Seconded on Stephen Colbert, ZeroGyro! His flawless newscaster delivery lets him get away with the most ridiculous statements (in perfect mockery of the real thing).
For an amusing little sound clip, he contributed his efforts to the Hedwig and the Angry Inch tribute album, Wig In A Box (Ladies & Gentlemen is the track).
But … but … but, you’re missing the moment of Zen!
Considering that Bush probably thinks Kumbaya is a dish on a Thai menu, probably not. 
That’s not the point, anyway. Stewart did something spontaneous and unexpected and caught them flatfooted. Good debate should be spontaneous; Crossfire’s discussions tend to be predictable. BTW, I also enjoy the show sometimes; I just enjoyed watching Carlson and Begala getting the wind taken out of their sails for a moment.
You have been greatly, greatly whooshed.
Repeating talking points ad infinitum is your idea of “debate”? Crossfire, Hardball, and all those other so-called debate shows are exactly what Stewart criticized them as: partisan hackery. Theater, not debate.
I assume you mean “lockstep against President Bush,” as Stewart is a self-admitted liberal. Regardless, when Stewart attacked Crossfire, it was not to push any particular political agenda, but to point out that the news media today makes a mockery of honest journalism and intelligent discourse. In Stewart’s eyes, Paul Begala is just as responsible for “hurting America” as Tucker Carlson.
And frankly, it was about time someone stood up and ranted against these guys. I consider it a win when Jon Stewart gets more applause from Crossfire’s studio audience than the hosts themselves.
If it has to be explained, clearly, you don’t get it.
You’ve completely missed his point. Stewart doesn’t want impartial journalism, he wants honest journalism. Crossfire doesn’t offer debate, it offers both political parties an additional platform to spread their lies and misinformation. A good journalist should be acting as a filter between the public and the politicians, correcting spin and putting things in their proper context, not acting as a mouthpiece for their political party.
Did you see the bit where he fellated a banana? Totally lost it. Only time I’ve ever seen him totally crack up.
TDS isn’t the problem, the rest of the so-called objective news media is the problem.
Stewart had Bob Schieffer (sp?), the host of CBS’s “Face the Nation” on as a guest shortly before Schieffer hosted one of the presidential debates last fall. As Schieffer came on he said to Stewart, “I wish I could say the things that you do” to which Stewart replied, “If only you had your own TV show.”
Stewart wasn’t attacking Schieffer by any means, but his comment made the point very well what straightjackets the mainstream media either puts on itself, or agrees to in exchange for so-called “access”, as if access to the pablum the government power structure puts out is worth the tradeoff.
I certainly agree with this. In fact, any comedian who laughs at his or her own jokes loses marks from me. It’s one of the main reasons—apart from the complete lack of funny material—that i find Jimmy Fallon and Tina Fey’s SNL stuff so annoying.
Hmm… it seems to me that when he loses his composure, it’s almost always in response to a correspondent, or to the audience. I can’t think of any moments offhand where he actually laughed at one of his own jokes.
If by that you mean that he lets his personal opinions be apparent on a fairly frequent basis, you’re correct. But he’s clearly not “partisan” in the sense of being a shill for any particular political party. His views may be pretty well Democratic, but (unlike the Republican talking heads on TV and talk radio) he’s not regurgitating anybody’s party line.
His show is the only one that seems to be willing to mock what the media has become in this country. I especially love their field interviews with people that take themselves way too seriously.
I second that. Sometimes he’s surprised by the audience’s reaction to something, or other times the special reports - like last night’s, which featured a lot of unnecessary fake crotch footage - seem to shock him. But he’s not like that idiot Fallon, who I think just laughs to try and convince people that he’s funny.
Oh come off it! Every journalist has their own spin and biases. Their ‘filter’ usually belies their own political viewpoints. Crossfire, at the very least, makes no bones that it isn’t attempting to call itself unbaised. People get all in a huff and say they are yelling talking points against each other, what would people want? A bunch of stuffed shirts claiming unbais while injecting their bias into a formal debate show? I mean the McLaughlin Group and The Capital Gang seperate the show into liberal and conservative journalists, but each of them seem to think they are being unbiased. It’s ridiculous!
Honest journalism… pffft. Does that mean pretend you don’t have any biases as they color your news report? And would ‘honest journalism’ be ones that parrot Stewart’s beliefs about the government? Yeah, I think they would for him.
This is a major problem here: commentators and insiders have managed to convince everybody that they’re journalists. They’re not. A commentator can wear his biases on his sleeve, and usually does. A journalist is supposed to be impartial, keep partisans in line, and serve the public good.
We’d have better debates without the talking points in the first place. Talking points exist so you can advance your party’s agenda by framing an issue in the way the leadership tells you to. That’s not good debate, it’s just being a good cog in the machine. That helps nobody except the party. Arguing your viewpoints and grounding your case in facts would be fine, although the shock might kill people.
