That is a debatable point. But, you could have just written the above instead of bringing Hillary Clinton into it. Why pick her from what appears to be an infinitely long list based on your characterization (“every person remotely associated with politics”)? The example really didn’t make any sense to me.
Back to the thread: I am all for interviewers (in comedy shows or not) to avoid indulging and “JayLeno-ing” the guests. I didn’t see Jon Stewart playing to the crowd and wrecking Hayes’s dignity. He interviewed from his own heart and mind. Hayes really couldn’t handle the questions. Maybe, as a gracious host, Stewart could have backed off, but as I said, I never liked that etiquette anyway, especially when it is awarded to someone who is bold and intelligent enough to publish books, write columns, be a commentator with strong opinions etc.
“Vicious attacks on the admin” huh? It’s got the connotation of “cheap shots” but all Jon Stewart is doing is presenting the facts and his opinions in a funny way. The Dick Cheney segment was hilarious!
I loved that interview. It was funny to see Jennifer Love Hewitt shocked by the lack of indulgence. She could have at least had a sense of humor about it, but she was genuinely disturbed.
lissener, you’re absolutely right about TDS being, first and foremost, a comedy show. It’s one of my favorites–if not the favorite–and I think Jon Stewart’s interviews are, for the most part, both incisive and funny. But there is a difference between laughing at someone good-naturedly and ridiculing them to the point of excoriation. Everyone knows that Stewart is left of center, but the reason that so many people–from both the left and the right–watch it is that it’s nonpartisan; Stewart’s quips aren’t mean-spirited. That’s what bothers me about such an incident. It’s not funny and Stewart is better than this.
That was a pretty painful interview. I felt like that train wreck was more her fault than Jon’s though. She didn’t understand that this wasn’t going to be her usual Leno or Letterman interview. She started freaking out when Jon started ckacking wise.
You’re certainly correct that Jon is an equal opportunity interrupter. He does it to everyone. It doesn’t make it any easier to watch though. I remember being especially annoyed with his interviews of Richard Clark and Bob Woodward. For guys like that, who had written serious books and had some serious things to say, to come on a comedy show, says a lot about what The Daily Show has become. Every time they started getting going with a thought though, there was Jon, stepping on all their points. It left me frustrated.
I’m sorry. I was talking about *Jon * Stewart, who does a show called the Daily Show. On Comedy Central. You probably haven’t seen it though. In any case you probably wouldn’t like it. Because most of the humor on the show, from day one, has been pretty mean spirited. They tend to find a subject worthy of ridicule and then uttery destroy it with vicious and biting satire.
I found the Dick Cheney segment hilarious but I’m also not a believer in the current administration. I know you are a conservative on this board… I don’t know how much you support this admin, but assuming you do, what is your reaction to a segment like that? In general, how do you perceive the show (since you seem to watch it regularly)? I am curious.
lissener, it took me a few moments to remember that we’re in CS, and not the Pit, but I did remember in time, so I’m going to try to confine myself to the vocabulary of civility.
Ahem.
Are you even paying attention to what’s going on around here? In case it’s escaped your notice, the “party line-toeing” Liberal is none other than the redoubtable Libertarian, using a different name. No Bushco apologist he, and certainly not a Republican, Liberal is presently (to my knowledge) leaning in the direction of regime change this coming November, and is clear-eyed enough to recognize that this will likely involve holding his nose and casting a vote for the Democratic candidate.
Ad hominems in Cafe Society aside, your retort to him above seems to reflect poor strategic thinking.
As to the issue of Mr. Stewart’s behavior toward his guest last night, I did happen to see the show, but my experience with it is scant enough that I don’t feel qualified to judge whether Mr. Hayes was treated any more fairly or unfairly than, say Senator John McCain. That said, I did feel that the audience reaction to Mr. Stewart’s handling of the interview was somewhat, shall we say, carnivorous. Whether this observation cuts to the heart of what Liberal objected to, or whether it is Jon Stewart’s legitimate role to modulate or to attempt to maximize such responses is perhaps a fruitful subject for debate.
You can be witty without offending anyone. If that’s a foreign concept to you, I don’t know what to say.
Back to the OP: Having just watched the episode in question, I think that Stewart’s comment was not unreasonable, both in its timing and manner (and, besides, he apologized and smoothed it over immediately afterwards).
That’s what they’re there for. They’re interchangeable straightmen for his – pay attention here – comedy routine. The sole reason they have been invited on the show–well, not always the sole; but certainly almost always the primary reason–is to provide Jon with lines off of which to riff. His job is mine their words for little nuggets off of which to bounce his wit.
The quip being prioritized, the this format, over the self-indulgent “point” that the celebrity guest is trying to make, interruptions are inevitable. And usually necessary.
If a celebrity wants to go on a talk shore where the host will be reverentially silent until until given leave to disengage his lips from the celebrity’s ass in order to ask a prescripted sentece, he or she should go on Inside the Actor’s Colon. Sorry; Studio. Or Leno.
