Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Jon Stewart Decade

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 78 posts

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#11

Post by mkr-hn »

w00pla2 wrote: post #9
mkr-hn wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're making a lot of claims that don't make sense. "A large part of 20 somethings use this as their main news source." I'm a 20 something and know quite a few of them. You'd think that if this were true, my group of 50 or so would show at least one who treats TDS as anything more than a comedy show. They may use it as a starting point for stories they didn't know about, but you would be laughed out of the room if y…

> I'm a 20 something and know quite a few of them. Quite a few of my friends view this as a "serious" news show. If you do not believe this, look at any large social site such as Reddit (where the Daily Show is taken as a serious news source). > Just like a comedy show. Of interviews with politicians which they obtained under false pretences? The objective of the Daily Show is to make one ideological grouping laughab…

We're not going to get anywhere with dueling anecdotes. And you're referencing things I don't recall, and I've been watching TDS for years.

"But I guess that this is just how real journalism fades. Papers become bankrupt whilst people read online “news sources” such as Huffington Post or Alternet. News networks like CNN become Twitter Crazy and airs shows like The Daily Show."

Journalism is doing fine. You're just looking in the wrong places.

"Of interviews with politicians which they obtained under false pretences? The objective of the Daily Show is to make one ideological grouping laughable. It is inherently a political show that parades as a “quasi-news” show and uses the “comedy show” excuse so that they do not have to show any integrity (journalistic or otherwise)."

You are once again making bold and seemingly ideologically-driven claims that don't reflect my own observations. Can you cite something?

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#12

Post by w00pla2 »

binarymax wrote: post #8
w00pla2 wrote: post #6

John Stewart’s show is probably the worst show that someone could create. He does not even attempt to be objective. A large part of 20 somethings use this as their main news source. It is sad when people are not willing to watch news for news’ sake (instead of having it mixed with comedy – like a child gets medicine mixed with syrup). And whilst the Daily Show serves as the main news source for many of 20 somethings,…

According to the article, there is a 1.8 million viewer base per night. So a large part of 20-somethings is innacurate. Maybe a large part of 20-somethings you know? In any case, this line is a brilliant response to your claim: “We’re not provocateurs, we’re not activists; we are reacting for our own catharsis,” Stewart says. “There is a line into demagoguery, and we try very hard to express ourselves but not move in…

I guess I will be heavily downmodded today.

> According to the article, there is a 1.8 million viewer base per night.

It gets viewed more often than that (through video streaming). It also appears on CNN International at different times (WTF?). Many people also watch it irregularly.

> In any case, this line is a brilliant response to your claim:

He just confirms what I've said, but put it more eloquently.

> And I will lead you to the land of answers, my people!’

> You can fall in love with your own idea of common sense.

Usually rational people form conclusions (i.e. reaches answers to questions) based on an objective discussion from all angles/sides to a story. Does this happen on the Daily Show? No. Does the Daily Show go into depth (from all sides) to complex and important news topics, allowing the viewer to come to his own nuanced conclusion? No.

Does it quote people out of context, have interviews under false pretences, cut tapes to put people in bad light, add questions which the interviewee was never asked and break all rules of journalistic ethics? Yes.

The idea of the Daily Show is simple – they would make fun of groups such as the Republican Party (through some of the methods above). Their audience laugh – not because it was really funny, but because it reinforces their own ideological bias.

PS: I am not American, and that show completely irritates the hell out of me. The whole of CNN for that matter went down the drain. If you want (somewhat good) television journalism, it seems that only Al-Jazeera can provide it.

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#13

Post by chime »

> Oh, Stewart & Co. enjoy a lowbrow laugh as much as the folks over at South Park; heck, next week they’re publishing a book that includes some excellent masturbation jokes. But Stewart and The Daily Show became America’s sharpest political satirists by aiming at least a little bit higher.

Oddly coincidental that if Matt Stone & Trey Parker of South Park fame read this, their response would be "Thanks for the kick in the nuts." As per one of their video interview, this is their usual response to when people categorize them into the same bucket as Family Guy by saying something like "South Park and Family Guy are the only shows I love." Why does the author feel the need to compare South Park and Daily Show, so as to make Daily Show come on top? I would rate both of these shows as the best of their respective genres, neither aiming higher or lower than the other.

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#14

Post by ugh »

w00pla2 wrote: post #6

John Stewart’s show is probably the worst show that someone could create. He does not even attempt to be objective. A large part of 20 somethings use this as their main news source. It is sad when people are not willing to watch news for news’ sake (instead of having it mixed with comedy – like a child gets medicine mixed with syrup). And whilst the Daily Show serves as the main news source for many of 20 somethings,…

Who told you that politics is off limits for comedy? I have literally never ever heard that sentiment expressed.

