[brief hijack]Does Tucker Carlson make anyone else think of Andrew Macarthy [/brief hijack]
I think Jon’s point is that what they’re doing – perpetuating infotainment and shillery in place of substantive journalism – hurts us, which they obviously do not have a right to do. Of course, the guys at Crossfire are not wholly responsible for the disintegration of journalistic integrity, but they are cogs in the machine. It felt to me like Jon was directing his ire as much towards the entire media machine as towards Tucker and Begala.
Sure, he was pretty rude. But when 10,000 people are dying each month in Sudan and one of the leading providers of news thinks the tiny irrelevant lives of Kobe Bryant and Martha Stewart are more important, something is seriously out of wack. If someone points this out in a less than polite manner, I think that’s forgivable.
Uh, Stewart wasn’t rude in the slightest. Read the transcript. He didn’t call Carlson a dick until Carlson called him Kerry’s butt boy. If I’m a guest and my host calls me a butt boy, I think it’s well within the bounds of fair play if I give as good as I got. The fact that Carlson was totally outclassed makes him look really bad, but doesn’t make what Stewart said particularly rude. IMHO.
If I was feeling pedantic I would side with Miss Manners and insist that rude is rude, regarless of who started it. But I hear you. “Confrontationally blunt” is probably a better way to describe his manner. Fully justified either way. I personally enjoyed seeing some sincere righteous anger on TV instead of the usual kneejerk gasbaggery.
I loved how Carlson called Stewart preachy, as if Carlson’s whole profession wasn’t to be preachy all day long. What is it about conservative tv personalities that they are so utterly blind to this worst of all hypocrisies? Moralizers who decry moralizing? The fact that Stewart was at once both more funny AND more interesting and compelling than Tucker has been in a long while made it all the more weak and pathetic an insult.
Again: the absolute worst of it is that they both clearly saw Stewart as just a funnyman who makes lighthearted fun of politicians. But that’s not what makes the Daily Show great. What makes it great is that it is deadly serious, very very pointed satire of the news media and punditry. They invited him on without realizing what most of America already knows: that we’re laughing AT them, not with them.
What are the chances that Stewart will mention this on his show come Monday?
No, I wanted to make my opinion known. You can do that on this site, right?
And let me get this straight, if other people believe a certain way and my opinion is different then I’m ‘wrong’? Would you be saying the same thing to a person in the middle of a lynch mob saying that this activity is wrong? After all, the majority has spoken!
If you’re attached to being ignorant, why bother being on this board?
Are you of the opinion that people on both sides have to seemingly (to them) bang their heads on the wall? I prefer to say you have your opinion and I got mine and since we aren’t going to change it we should just call it a day. I find it the more civil way to do things instead of devolving into flame fests. I guess YMMV.
Last week, Stewart had Governor Raciot (sp?) on his show - former governor of Montana, now big mucky-muck in Bush’s re-election committee. Stewart asked him some pretty softball questions as well, so it’s not like he toned it down for the dem and ramped it up for the pubby.
But the key thing is that Stewart’s softball questions to Raciot were a) funny, which is the main focus of the Daily Show, and b) once again poked more fun at the media than at the politicians.
Going from memory, one of the exchanges was along these lines:
Stewart: “Governor, there’s been a lot of speculation in the media that you guys are going to bring out an ‘October surprise.’ It’s October now - care to give us any hints?”
Raciot: “There’s no October surprise, Jon.”
Stewart: “Really? but everyone’s talking about it.”
Raciot: “Nope, nothing.”
Stewart: “Oh. Guess we’re wrong.”
Complete deadpan from the governor guy, and it was a very funny bit - and it made the point that the media is mainly running around on rumour and gossip, and doesn’t really know how to get beyond a bland denial. Raciot came across (to me at least) as a smart, funny guy.
Stewart’s pretty much admitted, both (briefly) on his show, but more so in his recent Rolling Stone interview that he blew it, big time, with Kerry.
What’s interesting is that anybody cares. That he can give good enough nterviews that the odd bad one is noteworthy.
