Anyone catch tonight’s Daily Show? (3/16/04)
The usually gracious Jon Stewart seemed like he was having an especially hard time holding his tongue, while interviewing Stossel.
Stossell essentially hung himself on his own words, denying any wrong doing of the Robber Barons, claiming that any government needed to get out of involvement in things like education. Went on to claim private corporations would more aptly govern themselves without any governmental interference.
Usually, Jon will try and gleam from his broad spectrum of guests their unique take on current events, trying to empathise, to a degree, with where they are coming from. Tonight, however, it seemed like he was doing all he could not to keep from laughing at him.
Priceless moment: Stossel cracks wise about the poor tactics of the obviously satirical (at least to most) piece from Stephen Colbert on drug testing for Bridge players.
Jon’s imediate reply: (Mocking the famous anti-drug commericial of years ago) "I learned it from you!
Usually the interviews are the weakest oart if the show, but not tonight…
Well, like so many DS pieces, they took a real story and then take it a little too seriously. Colbert started quizing her on the many drugs she may have taken, starting with real ones, then just making up names of increasing ludicrous drugs, like Goofballs and “faggadrems” (IIRC).
I couldn’t stand having to interview Stossel either. He was plugging his book with one of those Foxnews dittoheads the other day, and the stuff he said just blew me away. His opening line was wrong in so many ways:
(Paraphrasing): People hate their employers, who give them money, but love the government, which takes their money.
Huh? Since when do employers “give” people money? I was under the impression that they paid in exchange for labor.
And in what world do people love the government? The particular branch of the govt. that takes people’s money, the IRS, has to be the most hated govt. institution this side of the Gestapo.
Stossel got worse from there, arguing that Hollywood liberals, atheists, the French, and al Qaida all hold and propagate this view, without a shred of evidence.
That was a great segment; I was glad to see Jon stick it to that brainless twit.
Watching Stossel made me realize that with some very minor editing and maybe some amped-up music cues, Stossel’s work could be turned into some really fabulous Daily Show-esque comedy.
Stossel is far from brainless. His politics and mine are different—I am not a Libertarian and think many of their positions are unrealistic—but that doesn’t make him or others who feel as he does brainless or stupid. Stossel is very intelligent, a damn sight more so than Jon Stewart who is nothing more than a talking head.
Stewart is primarily a comedian, but I like what he does. Stossel’s a liar and I’ve got no respect for him. I’ll have to watch the re-run of this one.
That would be the second guest in the last few weeks Stewart has laid into. A week or two ago, they had the author of some tabloid-ish book about celebrity craziness, and it was pretty much the same- JS seemed to find the idea laughably stupid and couldn’t help from being critical. The most pointed exchange went something like this:
Guest: This book could have just been a list of celebrity meltdows, but-
JS: That’s exactly what it is!
You’re obviously not that familar with Jon Stewart. He is very smart, and his takes on world events reflect a startlingly shrewd grasp of the issues. You couldn’t come up with political material that funny and dead-on if it were otherwise.
My favorite recent Stewart zinger was from an interview with GOP chairman Phil Gillespie (sp?).
(Paraphrased)
PG: We’re expecting a tough race, it’ll look more like 2000 than 1984.
JS: Oh, it’s looking a lot like 1984!
That (cheap, but hilarious) shot aside, it was an interesting and largely non-partisan interview on how party politics work. Stewart tried to get along with guests he disagrees with, mostly by fiegning humility and deferring to them on their issue of expertise, but sometimes (see also Coulter, he demolished her with kindness), he just can’t hold back.
Stossel was on the Daily Show before–maybe a year ago? I don’t remember what they talked about, but they clearly didn’t get along at all. After the interview, with the lights dimming as they went to commercial, Stossel walked off, swatting his hand as if to say “screw this”. After the break Jon said something like that’s the last they’ll ever see of John Stossel.
I still enjoyed the time the Spice Girls were on the show (well, two of them) and he spent the entire interview mocking them. And not bluntly or playfully, either.
They didn’t appreciate and started insulting him right back. Some of the finest TV ever.
