philosophical, ontological and epistemological center of humor is that life is tragic and one way to cope with that terrifying fact is through humor.
We are talking about actual life. We live in a world of irony, illogic, pretension, cruelty, ignorance, self-righteousness, grandiosity, greed, jealousy, hypocrisy, pompousness, savagery, schadenfreude, etc. It tames our terrors to poke fun at these real things. It’s not nearly as funny if you are reduced to inventing stuff to poke fun at, when you are claiming they are true. It undermines your message and, most important, it betrays the trust of readers and audiences, who are given every reason to believe that what you are saying happened, and thus is a valid insight into the absurd nature of life.
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:23 AM on October 31, 2023 [3 favorites]
He is not just a standup comic, he is a social critic and an advocate for Muslims. He wants to change people’s opinions. Nothing wrong with any of that. But his duty to the truth — the literal truth — is far greater in that role, because he is passionately trying to persuade people to feel a certain way. He cannot mess with the facts to make them more dramatic or evoke more sympathy. That makes him simply a liar and a con man.
These are not incidental factual manipulations. Saying he was roughed up by a cop is not remotely the same as being harassed on a basketball court by people he thought might have been cops.
On the broader question: Should a comedian ever lie when relating an anecdote he claims to be true? I am a hard-ass on this subject. My answer is “never in a material way.” Make up an anecdote whole cloth? No way. Change a detail to change the nature of the story ? No way. Invent dialogue that did not happen? No way.
Why? Because the philosophical, ontological and epistemological center of humor is that life is tragic and one way to cope with that terrifying fact is through humor.
We are talking about actual life. We live in a world of irony, illogic, pretension, cruelty, ignorance, self-righteousness, grandiosity, greed, jealousy, hypocrisy, pompousness, savagery, schadenfreude, etc. It tames our terrors to poke fun at these real things. It’s not nearly as funny if you are reduced to inventing stuff to poke fun at, when you are claiming they are true. It undermines your message and, most important, it betrays the trust of readers and audiences, who are given every reason to believe that what you are saying happened, and thus is a valid insight into the absurd nature of life.
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:23 AM on October 31, 2023 [3 favorites]
He barely "brought receipts" for 1/3 of the significant problems. I'm undecided on whether this should have cost him a shot at _The Daily Show_ (there are other allegations that are perhaps more important in that respect), but he was way over the line in his faux-victimhood and it's hard to believe most of his defenders would buy the "emotional truth" argument if it were being trotted out by, say, some MAGA spouting politician.
posted by fncll at 2:10 PM on October 31, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by fncll at 2:10 PM on October 31, 2023 [1 favorite]
> On the other, he doxxed his friend because he didn't change enough details in the story he told
That's a bad-faith argument if I've ever seen one.
posted by fncll at 2:11 PM on October 31, 2023
That's a bad-faith argument if I've ever seen one.
posted by fncll at 2:11 PM on October 31, 2023
But his duty to the truth — the literal truth — is far greater in that role, because he is passionately trying to persuade people to feel a certain way. He cannot mess with the facts to make them more dramatic or evoke more sympathy. That makes him simply a liar and a con man.
Ah yes, marginalised people must perform their trauma a specific way to our exacting standards before we will take them seriously!
This entire thing is ridiculous and completely ignores that he is a STORYTELLER. Like, has the man never heard of allegory?
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:31 PM on October 31, 2023 [3 favorites]
Ah yes, marginalised people must perform their trauma a specific way to our exacting standards before we will take them seriously!
This entire thing is ridiculous and completely ignores that he is a STORYTELLER. Like, has the man never heard of allegory?
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:31 PM on October 31, 2023 [3 favorites]
I do recall that he said that Tiffany objected to him talking about her, and then also complained when he didn't, so fuck if I know on that one.
jenfullmoon, that was discussed in the 2013 Sedaris thread on the blue when this first came out. Here's her quote about that, and my comment:
'I was the only one who told him not to put me in his books," Tiffany, 41, says of her five siblings. ''I don't trust David to have boundaries. Our friends, our shrinks, the guy who gives us our meds, they all think David is incredibly violating. But then everyone says, 'Oh, what, does your brother not like you?' Even when he doesn't write about you, he's writing about you."
