|
If you didn't see SNL Thursday night (and these days I don't get to see it much at all) you don't know what the fu** this guy was talking about. Well, ok, you get the fact that this guy thinks the sketches and impersonations were pretty lousy.
However, the intro shot was of two of the performers dressed as, I assume from the guys rant, Whoopi Goldberg and somebody, but you don't get to see the skit - or any skit from the show. It would have been nice to have some actual reference to go with what he was saying. After all, the lead did imply as much.
I don't disagree with anything he said. I have no reference. I have to take him at his word ...and,from what little I have seen of SNL lately, I am inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt .
What's more, the op didn't supply any textual background. It could have helped. A picture might be worth a thousand words, but a "misleading" video can garble those words worse than Sarah Palin at a Katie Couric interview.
To be fair to Britethorn, this seems to be more and more par for the course with DU posts of Youtube clips these days: no context. I am increasingly inclined to skip posts that have a video attached because it is increasingly misleading.
Of course, non-video posts are subject to this "everybody knows what I am talking about" attitude,
Context, more often than not, is key.
you may now return to to your regularly scheduled Youtube.
:P
|