Rick Sanchez takes on Jon Stewart... and immediately gets fired by CNN

Let me try once a bit detailed account of the key part of the conversation.

It starts with bigot call. This is very simple. Yes, a person can be called a bigot in accordance to its definition:

A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.

Sanchez called Jon a bigot the way he (Sanchez) sees it or perceives it. So, what? Many people called O’Reily a bigot despite the fact that he too will “engage” anyone holding an opposing view. However, upon examination of both, one can conclude that no amount of direct discussion with people holding an “opposing view” will dissuade either or make either change their opinion. In fact, the only thing having someone of the opposing team is that ratings go up and heated debate ensues (to an absurd excitement of the “loyal fan base”) that resolves nothing. Even further, having two people that hold opposing views for a full hour debating was tried before and died (Crossfire, anyone?).

Further, the article points out that Sanchez backtracked and corrected himself right during the interview so he, in fact, DOES NOT believe Jon is a bigot. How come everyone is skipping over that? Looks like bunch of kids in the playground screaming and pointing fingers.

Now, when the interviewer pointed out that Jon is Jewish I would first go on and say WTF that has to do with anything? That, to me, is the lowball slimy kind of setup that deserves contempt. However, some people go for it as it is too sweet to ignore. So Sanchez, I think, instead of saying “fu** you, idiot, that is totally stupid point to make ask me something else” wanted to reject that point by explaining that Jon in this time and age does not belong to a “minority” that requires special protection by citing examples of many Jews that are on the networks. Main reason Sanchez took that example is that Sanchez himself is part of the networks milieu and I think he was just saying that he does not see any Latinos or Blacks being high positioned executives on TV networks but rather Jews. That’s just an observatory fact easily Googled by anyone. So, he just said that if the members of a certain ethnicity or race hold some portion of the power in an important social element that media is viewed as, then it is not fair to call said ethnicity a minority.

Sanchez goes even further:

This sounds like a well though out statement to make. What’s wrong with this? Well, for one, it makes the guy look aware and less of an idiot and “we” dont want to make him look aware and less of an idiot so “we” will just skip over it like he did not say that at all. Go, figure!
What I don’t get is the actual intent of the interviewer to which Sanchez clearly responds - even if Jon was a member of a minority how does that disqualifies him from ever being a bigot himself? It’s just stupid claim by the interviewer.

To accuse the guy of anti-semitism, to my untrained Canadian ears, is totally whacked out. But, there is this mob mentality fueled, fed and executed by the media for anything that can be semantically construed as “deep seated hatred” that I pity anyone who has to work as a public figure because inevitably each of those public figures will at some point be faced with the question that in one way or another, even tangentially, touches on certain “minority” so they better memorize winning phrases right now.

The “bigot” part (as idiotic as it was) was not the thing that got Sanchez in trouble.

If you aren’t aware that “The Jews ruin the media” is a standard antisemitic meme, then you just aren’t very educated.

Even his “white liberal elite” accusation was stupid and racist.

Probably, the day teacher wanted to teach standard anti-semitic memes we had to go to the shelter because grenades were falling on my city.

My God, did you read what I wrote. He never said anything like that. That’s what has been suggested he thinks but he never said THAT. It is extremely malicious to construe such an accusation.

I mean, seriously, Sanchez is anti-semite? Really?!

Sanchez’s own words:

This is as close to saying “Jews control the airwaves” as you can get without saying “Jews control the airwaves”*.

And Sanchez grew up poor and Hispanic- what’s he want, a frigging parade? If he really wants to get into pissing contests I’m sure Oprah can prove she grew up poorer and more oppressed and rose a lot higher a lot sooner than Sanchez did, and she supports Stewart’s upcoming D.C. rally so that trumps him.

Sanchez just comes across as a textbook narcissist and crybaby. It’s not like he’s an obsession of Stewarts- he comes up far less than Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity or pretty much anyone at Fox. As for Stewart going after working class “po boy riz to greatness” types because he’s such an evil classist, you don’t get much whiter or eliter than Tucker Carlson- heir to a frozen food fortune and got where he is with family connections and smirking and bow-tie wearing- the guy is a villain from an Elvis movie who you half expect to follow his named with a slurred “The Fourth” and you know he has people named Mimsy and Boopsie somewhere on his speed dial. Stewart eviscerated him on his own show- that was a massacre compared to the minor cheek tweaks he’s given Sanchez. (He shows video of Sanchez voluntarily getting tasered or “lost” at sea… dude, you did both of those.)

*And, for the benefit of our Jewish airwave lords who may be listening, I’m fine with that- really- you guys are don’t a great job! Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes aren’t Jewish and look what Fox turned into.)

Freudian slip?

:slight_smile:

He certainly did say something like it. Following is a direct quote from the article; words out of Sanchez’s mouth:

Okay, you got your “everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart.” Taken by itself, if you wanted to insist upon his earlier words being the controlling characterization, you can plausibly say that this “everybody” refers to “Northeastern liberal elites.”

Then you got your “a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart.” Still in plausible deniability-land, I guess.

But then he ties these clauses together with “they, the people in this country who are Jewish…”

If that doesn’t take “Northeastern liberal elites” right out of the running for being the “everybody” in his antecedents, then he deserved to be fired for the most surreal non sequitur in the history of broadcast journalism. I really don’t see how one can claim otherwise with a straight face.