That she'd grow tired of people always asking her why David wasn't writing about her and ask him to go ahead and write something, be happy with it, and then tell a reporter she still had privacy concerns is not inconsistent.
posted by mediareport at 2:40 PM on October 31, 2023
jenfullmoon, that was discussed in the 2013 Sedaris thread on the blue when this first came out. Here's her quote about that, and my comment:
'I was the only one who told him not to put me in his books," Tiffany, 41, says of her five siblings. ''I don't trust David to have boundaries. Our friends, our shrinks, the guy who gives us our meds, they all think David is incredibly violating. But then everyone says, 'Oh, what, does your brother not like you?' Even when he doesn't write about you, he's writing about you."
That she'd grow tired of people always asking her why David wasn't writing about her and ask him to go ahead and write something, be happy with it, and then tell a reporter she still had privacy concerns is not inconsistent.
posted by mediareport at 2:40 PM on October 31, 2023
Years ago I made a game that was basically Papers Please but from the POV of an immigrant. It was full of annoying minigames that metaphorically depict different parts of the immigration process. There was an escort mission where your paperwork kept getting stuck behind walls, and an invisible maze that pops up with some random requirement every time you hit a wall.
Do I literally have to bring my paperwork through an invisible maze? No, of course not.
Was it easier to convey the emotional turmoil that came with immigration this way, compared to a literal Paperwork Simulator? Hell yes!
But according to too many of you, any point that I wanted to make about immigration would be invalid because I didn't literally saddle you with my mountains of paperwork. Because i didn't get "you dolebludgers should go back to your country" or "you're stealing our jobs but also stealing our tax money because you don't have a job" or "you're the reason no one has housing" exactly said to me, only implied in prettier words that non-immigrants would not clock as problematic. Because I don't actually have to give Immigration my entire family tree like that invisible maze wanted, only the chunk that proves how my aunt and my dad are related through their father that had three wives.
"Duty to the literal truth" my fuckin ass
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:44 PM on October 31, 2023 [7 favorites]
Do I literally have to bring my paperwork through an invisible maze? No, of course not.
Was it easier to convey the emotional turmoil that came with immigration this way, compared to a literal Paperwork Simulator? Hell yes!
But according to too many of you, any point that I wanted to make about immigration would be invalid because I didn't literally saddle you with my mountains of paperwork. Because i didn't get "you dolebludgers should go back to your country" or "you're stealing our jobs but also stealing our tax money because you don't have a job" or "you're the reason no one has housing" exactly said to me, only implied in prettier words that non-immigrants would not clock as problematic. Because I don't actually have to give Immigration my entire family tree like that invisible maze wanted, only the chunk that proves how my aunt and my dad are related through their father that had three wives.
"Duty to the literal truth" my fuckin ass
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:44 PM on October 31, 2023 [7 favorites]
It's about time the New Yorker embarked on a fact checking crusade against that lying scoundrel who invented The Password Game.
it's hard to believe most of his defenders would buy the "emotional truth" argument if it were being trotted out by, say, some MAGA spouting politician
It's hard to believe some MAGA spouting politician would be capable of performing a standup set that could actually get a laugh from anybody but the already-stupidized, so that's not a workable comparison.
posted by flabdablet at 4:09 AM on November 1, 2023 [2 favorites]
it's hard to believe most of his defenders would buy the "emotional truth" argument if it were being trotted out by, say, some MAGA spouting politician
It's hard to believe some MAGA spouting politician would be capable of performing a standup set that could actually get a laugh from anybody but the already-stupidized, so that's not a workable comparison.
posted by flabdablet at 4:09 AM on November 1, 2023 [2 favorites]
On the broader question: Should a comedian ever lie when relating an anecdote he claims to be true? I am a hard-ass on this subject. My answer is “never in a material way.” Make up an anecdote whole cloth? No way. Change a detail to change the nature of the story ? No way. Invent dialogue that did not happen? No way.fuck, i hope this dude has this energy for the coen brothers for fargo and elizabeth banks for cocaine bear.
or do they not count because they're not comedians, but white filmmakers?