I’m not sure Stewart’s new found hostility and partisanship is playing all that well. In the last ratings period, The Daily Show has lost 12% of its audience. Including me, most nights. I often tune in, and go, “Oh, they’re off on another anti-Republican rant”, and change the channel. I absolutely love the Daily Show, and I’m hoping it’ll settle back to doing better comedy after the election.
I can understand why Democrats would think it’s hilarious, though. I suspect the 12% drop-off is probably 80% Republican.
Pish-tosh, he lambastes the Democrats plenty, but let’s be honest here, the Bush administration’s ineptitude and mendacity provide much better comedy fodder. When Kerry becomes president, Stewart will rip on him, too.
“new found hostility and partisanship”? The Daily Show has always criticized both sides, but the Republicans have been the more obvious objects of ridicule in recent years. Just point a camera at Bush & he’ll do something silly; add a microphone & he’s a laugh riot.
Don’t worry about Jon Stewart & the Daily Show. I’m sure they’re doing fine.
To plug his new book, silly! :smack: The book is on last week’s best seller list.
Why would you possibly care how the hosts from two shows feel about each other? This is not 6th grade where you are part of some clique and must take sides and only like those on your side.
This statement remind me of my cousin who would scrutinize all of my statements for disloyalty. He would condemn me for saying that someone other than Miss USA was the most beautiful or had a nicer dress. Everything was based on whose side you were on and endorsing any part of something meant you could not criticize any part of it.
This is life. If a show meets your needs then it serves a purpose for you. I always thought it was that my cousin was just raised wrong, but is seems that most of America has fallen for this kind of thinking, which is part of what Jon was so upset about. Instead of looking at those running, looking at how they suit you overall and then going with the one that fits best, but keeping your eyes open and voicing concerns as the arise, you must choose one side and then it is my side right or wrong! Somehow anything less than blind devotion is a character flaw.
Back to the topic of ettiquette:
Jon stated in the beginning, he was there to say to their face what he had said about them on his show and in private. I feel confident that he stated his intention to them or others with the show, how else was there no other guest for him to debate? I don’t see that he was rude to do as he said he would. There is time for the insult direct and he did not insult them until he was insulted.
I agree completely. What’s more, he showed up in person for the interview. When I first read the transcript, for some reason I assumed he was on a remote hook-up. I think it reflects well upon him that he had the balls to show up in person to air his grievance. That fact also likely added to the contentiousness of the interview. I have to think that he may not have had the opportunity to call Carlson a dick if he wasn’t really there to to interject.
I just watched this and holy s*#t!. I have never seen two people torn into so completely. The worst part was that they kept treating him as if he was joking, even though he was serious and entirely correct in every point.
I actually feel kind of bad for Stewart. You can tell that at the end he had completely given up on talking.
What really made this was that they had *no idea * what they were getting into. They thought that this was just a chucklehead softball interview. It’s not like he hasn’t made his feelings about this sort of thing known or he is just some hack stand up going on stage to talk about how women are different from men. They underestimated him and it bit them in the ass. 
Was it rerun over the weekend?
There are many places to download the thing. Here’s a link to a few.
I’d be very interested to read this… have you any links?
My two cents? Well, he was a total dick, but he was so utterly correct and funny (as he usually is) that I’ll give him a pass.
I found this link which is Quicktime, small and fast to run (my cable modem had it up and running in a few seconds…)
Wow - even better watching it than the transcript. Carlson looked lost. Stricker van Gogh you hit the nail on the head - Carlson doesn’t realize that what he is currently doing on Crossfire isn’t substantive.
I guess what would’ve been helpful would’ve been to have a person in the audies - or Begala, because Carlson clearly didn’t seem up to it - ask Stewart how he would make this Debate Show more Debate-substantive. I know I have a POV, but I would be interested in Stewart’s much more than mine - he is a professional on TV, so understands the importance of entertaining, but also is calling for more substance on Crossfire - how would he pursue both?