That’s really what we have now. People are identified with a side, but just claim they’re being honest while the other side is lying. And they pretend to come up with their own arguments when they’re taking marching orders from somewhere else.
This is also sad: some people don’t even know what honest journalism means anymore.
Do you even watch the Daily Show? He makes no bones about being a Democrat but sticks it to them all the same. He was harder on Tucker Carlson during his Crossfire apperance, but he told BOTH of the hosts their show was hurting America.
If you want a good example of what would be left out of an honest debate (a debate that might help the public understand a subject instead of just spinning it), watch for one of those items where the Daily Show highlights what a talking point is. They do so by playing clips of a bunch of people from one party or the other advancing the talking point - using identical or nearly identical language - on a bunch of different political talkshows.
You don’t really believe that? Journalists all have their own biases so asking them to remain impartial is silly. The Brits have it right. Let all the journalists admit their biases right away so you can know immediately what slant their article has. Journalists are there to make money. Public good… hehehe.
Frankly I don’t think the party leadership would have been too happy with Carlson and Novak’s positions during Crossfire shows. I’m sure they’d have a fit when Novak starts talking about backing the Palestinians over the Israelis. If you think they are on a script, you’d be amazed how many times they’d say something that the party leadership would never go for.
We’ve never HAD ‘honest journalism’. It’s an idealized notion of something that never existed. Remember ‘yellow journalism’ in your history classes? Remember how journalists covered up Kennedy’s adulterist romps? Where was the ‘honest journalism’? What, Watergate? Aside from that what do you have?
I didn’t say he was a ‘Democratic’ hack. He just hacks for his own lefty beliefs. And people say he wears it on his sleeve. That’s great! Every journalist should! FOX News should stop trying to portray itself unbiased and the same with CNN and MSNBC journalists and commentators. We’d have much better news that way.
No, it’s not, and I say that as a journalist. Do I have my own political views? Of course. So does everyone I work with. If you think we’re too dumb or lazy to keep our opinion out of our reporting, it’s because people who don’t want to hold themselves to such standards have convinced you.
Please don’t presume to tell me why I’m doing my job. If I’d chosen to write for magazines for a living purely to make money, I’d be a fucking numbskull.
In some individual instances, probably not. I can’t see Republican leadership being too mad with Novak, though.
And thanks to people who like to hear themselves talk and don’t like to take the trouble to check their facts, you no longer even know what the ideal is.
I never said it existed. It’s a goal, not something we’ve lost. What you get as a result of this “okay, everybody’s a biased commentator” business is a lowering of expectations and standards. If this profession is supposed to exist and serve any purpose for anybody,
Since I also studied journalism in college, I can think further back than that. Earlier in history, the idea of objective journalism didn’t even exist. There were just party presses that existed to make money and slam the hell out of the other side. In some ways we’re approaching that attitude all over again.
We have more people than ever acting as partisan hacks and wearing it on their sleeves. Is the quality of news better than its ever been? The public sure doesn’t seem to think so.
We can have commentators up the wazoo, I don’t really care. I’ll be frustrated by them but I still won’t watch or listen . Regardless of their motivations (monetary, altruistic, whatever), however, you’re wrong if you think there’s no value to having an independent, unbiased entity that investigates and reports on what people are doing. Public trust for journalists and TV news is in the gutter because they’re not doing that. The news today is celebrity news + flashy controversy + a rundown of what politicians said, without any serious evaluation of the truth of what they said. The news is “President Says Something.” Once you start making excuses about everybody’s biases, you’re giving people one more excuse to just find ‘news’ that will tell them whatever they want to hear - something more and more people are doing. As far as I can tell, the logic is ‘nobody’s being straight with me, so I’ll go to someone who’ll tell me I’m right.’ As a member of the… what was the term, “fact-based community?”… and a citizen and someone working in the media, I think that hurts everybody.
He wasn’t trying to be funny. He made that clear.
In fact when Tucker Carlson had the raw nerve to say that he expected Stewart to be funny, Stewart’s response was: “I’m not your monkey.”
He wasn’t whining.
I think the only type of person who could have seen his statelment that they(the bastards from Crossfire) were “Hurting America” is true. Much of the mainstream media is harming America and not actually reporting the news. Unless it’s a press release created by the USDA, with USDA reporters, telling us American beef is A-OK and completely 98% mad cow free.
As you can’t see that, it’s no wonder you don’t appreciate his shpw.
Your loss.
This is something of a distortion, I’m afraid. While it’s true that the tabloid press demonstrates clear bias, and the broadsheet (i.e. respectable) press has an editorial opinion alongside a commitment to impartial reporting of the news, television journalism (including live interviews as discussed here) prides itself on impartiality, and you will never find an interviewer discussing his or her personal politics. As a good example, check out these three interviews with the leaders of the political parties at the most recent election and try to decide where the interviewer’s bias lies. For my money, there’s no discernible change in attitude for any of the party leaders.