We are talking about actual life. We live in a world of irony, illogic, pretension, cruelty, ignorance, self-righteousness, grandiosity, greed, jealousy, hypocrisy, pompousness, savagery, schadenfreude, etc.still wild to me all these white people are big mad some brown dude didn't talk about actual life the right way
feels kinda ironic, really, and there's so much self-righteousness, pretension, hypocrisy, pompousness, and savage schadenfreude seemingly pointed minhaj's way. plenty of ignorance too.
It tames our terrors to poke fun at these real things. It’s not nearly as funny if you are reduced to inventing stuff to poke fun at, when you are claiming they are true. It undermines your message and, most important, it betrays the trust of readers and audiences, who are given every reason to believe that what you are saying happened, and thus is a valid insight into the absurd nature of life.k
so many people want to dismiss the lives and experiences of the marginalized that any reason will do. so hasan didn't get roughed up by a cop. such a betrayal of (white) audience expectations who wanted a good brown boy they could pat on the head and feel sorry for, while on the flip side so many muslim and desi and indigenous and black and african people know what that is like in their bones because it's happened to so many of them, that it resonated with them.
but yeah, let's stick a sign in the window that says in this house we believe black lives matter and feel good about having done something
---
it's hard to believe most of his defenders would buy the "emotional truth" argument if it were being trotted out by, say, some MAGA spouting politician.where's the emotional truth in
- “And I’m thinking yeah but when you think about it I don’t want people to think that of me; I just wanna get out of jury duty. So I filled out the form, and I wrote ‘I love chinks.'”
- "Now I wish that someone told me that when I was in high school that I could have felt like a woman when it came time to take showers in PE."
- "Your gender is 'Get a job', that's your gender."
- "My pronouns are: kiss my ass!"
- "I reckon that’s got to be easier for a man to turn into a chimp, we’re so close, than for a man to turn into a woman, in many ways. A bit of hair, and a top lip like that, as opposed to your cock and balls ripped off… and a hole gouged out, into– I’m not a doctor! But that is… the gist of it. I know which one I’d rather have done. I’m not saying chimps are better than women. No way. Right? Any ladies here? I can’t see you, but, to me, every single one of you is equal… to a chimp."
i hope this dude has this energy for the coen brothers for fargo and elizabeth banks for cocaine bear.
or do they not count because they're not comedians, but white filmmakers?
They don't count because they're not comparable. They're writing fiction and no reasonable person could misunderstand that. So far there's been one solid comp in this entire thread, and that's David Sedaris. He wrote fiction about a real person and suffered no harm to his career as a result. That's good evidence for a claim that Hasan Minhaj is being subjected to a double standard. Fang, cocaine bear, Rodney Dangerfield's wife/boss/whatever, et al. are not good evidence of a double standard because they're not comparable, being obvious fictions.
posted by Don Pepino at 8:03 AM on November 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
or do they not count because they're not comedians, but white filmmakers?
They don't count because they're not comparable. They're writing fiction and no reasonable person could misunderstand that. So far there's been one solid comp in this entire thread, and that's David Sedaris. He wrote fiction about a real person and suffered no harm to his career as a result. That's good evidence for a claim that Hasan Minhaj is being subjected to a double standard. Fang, cocaine bear, Rodney Dangerfield's wife/boss/whatever, et al. are not good evidence of a double standard because they're not comparable, being obvious fictions.
posted by Don Pepino at 8:03 AM on November 1, 2023 [3 favorites]
Yeah, I think Fargo is, too. However, all the mammalian life forms in both Cocaine Bear and Fargo are nevertheless clear fictions. They are, like Fang et al., not mistakable for actual individual humans/bears who actually live or lived in the actual world.
