Kathy Lee Gifford clip

Post Reply New Topic

They wrote a song that was totally insensitive to the person with autism. They sang something along the lines of, "Sitting there all alone...feeling all alone...image never having a friend..."

It is the same thing as a cancer patient sitting there and the song saying, "Your hair burnt off my chemotherapy. Not knowing whether you would live or die".

If you cannot see what is wrong with the song after this explanation, you probably were not the kid who sat alone and never had a friend. Or you are a Kathy Lee fan whose allegiance blinds them to the horrible, insensitive thing she did.



It was when the kid cried during the song and burst Kathy Lee's bubble after explaining why he cried.

Graham: *cries a little during the song*
Kathy Lee: See, this is why I do this. My music touches people.

(later on after the song was finished)

Kathy Lee: Why'd you cry buddy? (she eagerly awaits him to tell her he loved it)
Graham: It was a little sad.

Kathy Lee then realizes he was crying because the song made him relive those awful memories and not because it touched him.

Kathy Lee: (laughs nervously and everyone joins) We can make it happier. (the group proceeds to re-sing the awful parts of the lyrics with goofy voices)

So it's like singing "Not knowing whether you would live or die" in a higher, goofy tune to the cancer patient after he says "It was a little sad". It then seems like mockery to the cancer patient. Kathy Lee should have apologized but she was too stupid and ignorant to realize what she did.



This was not for the person with autism. This was to "reward" the jock who took him in. If I was the jock, my friendship with such a great kid as Graham would have been enough. He seemed way too far into himself than Graham.



Why would the mother of the jock feel the need to write a letter? The message is that befriending a kid with autism is such a burden that it should be rewarded. Nice message, huh?

Yes in that context yes to create sensibility about an non-issue made into an intent-full attack against people with autism. Because some people are intolerant of the emotions, expressions and compassion of others they twist it up to make it into an evil when it is not.

You are perverting (manipulating) well intended people and their intentions and the compassion needed to help people with disabilities whom need all the help they can get. I find it to be an intolerance that manipulates and contrives in an ill spirited way. To you is there any other way of viewing what occurred in the video then what was projected into it as if it was all one grand insult?

If that is how you see it then fine. Let me just say something though: Kathy Lee is not a caring person. For her to do something nice, someone has to see it. She is being nice to win the approval of her peers not because she is naturally caring.

True caring and kindness doesn't involve an audience or someone to recognize it. This jock and Kathy Lee want an audience to see what they are doing means they took the autistic kid in for the wrong reasons. (I am going to give leeway to the jock since he seems naturally caring. I am talking about Kathy here)

It is subtle, but I have far too much experience in dealing with shallow, superficial people. I can weed out the people who do care from the people who are doing it to seem caring. Kathy Lee is one of those people.

If Kathy Lee really cared, she would have apologized for her lack of knowledge and insensitivity to Graham. Whether it was intentional or not is not the issue. She was insensitive. She didn't apologize because she is far too concerned with her image than with Graham.



Yes, there is a way I view it. These people honestly thought they were doing a great thing. So they decided to show the world what they were doing. When they realized it was making Graham not feel well, they tried to make him feel better by being goofy.

I don't have an issue with that, okay. But people have written to the show explaining why it was insensitive, and the show never apologized for their unintentional sensitivity. That says a lot.

If you are truly caring, why would you need to be recognized for it?

Last edited by techn0teen on 02 Sep 2011, 12:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.

The hosts of that show, the audience, and the composer and performer of that song can all go straight to hell.

The kid with autism and the teen guy who 'adopted' him are very cool.

The song was insulting, atrocious, and really, really bad music.

I truly wish there wasn't an audience for shows like that, and I am disgusted that people would put on shows like that for money.

Once more, with feeling - That song really sucked.

technoteen - I think you really nailed the essense of that monsterous woman.

If she does any good, it not because it is good, but because it will make her appeal to her horrid fans.

I truly hate her.

Well for me the song reflected a reality I have experienced without services. Without singers like her who are willing to go out on the line to to have criticism from people like you who will make good the bad no one would care. For that reason she is brave. If people didn't bother to care which is what some advocates philosophies result in because of "emotional intolerance" then there would be no help. The more people realize that some or more of us need help and to care in the first place the better. I find going up against the song by projecting into the person as simply being about her to lack FACT. It is mean spirited, contrives and does not formulate friendships with the society around us in the disabilities some experience more then others but instead creates hard feelings. My understanding if your perhaps far to concerned with your image in the compassion others experience from others simply over a image of autism in society you happen to have similarity in. I think it is very self-centered to expect others to believe everything you say otherwise they themselves only seek to belittle you like you projected others did to the child.

