Perhaps I dream, but give the guys at spinsanity.org or factcheck.org a cable TV show. Let them take 2 partisan talking points a week and demolish them. I would watch that. It would be just what the doctor ordered.
ISiddiqui
Stewart did not always have the impact that he has now. Yes, he is hilarious. He has always been hilarious. But more people, like my father, who is a moderate conservative who will be voting Democrat for the first time, are tuning in now. This is because he gets you with being funny but he also lets you scream “Justice!” when he takes on the broken political establishment parroting talking points, distorting and spinning issues, and outright deceiving the public from time to time.
Stewart’s focus is absurdity. And American politics has become defined largely by its sheer absurdity. The examples are everywhere. Stewart’s humor is to illuminate and ruminate on the absurd. Ergo, Stewart’s humor has transformed into an illumination and rumination on American politics. And people have started watching: American politics is now inherently funny. And Stewart recognizes that this is Not A Good Thing. I don’t think he is claiming that Crossfire and Hardball crowds are the primary source of absurdity here; but they certainly play a role in repeating and adding to the absurdity, a kind of first line of amplification. In some ways, view him as a patriot, telling Carlson and Begala “Please make my job harder to make this country stronger.”
But the point is that they’re not getting any news. They’re just getting entertainment. The press shouldn’t be giving people what they want, it should be giving them what they need. And yes, that is bad for business. This is more important than business. It’s integrity. Fox, CNN, 60 Minutes… they don’t have any. Whining that they can’t get anyone to pay attention doesn’t cut it, either. If you can’t get them to pay attention, you’re failing in your job.
I think if every time John Kerry or George Bush sat down in front of an interviewer they got treated like Jon Stewart treated those two schmucks on Crossfire, you bet your ass people would watch. And if they just start avoiding the press entirely, then they’re going to be voted out in favor of the very first pol who is willing to stand up to that sort of questioning.
How is it their job to be shills? Aren’t they supposed to provide a real debate, that analyzes the issue in a critical way that politicians aren’t willing to do? Journalism is protected by the First Amendment, given free access to the airwaves, and given other encouragement because it’s vital to democracy. The SDMB represents various political viewpoints, but none of us are partisan hacks. (OK, there might be a couple of exceptions, but no naming names!) We have real debates here; what CNN gives us is garbage.
Well, look at the evolution of CNN’s Crossfire. Back when it was Bill Press and Pat Buchanan it was a fairly serious debate show. Yes, they were the ‘left’ and ‘right’ but they discussed the issues. Then Fox News came to town and swept ratings from right under CNN’s nose. CNN thought that this sensationalist news channel would never get viewers, but not only was it getting viewers, but beating down CNN as well. In order to compete, they had to adjust their shows as well. The change in format of Crossfire (to the ‘new’ Crossfire) happened as CNN was trying to counter O’Reilly and Hannity, etc. They still have no counter to O’Reilly (who still, IIRC, has the largest cable news audience out there), but they are learning to play the game.
You are being idealistic. These cable news shows (and network news) are in it FOR the money! If they aren’t making money they are failing in their jobs. If you want a news channel with integrity that won’t feel a need to pander to the public, there is always PBS.
I seriously doubt it. The American people either don’t care or will be offended (depending on if they back the candidate getting asked the questions). Look what happens when anyone tries to ask President Bush a semi-tough question… Conservatives go nuts, saying they are being unfair to him. While most of the people continue to tune out.
Our voter turnour has been pretty low for a while now. IIRC, it took a BIG blow after Watergate, when from what I seem to think is your position in the quoted post, it should have gone up (because you had those probing questions).
Now, they are expected to yell loudly for their sides. After Fox’s great success, CNN has realized that partisanship and yelling sells.
Exactly right. They’re whores. That’s their job. Not journalists. Not editorialists. Whores. And that’s how Jon Stewart treated them.
The conservatives raise a fuss because they know the press will cower liked whipped dogs. If anyone in the media had a spine, that wouldn’t work, and they’d give it up.
Not at all: I never said that a more responsible press would lead to an increase in voter turn-out. People didn’t stay away from the polls because of the coverage of Watergate, they stayed away because of Watergate itself. They were disillusioned by the political process. The fact that there was a genuine news media in the country at the time is evidenced by the fact that so many people knew about Watergate to be disillusioned with politics. The fact that politics is rife with corruption is not the fault of journalists. Rather, journalism is the cure for corruption in politics. The entire Watergate scandal is a perfect example of what is lacking in modern journalism. That would never happen with the current crop of shills and hucksters.
And they both deserve nothing but scorn because of it.
so…ISiddiqui your point is that since the public wants lying screaming partisan shills they aren’t wrong for being lying screaming partisan shills but the person that comes on and says “Hey you two are lying screaming partisan shills couldn’t we try for something better that actually would encourage intelligent debate in this country?” is wrong?