posted by Don Pepino at 8:46 AM on November 1, 2023
posted by Don Pepino at 8:46 AM on November 1, 2023
coen brothers, elizabeth banks, rodney dangerfield, david sedaris are all white
posted by i used to be someone else at 9:40 AM on November 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by i used to be someone else at 9:40 AM on November 1, 2023 [1 favorite]
Maybe another comparison, in terms of a comic who is explicitly pointing to her real life, but who hasn't had a scathing New Yorker takedown, would be Maria Bamford?
posted by mittens at 11:15 AM on November 1, 2023
posted by mittens at 11:15 AM on November 1, 2023
Maria Bamford?
Well, I can see that, sure, if instead of saying "I have uncontrollable intrusive thoughts of chopping my loved ones into bits and pieces and having sex with the bits and pieces and my mother and sister are addicted to Diet Coke and really enjoy going to Target and I killed my beloved pug and one time my mother woke me up and said 'Maria! Honey, you can't pull the quilt over you like that without a top sheet, Maria. Maria, your skin has oils,' and my boss wanted me to copy out the phone book, and my father and my pugs breathe similarly and thus remind me of one another," if instead of that her comedy were more like, "Just like Sarah McLachlan, I, Maria Bamford, have been kept chained in a cement-floored outdoor pen through the heat of summer and the cold of winter and starved and denied medical treatment all my life by [named or easily identifiable person] will you please save me and Sarah, donate to the ASPCA they will give you a beautiful blanket/T-shirt/tote bag," then yes. But while Maria Bamford's stuff is embellished memoir, the savage parts target herself and she holds other people harmless. Caricatures read very broad so that reasonable people will understand, "This is not her real actual dad/mom/sister/boss." Like the "bear" in Cocaine Bear, not like "Bethany" or Tiffany.
What about Tig Notaro, then, whose One Mississippi had a story line that included a fictionalized reprisal of the real life antics of real life shitheel Louis C.K.? Welllllll, did the dickhead boss in One Mississippi do anything worse than the shit Louis did? Not really. It did not make Louis look worse than Louis is. Thus Tig Notaro is not a comp. I know there have to be comps out there, though, and it seems likely they could provide evidence that there's a double standard.
posted by Don Pepino at 12:57 PM on November 1, 2023
Well, I can see that, sure, if instead of saying "I have uncontrollable intrusive thoughts of chopping my loved ones into bits and pieces and having sex with the bits and pieces and my mother and sister are addicted to Diet Coke and really enjoy going to Target and I killed my beloved pug and one time my mother woke me up and said 'Maria! Honey, you can't pull the quilt over you like that without a top sheet, Maria. Maria, your skin has oils,' and my boss wanted me to copy out the phone book, and my father and my pugs breathe similarly and thus remind me of one another," if instead of that her comedy were more like, "Just like Sarah McLachlan, I, Maria Bamford, have been kept chained in a cement-floored outdoor pen through the heat of summer and the cold of winter and starved and denied medical treatment all my life by [named or easily identifiable person] will you please save me and Sarah, donate to the ASPCA they will give you a beautiful blanket/T-shirt/tote bag," then yes. But while Maria Bamford's stuff is embellished memoir, the savage parts target herself and she holds other people harmless. Caricatures read very broad so that reasonable people will understand, "This is not her real actual dad/mom/sister/boss." Like the "bear" in Cocaine Bear, not like "Bethany" or Tiffany.
What about Tig Notaro, then, whose One Mississippi had a story line that included a fictionalized reprisal of the real life antics of real life shitheel Louis C.K.? Welllllll, did the dickhead boss in One Mississippi do anything worse than the shit Louis did? Not really. It did not make Louis look worse than Louis is. Thus Tig Notaro is not a comp. I know there have to be comps out there, though, and it seems likely they could provide evidence that there's a double standard.
posted by Don Pepino at 12:57 PM on November 1, 2023
The reason you can't find "appropriate comps" though is precisely because hardly any other comedian has had this level of fact-checking done to them. We don't even know how precisely accurate Maria Bamford is with her retelling - why would her getting into gory details be automatically assumed to be literal truth?