Of course, if you can link to a transcript showing that the words I C&P’d from the article were missing something that does tie “Northeastern liberal elites” back into his statement about who runs the media, I’ll be happy to reconsider your argument. It still won’t resolve the issue of “NLE” being code for “Jews,” of course, but at least we’ll be on the “agree to disagree” page.

Yes he did. That’s exactly what he said.

Well, if we’re going to say that statement has substance, then it’s only fair to say that I can’t see somebody not getting a job somewhere because they’re Hispanic, either. And the kind of person who would discriminate against a Hispanic these days more than likely would discriminate against a Jew, too. It does nothing to bolster Sanchez’s argument, especially when you consider that Sanchez was, at the time, employed on national TV. It kind of takes the wind out of his sails when he claims discrimination and oppression.

Who Makes How Much - New York's Salary Guide 2005 - Nymag Define boatload. In relation to the rest of these he is a piker. A host of a cable TV show.

Oh, about forty times a year more than the chump change I make. :slight_smile:

Huh? You can’t be serious? :rolleyes:

A more complex issue than it looks at first blush. Stewart is a talented guy for sure but while he does have a number of his “opponents” on his show it’s very difficult for them to get an word in edgewise due to the baying of the rabidly pro-Stewart audience. I find that weak (though he is certainly not the only one who does it) and really tears apart the notion that anyone gets even time.

Regarding Stewart being Jewish, well I don;t consider a Jewish person to be a minority in the context that it was used in the interview. I also think Sanchez is ultimately right insofar as it really isn’t a hinderance in this day and age to be Jewish in the entertainment industry or really in most industries. In fact, it’s probably a benefit.

However, I don’t buy Sanchez’s view of who and what is a minority either. In my opinion there are only two minorities who have any claim in the United States for redress given how badly they have been treated and that’s Black and Indian (native) Americans. Beyond these too groups being a minority should be utterly irrelvant. They should not be protected any more or less than any other law-abiding person in the US. To suggest otherwise dilutes the very real issues faced by a true underclass and deflects needed attention from those issues.

What about the LGBT community?

Why wouldn’t I be? Sanchez is “Hispanic” and had a pretty good job. Clearly it wasn’t an issue for him. And even here in racist ol’ Arizona I’ve never really gotten a sense of employment discrimination. I freely admit it’s a base assertion, though.

But is that Stewart’s fault or the audience’s? I suppose he could do more to try to control them, certainly. It annoys the hell out of me too that the audience is so partisan.

I don’t EVER recall the Daily Show audience shouting down or drowning out on of Stewart’s conservative guests. Please give an example.

And recently, he’s gone further than anyone else I know of in allowing for adequate time. If the show runs out of time, he keeps the discussion going and posts it in it’s entirety online. I hope other shows do that, because it’s relatively easy, but I haven’t heard of it.

Sanchez is not limiting his comments to Jews in the media, he is talking about American Jews.

Hispanics are discriminated against widely and often. Perhaps you’ve heard some of the anti-immigration rhetoric, which is almost entirely aimed at Hispanics.

To argue for the other side for a moment, it’s not so much that the audience shouts down or drowns out the conservatives, it’s more that their reactions are so blatantly one-sided and emphatic that one, they take up time that might be spent talking, and two, they can be intimidating and frustrating. I’d certainly have a hard time arguing my point when the audience is so biased against me.

As for the extended online interviews, while it is nice that the option is there, the fact is the majority of the interview is still not shown on TV. And if the editing of the interview for the TV version is one-sided, intentionally or otherwise, it can present a pretty bad view of the show. I think they’ve lately dispensed with an ‘abridged’ version of the interview and instead show the full first 5-7 minutes unedited, which is a bit more fair.

I wish they would pick one show a week and do a full hour. He gets guests like President Carter, President Clinton and King Abdullah II of Jordan and only gets like 8 minutes of actual interview time. I know he posts the rest online but could he plan for this maybe one day a week?

From your mouth to God’s ear. :rolleyes:

Since you seem to to be taking a devil’s advocate position, I’m not directinh this response to you personally.

Seriously, I would like to see an instance where a negative reaction of the audience took up a significant fraction of interview time. It have heard that every show segment is available in an archive on the show’s website, so if someone can provide a link, I will certainly look at it.

And as far as editing goes, I’m not sure that there was editing before the web postings began. IIRC, he just cut off the interviews when he ran out of time. He still does something similar most often – he interrupts the interview to close the show and says the discussion will continue and be posted in its entirety later. What editing I HAVE seen is pretty crude, they chop it dead at some point, and insert Jon doing a brief closing.

Agreed. That’s exactly my point earlier. Yes, he will invite anyone with the opossing view but the treatment of that guest only escalates to the point of circus.

Agreed. This interpretation is the exact match. All other interpretaions suffer from subjective noise.

Disagreed. As someone already mentioned, Hispanics are currently most opressed due to their status as illegal aliens which, for some in US means, they are sub-human. And due to that status most of the wrongfull treatment goes unreported. Yes, they will get employment but well below minimum wage. It’s in fact a modern day slavery.

It is also true that there is a significant number of Hispanics already in US and well standing. That is the market that CNN – and other networks – are trying to sell and that’s why, to some degree, they get guys like Sanchez. I think it is actually good thing for Sanchez to bring afront issues with treatment of Hispanics. Too bad he got thrown under the bus.

Exactly. Even when he did his famous takedown of Jim Cramer, he allowed him to explain himself. Yes, Stewart called him out when he tried to inject bullshit into the argument, but he did not pull a Bill O’Reilly and shout the guy down or try to incessantly interrupt him.