To quote Mr Stewart: Whaaaaa?? (Rubs eyes in disbelief )
I’ll grant you that Stossel could very well be a genius in his private life, but it sure hasn’t come across in his journalism or his arguments he mentioned from his book.
And I have to wonder how familiar you are with Jon Stewart if you think he’s merely a “taking head”. This guy has received more than his share of accolades for heading up his razor sharp team of satirists. For all the thoughtful skewering he does of business-as-usual network news, I would say he’s more aptly described as the anti talking head.
Stossel is a turd of the highest order. Remember when he went on Howard Stern’s program some years ago, and was SHOCKED and OFFENDED that Stern made fun of him? Duh!
I only saw a little part of the Stewart/Stossel interview. I’ll have to watch the whole thing on rerun this evening. And I have to get my mom to watch it too–she plays competitive bridge! I guess she’ll have to lay off the smack.
Another vote for Stewart’s intellect and fairness over Stossel’s. I read Stossel’s book and while some of it was common sense, most of it was vague generalizations, half-truths and verisimilitudinous complaints and suggestions. I lost all respect when he admitted that he received a $250,000 grant to repair a beach house that he knew was built on an unsafe location, then panned the program. He saw it as honesty and irony; I just saw it as blatant hypocrisy.
That was a little scary. Looks like Jon has taken to heart all the stories about America’s young adults using his show as a primary *news * source (example) and is starting to forget he’s a satirical comic. Worse, it looks like politicians are starting to notice, too, and are trying to get *on * the show. Compare the Stossel interview to Stewart’s tongue-bath of Schumer the night before. At this rate, he’s going to turn into the Democrats’ Dennis Miller.
Damn fine interview, though - he slipped the shiv right through Stossel’s rib cage on every question before the victim ever knew it, and got the audience to laugh along every single time. He’s evidence that it takes great intelligence as well as a twisted attitude to be a great live comic - “talking head”, somebody said?
I’m amazed that Stossel is so non-self aware. His ability to read a room is about on par with Omarosa from The Apprentice.
He approached this thing like he was being interviewed on PBS’s Newshour. Which as anyone who has watched five minutes of The Daily Show can tell you is entirely the wrong approach. Sure, you can make serious points in front of Stewart – as long as you don’t come off as self-important or convinced of your own righteousness. Stewart makes his money by deflating blowhards, and he doesn’t suffer inflated egos lightly.
Which is why the greatest Daily Show political guest is and always will be Bob Dole. When Dole is on, he often makes points that I’m sure Stewart seriously disagrees with, but he does it with a wisecrack and an ability to make fun of himself. Thus, Stewart doesn’t roast him; he rolls with the conversation.
Pity Stossel didn’t learn that lesson. He actually raises some valid points – there really is a serious body of economic research that shows Standard Oil was beneficial to the consumer, for example – but he raises them in a manner that reflects a belief in his own inerrancy, and thus gives Stewart a big fat irresistabe target to shoot at.
And Stossel goes overboard – Standard Oil may have been good for consumers, and that may be evidence that some aspects of antitrust law are unnecessary, but to use Standard Oil as proof that all antitrust laws are unnecessary is silly; at the very least, most economists will agree that prohibiting explicit price-fixing between firms is a good idea. And that’s another thing Stewart will shoot at: people who take extreme positions without any sort of hedge or admission that there are countervailing factors at work.
Dewey, I thought John McCain was a great guest the last time he was on (I think it was the night after the last State of the Union address). He was funny too. But Dole is definitely a good contributor.
What was that interview if not satire? Stossel said some pretty ridiculous stuff, and Jon didn’t let him get away with it. It’s not a new thing. The show has started to have a little bit of political clout, but they were mixing insightful and funny years ago.
Schumer came on mostly to make jokes, though. Have you missed their jokes about Kerry lately? Here’s why he’s not Dennis Miller in my opinion: 1) he’s funny, 2) he’s not a self-absorbed jerk convinced of his own genius (I liked Dennis for a long time, but he always radiated smugness), 3) he’s funny, and 4) the non-interview portions of the show are still comedy and nothing but. I’d rather he talk to the politicians, his talents aren’t used as well when he’s talking to an actor. They typically have nothing to say except “go see my next movie.”