How did the suffering of marginalized artists become so marketable?
How did the suffering of marginalized artists become so marketable?
When I reflect on my career, it’s hard not to notice the ways interest and institutional support (in the form of art contracts, funding, awards, invitations) have increased as I’ve shared more of my traumatic experiences. While my ability to survive as a working artist depends in part on interest and institutional support, the correlation between trauma and “success” is disturbing. Have I unknowingly been typecast as a trauma clown?I'm So Damn Tired of Slave Movies
Unfortunately, this seems to be a common experience for marginalized artists: our value often seems inherently tied to the suffering we portray in our work. What is it about the suffering of marginalized bodies that’s so appealing?
It’s obvious at this point that Hollywood has a problem with only paying attention to non-white people when they’re playing a stereotype. Their love of the slave movie genre brings this issue out in the worst way. I’m tired of watching black people go through some of the worst pain in human history for entertainment, and I’m tired of white audiences falling over themselves to praise a film that has the courage and honesty to tell such a brutal story. When movies about slavery or, more broadly, other types of violence against black people are the only types of films regularly deemed “important” and “good” by white people, you wonder if white audiences are only capable of lauding a story where black people are subservient.White people, black authors are not your medicine
So many of the writers of colour that I know have had white people treat their work as though it were a kind of medicine. Something they have to swallow in order to improve their condition, but they don’t really want it, they don’t really enjoy it, and if they’re being totally honest, they don’t actually even take the medicine half the time. They just buy it and leave it on the shelf. What pleasure, what deepening, could there be in “reading” like that? To enter the world of fiction with such a tainted mission is to doom the novel or short story to fail you on its most essential levels.posted by creatrixtiara at 5:31 PM on November 1, 2023 [5 favorites]
Weingarten:
posted by flabdablet at 8:30 PM on November 1, 2023 [2 favorites]
Should a comedian ever lie when relating an anecdote he claims to be true? I am a hard-ass on this subject.Well good for you, sir, and blessings be upon your hard ass; may it live out the rest of your tedious life completely unassailed by curry. That said: your opinions are of no value to me and I do not wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
posted by flabdablet at 8:30 PM on November 1, 2023 [2 favorites]
Heh. I love Weingarten, among other grumps that I am likewise fond of. He has opinions, you can agree or disagree, he knows he's a dinosaur, it's fine. (You can read about his side of the curry thing here if you so choose.) He's also a hell of a writer.
posted by PussKillian at 8:06 AM on November 2, 2023
posted by PussKillian at 8:06 AM on November 2, 2023
You know, I'm beginning to think that Dave Chapelle might not actually have seen a baby selling weed at 3AM.
posted by slkinsey at 2:14 PM on November 2, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by slkinsey at 2:14 PM on November 2, 2023 [6 favorites]
You can read about his side of the curry thing here
Thank you. I just went and did that and - who'd have thought? - the author is a run-of-the-mill self-regarding blowhard who distorts and exaggerates for comic effect as of right and cracks the sads when called on it.
Hard-ass my ass. I still don't like him. I am unrepentant.
Seventeen years of fucking around for Weingarten to find out. And he's nowhere near as funny as Minhaj.
posted by flabdablet at 9:11 PM on November 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
Thank you. I just went and did that and - who'd have thought? - the author is a run-of-the-mill self-regarding blowhard who distorts and exaggerates for comic effect as of right and cracks the sads when called on it.
Hard-ass my ass. I still don't like him. I am unrepentant.
