(This could fit into any one of a few other forums; I will not be surprised if it gets moved.)
This is a big topic on the Saturday Night Live subreddit. The show’s “cold open” (the first sketch of the night, before the opening credits) is very often politically oriented. Given the headlines these days, many viewers are frustrated that the ones involving Trump are (by their opinion) going too easy on him and effectively downplaying the evil of his actions.
I can see both sides of this. Yes, the show’s purpose isn’t specifically political. But the show does try to be topical, and there isn’t a lot that’s more on people’s minds. But I remember the kind of indirect way they handled sketches that touched on 9/11, and realize that it’s a very sensitive and tricky line to walk when actual human lives are involved. But humor can be a very effective weapon against fascism by reducing the “street cred” that gives them a significant amount of power. But this is a major network with a lot of employees with a lot to lose personally, given the administration’s actions. But as a major network, they have a lot of power, which comes with a lot of responsibility.
If they treat him like they’ve treated politicians in the past, it helps to normalize him. SNL poking relatively light-hearted fun at politicians is something we’ve come to expect over the last 50 years, and if they do that exact same sort of thing it makes it seem like everything is still operating within norms. And people burying their heads in the sand and pretending that everything is still within the realm of how we’ve always operated is a key factor in sleepwalking through this fascist nightmare.
I think they should either go hard and really emphasize just how different and how evil the current circumstances are, or just stop being political at all, (edit: though that would be really hard to pull off without seemingly cowardly.) Because treating him as if he were a normal president is enabling.
*I marked an edit I made so the post that responded to mine makes more sense.
You don’t think that “not being political” could be seen as shirking basic responsibility and trying to bury hard truths? But does that mean that the show has an obligation to say something?
(Oop, you edited while I was writing and I can’t delete this post…)
One thing they can do that they have done in the past is to try to annoy the shit out of Trump personally. He’s one of the weakest, most pathetic, more thin-skinned people on the planet. He gets supremely offended over anything. They could easily tailor their content in such a way that it’s designed specifically to piss him off. I would certainly enjoy that. It would be risky for them, though.
I just… don’t want the norm. I don’t want to normalize. I would like them to attack hard and aim to piss him off.
To be fair, I’ve thought they’ve done a reasonable job here and there of really digging into him and not trying to normalize him – I don’t think SNL is a particularly bad offender in this regard.
I think anyone expecting SNL to be the vanguard of the leftist revolution is absolutely putting their bets on the wrong horse. SNL is a known quantity at this point their politics are plain to see for everyone who bothers to pay attention. But I think the OP’s contention that they’re holding back out of some fear of Trump punishing them or whatever stems from the average person with only a passing familiarity with the politics of the show. This already is SNL trying their best, this is what trying their best looks like from the world view of SNL.
I think the effective criticism of SNL isn’t to make any meaningful changes to the show, it’s an attempt to reach fellow viewers of the program and prod them to explore sources more leftward who have a more radical theory of politics. For many viewers, SNL is the leftmost content they consume and they implicitly believe therefore it’s the leftmost opinion “reasonable” people should hold. Pointing out how SNL is not meeting the moment is a way to expand the Overton Window.
I think it’s very similar to people pointing out the hypocrisy and blatant double standards of the treatment of Zohran Mamdani by the NYT/Atlantic/Wapo/CNN etc. It’s not that they expected the criticism to change the coverage of any of those sources, but rather that the milquetoast centrism was finally forced to be cast into stark relief in ways that forced a reckoning. Hopefully, it caused some people to look for more reasonable coverage of Zohran Mamdani which then exposed them to a bunch of new ideas that are also poorly covered by the large establishment “liberal” media sources.
I don’t watch, but if SNL was doing what Brendan Carr says he wants – equal time – they would still blast Trump. And they would also blast Democratic Party leaders, as if being a cruel strongman is laughable, but so is leading a factually weak minority congressional party having no actual ability to change MAGA policies due to holding a minority of legislative seats.
SNL is and always has been a comedy / variety / entertainment show, not one of biting satire or political commentary.
Could they go after Trump more harshly, while still being funny and entertaining? And could they do it in a way that might actually change people’s perceptions, rather than just preaching to the choir?