Look, sarcasm aside (sorry; I realize I was getting out of hand sarcasmwise), a “cutting edge” comedy show whose *raison d’etre * is to make fun of the news is just *not going to work * if “being nice” is any kind of priority.
Are you seriously telling me, the collective lot of you, that you expect–you fully expect, to the point where you’ll attack him otherwise–you expect Jon Stewart to be consistently:[ul]
[li]Funny AND[/li][li]Journalistically above reproach AND[/li][li]Entirely bipartisan AND[/li][li]Well informed AND[/li][li]Intelligent AND[/li][li]Nice[/li][/ul] ?
Well, yes, and the reason is – the reason you keep failing to grasp – is that most of the time he is all those things. That’s why it’s disappointing to see Stewart do a poor job: we know he can be, and often is, better.
Oh, I think Cheney stepped in it, to use his words, “big time.” I think it’s dumb the way the administration denies their earlier stridency. Not only is it at odds with reality, it’s just dumb from a common sense point of view – it’s stupid to say “I never said anything like that” because chances are some intern somewhere whose sole job is to review every tape of every interview you’ve ever given is going to find a sound clip where you did say something like that. Hell, I can’t remember precise things I said in conversations six months ago; if I was asked about one, I’d be hedging my ass off before I gave an answer.
I really, really like The Daily Show. I think it’s one of the smartest political shows on TV. Hell, TDS plus South Park probably yields more insights on issues per day than all the serious talking-head programs combined.
And yes, I get a kick out of it even when Stewart is sticking it to conservatives. There’s ample stupidity on both sides of the aisle; you’d have to have a giant stick up your butt not to laugh when your side gets its just desserts. I loved the bit where they played a tape of Grover Nordquist, in agitating for Reagan to replace Alexander Hamilton on the twenty dollar bill, saying that Hamilton was the only non-president on our currency, then cut to Stewart [1] saying “I’LL BET YOU A HUNDRED BUCKS THAT’S NOT RIGHT” before flashing a Ben Franklin on the monitor. That’s good stuff.
…from last night’s interview an ill-timed joke Hayes made, which may have pissed-off Stewart. Jon commented on the size of book about terroist connections and Hayes said, “Yeah, its great airplane reading.” The audience then did a combination groan and boo, a rather long one at that. I realized he made that comment in New York City, and from what friends tell me of THIER friends and family back in the Big Apple, they’re not nearly as far along in the post 9/11 healing process as the rest of the country is. Understandable, when you concider things Jon has said on the show, like he used to see the WTC from his apartment and now he sees the Statue of Liberty AND in a conversation a month after the attacks he mentioned he still had dust in his apartment (I swear the audience gasped then). My point is, before Hayes even got into the content of his book, he put his foot in his mouth in a BIG way with the New Yorkers in the studio, including Stewart. This may account for his less than warm reception for the rest of the interview.
If a celebrity wants to go on a talk shore where the host will be reverentially silent until until given leave to disengage his lips from the celebrity’s ass in order to ask a prescripted sentece, he or she should go on Inside the Actor’s Colon. Sorry; Studio. Or Leno.
[/QUOTE]
This last sentence in lissener’s response is without a doubt the funniest line I have read in some time. I’ve been laughing for the last 10 minutes, and only recently my eyes have cleared of tears enough so that I can type this.
I caught the rerun of TDS and I may have been prejudiced by reading the many responses about the interview, before actually seeing it. It wasn’t as bad as some have described. Stewart did appear to do some back pedaling and log rolling at the same time, to smooth over any offense that Hayes[who does not seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer] may have taken. Hayes should’ve been more forceful and better prepared. Hadn’t he ever watched the show before. Was this his first time being interviewed? It is rare to see Stewart hold up someone’s head on a pike, he’s usually more of a skewer them with humor kinda’ guy. Wonder if this puts second thoughts into the heads of potential interviewees?
Okay, I have an admission. I love TDS – it’s in my top 3 all-time favorite shows. But I can’t stand Stewart’s interviews. I watch all the comedy segments, but FF through the interviews. (There’s a PTI queued up right after!)
I happened to catch this interview. It was the first one I’d bothered to watch this year. Not sure why I watched it, but I found it riveting. I even stayed through the break.
But now I’m dying to know…WTF happened in the Jennifer Love Hewitt interview? Could someone with a good memeory post some relevant quotes? If not, just tell me when it aired so I can be sure to check for it during the next interminable run of repeats. (As in, the first airdate and the guests on a couple shows previous to it.)
I believe Hewitt was being interviewed because of the Garfield movie, so it couldn’t have been more than a couple weeks ago. (She’s in that, right?) I no longer watch the celebrity interviews–although I will watch most of the politic-y ones–so I’m afraid I can’t tell you what happened in it. I know I’ve seen her interviewed on the show before, though, so I’m also quite curious on how she got so blindsided this time around (assuming I’m reading the remarks in this thread correctly and she was, in fact, blindsided by something).