Seventeen years of fucking around for Weingarten to find out. And he's nowhere near as funny as Minhaj.
posted by flabdablet at 9:11 PM on November 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
Hey, that’s two-time Pulitzer Prize winning self-regarding blow hard! His story on parents who accidentally kill their children by leaving them in hot cars is incredible.
posted by PussKillian at 11:08 AM on November 3, 2023
posted by PussKillian at 11:08 AM on November 3, 2023
time to come for sarah mclachlan then, i mean, she didn't suffer anything those poor dogs did
i would immediately give money to the aspca if she dressed up as a pretend singing dog to get that sweet aspca cash
dogs are good boys and girls, support shelters and anti-cruelty orgs
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 8:31 AM on November 4, 2023
i would immediately give money to the aspca if she dressed up as a pretend singing dog to get that sweet aspca cash
dogs are good boys and girls, support shelters and anti-cruelty orgs
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 8:31 AM on November 4, 2023
A Pulitzer Prize winner can still be dead wrong about some things, such as how comedy or other performance art works
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:30 PM on November 4, 2023
posted by creatrixtiara at 2:30 PM on November 4, 2023
I think that Hasan suffers from a thing where he presents as pleading to be accepted as trustworthy and innocent with what he is saying even while there is something about his face that subconsciously reads as "I am bullshitting you".
A few mefites called this one out as racism but that’s my impression of him as well during his rebuttal video. (I had the same feeling when they interviewed the fast food marketing rep in Super Size Me. And often when Justin Trudeau is being interviewed…) There’s something in the delivery that just doesn’t ring 100% true. I read it as ones subconscious not being 100% in congruence, and I’ve even felt it myself when my husband has reflected my behavior back to me and I’m not ready to admit to some parts of it. Or when a person is too “on” in a performance. I just want to tell them to cut the bullshit and be real with me.
For me, having seen the standup and now knowing the anthrax didn’t fall on his kid or end up in the hospital, ya man I feel toyed with and manipulated. I read a commentary online, that comedy exaggeration (which I fully accept - you think Wanda Sykes’ wife really went into that neighbors house just to look around??) should be to be funny and make you laugh. When he said that line about his kid having anthrax fall on them I gasped out loud and was horrified and genuinely worried. To find out that was a lie? Shitty. (Compare to Wanda who totally exaggerated her wife’s behavior in a hilarious way, which she then turned around to make it a commentary on racism by saying: now if a black kid did what my wife did he’d be dead.)
Some people are making arguments about movies and characters but that strikes me as disingenuous - people know to expect in movies that liberties are taken. Even in biopics. We’re not that naive any more.
I don’t doubt that the article is a hit piece to cost him the job but the exaggeration in standup should be in service of getting laughs not eliciting my fear or concern.
posted by St. Peepsburg at 12:35 AM on November 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
A few mefites called this one out as racism but that’s my impression of him as well during his rebuttal video. (I had the same feeling when they interviewed the fast food marketing rep in Super Size Me. And often when Justin Trudeau is being interviewed…) There’s something in the delivery that just doesn’t ring 100% true. I read it as ones subconscious not being 100% in congruence, and I’ve even felt it myself when my husband has reflected my behavior back to me and I’m not ready to admit to some parts of it. Or when a person is too “on” in a performance. I just want to tell them to cut the bullshit and be real with me.
For me, having seen the standup and now knowing the anthrax didn’t fall on his kid or end up in the hospital, ya man I feel toyed with and manipulated. I read a commentary online, that comedy exaggeration (which I fully accept - you think Wanda Sykes’ wife really went into that neighbors house just to look around??) should be to be funny and make you laugh. When he said that line about his kid having anthrax fall on them I gasped out loud and was horrified and genuinely worried. To find out that was a lie? Shitty. (Compare to Wanda who totally exaggerated her wife’s behavior in a hilarious way, which she then turned around to make it a commentary on racism by saying: now if a black kid did what my wife did he’d be dead.)
Some people are making arguments about movies and characters but that strikes me as disingenuous - people know to expect in movies that liberties are taken. Even in biopics. We’re not that naive any more.