Disability can be sad and it's not always about ones own personal pride.

You are the hate. That's all you have to say is hate. Making things up and to hate on it. It's a good thing society does not function based on your emotional whim.

I think it's also self-centered to expect others to believe everything you say. I call them as I see them. If you can give me evidence on why Kathy Lee is naturally caring outside the domain of her public life, then I will shut up and see this event as a simple misunderstanding.

You know what, I don't care if I come across as an evil, judgemental bastard. What they did to that kid was insensitive. Period. That's how into my image I am. I will leave it here.

EDIT: Be honest. Are you a fan of Kathy Lee? It seems to be that you have a sort of emotional connection to her and so any criticism I have of her seems to be an attack on her.

Last edited by techn0teen on 02 Sep 2011, 12:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Your the one making the claims not I. As far as you coming across evil I'd simply say intolerant and emotionally immature like some adults do. Judgmental yes but not a B word. I think it's time you and some others realize tolerance is a two way street and that twisting up others compassion and help toward individuals with autism is a great injustice that creates hard feelings and REAL hate that you claim others already have.

I think though it was not the singer. Things you have experienced are the problem. You are projecting into her intentions and others based on your experiences. It does not make you evil but I think you and some others really do need someone to talk to about this stuff. That I don't mean as an insult.

Before this post I had never heard of her. That does not make it ok for me to harshly judge people as you have done simply because they express compassion and care. For anyone to be judged in the like ways you have they need to say some obvious things.

Skip to 9:07 in the video when Kathie asks him what he thought of the song. Do you not notice that huge burst of laughter by everyone that came out of absolutely nowhere just because he answered the question honestly?

Here is how I have learned to understand those emotional dynamics in theory.

1. They may have had a nervous laugh noticing his statement. Remarking on how they should jazz it up next time so as to make it happy and more exciting like their moods were.

2. In direct contact with someone with autism that kind of compassion may seem overwhelming. It was not intending to be an insult and obviously no established organization such as theirs in the media is going to intend to harm someone. Personally in that situation the laughter, noise. lighting and fast thinking transitions combined would likely have sent me into a sensory like trance.

The reality is however the song represented truths in peoples lives. It seemed obviously designed to help and to care. Beyond that we should learn to accept some people care a great deal and that in person those kinds of emotions may be overwhelming to some of us.

The so called N.T's are not perfect but when they mean well just as we mean well as people of some kind of autism we should be hospitable. The tact some are taking with concern to these like situations does not seem to me to be the best potential outcome in the long run.

The spineless cow laughed at a kid on national television and all you manage to do is make some statement on tolerance. I have no problems with 'NTs' but I want this paticular woman grilled for her misdemeanour. Well-intentioned idiocy is the root of much evil. She should have some sense slapped in to her.

Right. So when you get slapped back socially for creating ill will where there was none what will your position be? If you want to find insult around every corner like some advocates do it will simply destroy your emotional mind. It's happened to others and it's a path I don't support.

The kids are alright. The adults should have left them alone. I don't even fault Kathie Lee Gifford so much. She was just behaving in a way consistent with her TV persona, giving the audience what they want.....



But there is an audience. Which is why I don't fault Kathie Lee Gifford. She's just doing her job probably exactly as outlined in her contract. So who do I fault???

The parents of both boys.

Kathie Lee Gifford would never have even known they existed if it wasn't for the parents. Both sets of parents had to cooperate in this. They should have left this friendship alone instead of trying to elevate it to something abnormally altruistic. Instead they took a completely normal friendship and cast it as something TV-worthy: as though the AS boy is so unlikeable that befriending him is actually some sort of sacrifice and implying that the NT boy couldn't possibly have enjoying spending time with him as a motive, thus implying that his friendliness isn't authentic friendliness but is altruism instead. Why should it be news when two boys make friends? It shouldn't. And shame on the adults for acting like this friendship is some sort of bizarre aberration to celebrate instead of the way peope normally interact.