The problem is that instead of doing it on his show, he came on THEIR show and started saying it. That’s just wrong, IMO. It’s kind of like people who come to your house and start lecturing you about how bad of a parent you are. You are a guest, act like it. If he knew he was going to have a problem being civil to the hosts on their show, he should be refused the invitations. And don’t tell me that the Crossfire people knew Stewart would be that way… they probably thought it was an act, like I’m sure Letterman thought O’Reilly’s demenor on his own show is part act.
I simply have a problem with going on someone else’s show and lamblasting THEM. If he wanted to make that point he could have done so in much more tactful way. They let you on their show and now you are calling them out?
On their show, yes. It rubs me the wrong way to go on someone else’s show and lamblast the person who invited you. I wouldn’t tolerate it in my personal relations (I realize there are differences, btw), so I think it is simply wrong.
He can go off on Crossfire and CNN all he wants on his own show or a third party’s show.
Oh, and also, I think hosts have some obligations towards their guests as well. They should be courteous towards their guests, even when they ask some very probing questions. They shouldn’t try to ‘play gotcha’ with the guest and let the guest answer inconsistancies. I don’t think the Crossfire guys did a good job with Stewart, but I think Stewart was MUCH worse.
Spin? I can only go by what you said. Your entire post seemed to say “The public wants it so that’s what they get paid for so he shouldn’t nail them on it” And if he went on their show acted like he was ok with it then went on another show and blasted them I’d bet you’d be saying “Wow he was just on their show but didn’t have the guts to say anything to their faces! What a wussy”
Um if I went into someone’s house and they were BEATING their kids I would have something to say about it and possibly the cops to call. Who’s Jon supposed to call?
Actually the whole thing smelled like an ambush to me (though I’ve never seen crossfire before so it may just be paranoia on my part) they way they had only one guest on with two hosts and the prepared ‘softball’ questions that Jon did for Kerry. I think they planned to spend 10 mins buttering him up then jumping on him for criticizing their show. He just attacked first…though once again that just maybe in my head.
Well, if there’s a rule that says, “The guest must assume the role that the hosts would be the most comfortable with so the hosts don’t unexpectedly get their widdle feewings hurt,” I was not aware of it.
SEEMED to say… and you made an assumption about what I said. So, yes, spin.
:rolleyes:
Do you happen to have some, well, proof for this bald assertion?
So now what the Crossfire gang is doing is akin to someone beating their kids :rolleyes:. I didn’t say they were lecturing you in your home about beating your kids, did I?
And what proof do you have that they were going to attack Stewart for criticizing their show? It seemed Tucker got really pissed when Stewart starting going off on Crossfire. It didn’t seem he had anything prepared to blast Stewart with.
They didn’t “let him on their show”, they invited him. They knew that he didn’t like them (or should have) and so should have been prepared.
So your problem with Stewart was that he wasn’t nice enough? That instead of saying “ha ha I’m a funny guy, buy my book”, he came on with a serious point to make, that somehow makes him bad guy? No wonder the media’s in the shape it’s in.
He called them on their BS and they couldn’t take it. If you want to call yourself a journalist (and Stewart doesn’t) then you’d better be prepared when a guest comes on the show (they weren’t) to deal with whatever the guest throws at you. The Crossfire guys expect their guests to come on and be passive and let the hosts spew their partisan crap. Stewart decided that he wasn’t going to do that and they fell apart. Serves them right.
Actually it started in 1982 with Buchanan and Tom Braden (Eight Is Enough was based on his family). Buchanan joined the Reagan administration in 1985, but came back in 1987. Does anyone who replaced him on Crossfire? Was it Cal Thomas?
From what I recall a Braden/Buchanan debate was serious as a heart attack. Almost nasty. Michael Kinsley replaced Braden and John Sununu replaced Buchanan when he ran for President. That started this road to ruin.
Crossfire is about DEBATE. Perhaps you don’t know what a debate is. Obviously Stewart DOES and was taking those two incompetent shills to task for their ethical bankruptcy.
That your sensibilities were so offended really makes you a sad individual indeed.
Er no I reached a conclusion about what your point was in that post. Was there another one? If so tell me.
No proof that’s what makes it a BET and not an assertion.
Er, my point was he sees these shows as HURTING our country so he wants to do something about them but there’s nothing he can do. You’re the one that came up with the analogy of parenting. He doesn’t see them as not being perfect he sees them as actively doing harm.
Sheesh don’t you even read the whole post? Notice I said “paranoia” not “I have conclusive proof”? When I make a clear caveat in my post that it’s just utterly a possibly misguided impression do you honestly think I have hand written notes by the hosts saying “We’re going to get this guy hehehehehe”? Anyway if it was an ambush of COURSE the host is going to get pissed when it gets turned around on him. The ambusher always has the advantage unless the target knows it’s there and attacks first.