I don’t doubt that the article is a hit piece to cost him the job but the exaggeration in standup should be in service of getting laughs not eliciting my fear or concern.
posted by St. Peepsburg at 12:35 AM on November 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
A few mefites called this one out as racism but that’s my impression of him as well during his rebuttal video.
Sometimes people's subconscious impressions of people of color can be racist, but that doesn't mean that people of color are immune from bullshitting and having it readable on their face. As a WOC, I also had the same reaction: "oh this dude is a bullshitter and fuck this guy". I have dated too many guys like that. It has nothing to do with cultural mannerisms, it is specifically that Minhaj portrays to me "Dude who has been caught with his pants down and is desperately trying to blame other people to get out of trouble." I like him *less* after the video, not more.
Minhaj amplified and embellished a few stories that, from what I can tell, are essentially true at their core, in order to make them work better as stories and comedy. This is the done thing. And he recast himself in another person’s experience so he could more effectively and humorously tell a story that has relevance to his cultural experience as part of his act. This sort of thing is also done frequently. The only thing he’s done that I think he should apologize for is not changing the stories enough, not moving them even further from the truth of his own personal experiences in order to protect people like Bethany from any potential blowback.
I think actually, as I ponder this, that one of the major problems I have with Minhaj, is not just that he exaggerated or lied, but that that he is doing what I consider a particularly despicable thing - he is propelling himself to acceptability by increasing and enhancing stereotypes and prejudice against others. This is why the Bethany story reads so offensively to me, as well as the way in which he's trying to make this story a Claire Malone issue, rather than him being caught out. Minhaj is levering sexism in order to get out of trouble, just like he levered sexism towards success.
Is this a thing unique to Minhaj? No, absolutely not. Many white comedians leverage sexism to great success and wealth - Bill Burr comes to mind. But my position is that Minhaj, as a fellow marginalized person, should fucking know better. It reminds me honestly of my dad and the Latinos for Trump shit - people who want to be considered within the circle of whiteness or whiteness-adjacent, and are willing to throw others under the bus in order to do so. In Minhaj's case, it reads as, "I may be brown, but we all hate women, right? Amirite?"
Because let's unpack the Bethany story, and why the lies matter there. In reality, Bethany said that she didn't want to go to prom with him some time before the prom. We don't actually know why she said no. The documents we are shown show Bethany admitting her parents used to be more racist than they are now and that the opinion of her parents was a factor in the rejection, but they don't actually confirm that the reason Bethany said no was purely based on racism. It's possible that she just wasn't that into him, had said yes because she wanted a date to prom, and when it got her a lot of flak from her parents, decided not to do it.
But in the story, Minhaj centers not the parents, but Bethany and her mother. The women become the villains. They become the villains who basically ruthlessly laugh at him by letting him come to the door and get rejected by seeing Bethany with another boy. Minhaj knows exactly what he's doing here - this is nerd revenge narrative against popular girls for choosing other men. This is fucking incel fuel. And it is not harmless. There are undoubtedly people in Minhaj's audience who leave it thinking, "That's right, bitches can't be trusted." Elliot Rogers, who shot twenty people, had particular contempt for white, blonde women who didn't date him, especially ones who then went on to date other minorities. Bethany told Claire Malone that she felt used - and I could easily see where in fact, Minhaj said all the right things in emails that he knew would be quoted, but in fact, was *not* happy that the white girl he fetishized in high school went on to marry a different boy of color that she *was* willing to challenge her parents for.
And his turning this story on Claire Malone - another woman - and making her a liar who just attacked him for no reason because of racism, is more of the same. It's attempting to raise the baying hounds of sexism to defend himself, and to specifically defend himself against claims of sexism by bringing up his race as a shield. This is fucked up, and doesn't even hit just white women - men who bring rage against women often wind up hurting the more vulnerable and accessible women inside their community the most. Men of color who subconsciously both idealize and despise white women often take out their anger and feelings of racial sexual frustration on women of color.
posted by corb at 9:42 AM on November 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
Sometimes people's subconscious impressions of people of color can be racist, but that doesn't mean that people of color are immune from bullshitting and having it readable on their face. As a WOC, I also had the same reaction: "oh this dude is a bullshitter and fuck this guy". I have dated too many guys like that. It has nothing to do with cultural mannerisms, it is specifically that Minhaj portrays to me "Dude who has been caught with his pants down and is desperately trying to blame other people to get out of trouble." I like him *less* after the video, not more.
Minhaj amplified and embellished a few stories that, from what I can tell, are essentially true at their core, in order to make them work better as stories and comedy. This is the done thing. And he recast himself in another person’s experience so he could more effectively and humorously tell a story that has relevance to his cultural experience as part of his act. This sort of thing is also done frequently. The only thing he’s done that I think he should apologize for is not changing the stories enough, not moving them even further from the truth of his own personal experiences in order to protect people like Bethany from any potential blowback.
I think actually, as I ponder this, that one of the major problems I have with Minhaj, is not just that he exaggerated or lied, but that that he is doing what I consider a particularly despicable thing - he is propelling himself to acceptability by increasing and enhancing stereotypes and prejudice against others. This is why the Bethany story reads so offensively to me, as well as the way in which he's trying to make this story a Claire Malone issue, rather than him being caught out. Minhaj is levering sexism in order to get out of trouble, just like he levered sexism towards success.
Is this a thing unique to Minhaj? No, absolutely not. Many white comedians leverage sexism to great success and wealth - Bill Burr comes to mind. But my position is that Minhaj, as a fellow marginalized person, should fucking know better. It reminds me honestly of my dad and the Latinos for Trump shit - people who want to be considered within the circle of whiteness or whiteness-adjacent, and are willing to throw others under the bus in order to do so. In Minhaj's case, it reads as, "I may be brown, but we all hate women, right? Amirite?"
Because let's unpack the Bethany story, and why the lies matter there. In reality, Bethany said that she didn't want to go to prom with him some time before the prom. We don't actually know why she said no. The documents we are shown show Bethany admitting her parents used to be more racist than they are now and that the opinion of her parents was a factor in the rejection, but they don't actually confirm that the reason Bethany said no was purely based on racism. It's possible that she just wasn't that into him, had said yes because she wanted a date to prom, and when it got her a lot of flak from her parents, decided not to do it.
But in the story, Minhaj centers not the parents, but Bethany and her mother. The women become the villains. They become the villains who basically ruthlessly laugh at him by letting him come to the door and get rejected by seeing Bethany with another boy. Minhaj knows exactly what he's doing here - this is nerd revenge narrative against popular girls for choosing other men. This is fucking incel fuel. And it is not harmless. There are undoubtedly people in Minhaj's audience who leave it thinking, "That's right, bitches can't be trusted." Elliot Rogers, who shot twenty people, had particular contempt for white, blonde women who didn't date him, especially ones who then went on to date other minorities. Bethany told Claire Malone that she felt used - and I could easily see where in fact, Minhaj said all the right things in emails that he knew would be quoted, but in fact, was *not* happy that the white girl he fetishized in high school went on to marry a different boy of color that she *was* willing to challenge her parents for.
And his turning this story on Claire Malone - another woman - and making her a liar who just attacked him for no reason because of racism, is more of the same. It's attempting to raise the baying hounds of sexism to defend himself, and to specifically defend himself against claims of sexism by bringing up his race as a shield. This is fucked up, and doesn't even hit just white women - men who bring rage against women often wind up hurting the more vulnerable and accessible women inside their community the most. Men of color who subconsciously both idealize and despise white women often take out their anger and feelings of racial sexual frustration on women of color.
posted by corb at 9:42 AM on November 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
« Older Everyday Stories from the Ancient Past | Goodbye Bobby Lee Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
It would have been nice if the New Yorker and him could have worked it out together.
They already had all the information that he discussed in this video. If they wanted to represent him differently, they would have.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 4:22 PM on October 26, 2023 [16 favorites]