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#15

Post by w00pla2 »

mkr-hn wrote: post #11
w00pla2 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm a 20 something and know quite a few of them. Quite a few of my friends view this as a "serious" news show. If you do not believe this, look at any large social site such as Reddit (where the Daily Show is taken as a serious news source). > Just like a comedy show. Of interviews with politicians which they obtained under false pretences? The objective of the Daily Show is to make one ideological grouping laughab…

We're not going to get anywhere with dueling anecdotes. And you're referencing things I don't recall, and I've been watching TDS for years. "But I guess that this is just how real journalism fades. Papers become bankrupt whilst people read online “news sources” such as Huffington Post or Alternet. News networks like CNN become Twitter Crazy and airs shows like The Daily Show." Journalism is doing fine. You're just lo…

> Journalism is doing fine. You're just looking in the wrong places.

Nope. Journalism isn’t doing fine. The majority of papers that do good investigative journalism have serious financial problems.

> Can you cite something?

Here is a good example: Daily Show of 13 July 2010. A large part deals with racism in South Africa and race relations. The author paints a completely wrong picture (of an incredibly difficult and nuanced subject – which involves language and culture rights, economical aspects and poverty, land ownership, illegal immigration, and xenophobia, black economic empowerment, etc…). In that he made a 6 hour interview (under false pretences) with a person with a pretty nuanced view (he only aired snipped parts out of context – his whole interview style was baiting).

The whole fucking video pisses me off – it is such a complex subject which he is making light of (and painting a wrong picture). WTF? But yeah, let’s make fun of extremely complex and delicate subjects because our viewers will laugh!

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#16

Post by vinhboy »

I read the entire article just for this line

"There’s discussion of a possible Stewart-Colbert public event, a parody of Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally. “Maybe we would do a ‘March of the Reasonable,’ on a date of no particular significance,” Stewart says."

If you guys haven't heard, we are trying to start a reddit powered pseudo-revolution and I am really glad that this bit made it into this story.

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#17

Post by mkr-hn »

w00pla2 wrote: post #15
mkr-hn wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not going to get anywhere with dueling anecdotes. And you're referencing things I don't recall, and I've been watching TDS for years. "But I guess that this is just how real journalism fades. Papers become bankrupt whilst people read online “news sources” such as Huffington Post or Alternet. News networks like CNN become Twitter Crazy and airs shows like The Daily Show." Journalism is doing fine. You're just lo…

> Journalism is doing fine. You're just looking in the wrong places. Nope. Journalism isn’t doing fine. The majority of papers that do good investigative journalism have serious financial problems. > Can you cite something? Here is a good example: Daily Show of 13 July 2010. A large part deals with racism in South Africa and race relations. The author paints a completely wrong picture (of an incredibly difficult and…

"Nope. Journalism isn’t doing fine. The majority of papers that do good investigative journalism have serious financial problems."

I did say you were looking in the wrong places. You said you weren't in the US, so I wouldn't expect you to know about what local and regional papers do. Journalism does exist, but you have to go to the locals to find it. By narrowing their focus, they're able to limit the costs.

They have one beat, and it's usually in their own neighborhood.

"Here is a good example: Daily Show of 13 July 2010. A large part deals with racism in South Africa and race relations. The author paints a completely wrong picture (of an incredibly difficult and nuanced subject – which involves language and culture rights, economical aspects and poverty, land ownership, illegal immigration, and xenophobia, black economic empowerment, etc…)."

I can't find any reference to that day's episode or the clip you mention. Can you be more specific by providing a link?

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#18

Post by elblanco »

w00pla2 wrote: post #12
binarymax wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the article, there is a 1.8 million viewer base per night. So a large part of 20-somethings is innacurate. Maybe a large part of 20-somethings you know? In any case, this line is a brilliant response to your claim: “We’re not provocateurs, we’re not activists; we are reacting for our own catharsis,” Stewart says. “There is a line into demagoguery, and we try very hard to express ourselves but not move in…

I guess I will be heavily downmodded today. > According to the article, there is a 1.8 million viewer base per night. It gets viewed more often than that (through video streaming). It also appears on CNN International at different times (WTF?). Many people also watch it irregularly. > In any case, this line is a brilliant response to your claim: He just confirms what I've said, but put it more eloquently. > And I wil…

After reading this, I don't think you understand what the Daily Show is.

This is probably the best discussion about what the show is all about (note: crossfire was canceled almost immediately after this).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#19

Post by GiraffeNecktie »

w00pla2 wrote: post #12
binarymax wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the article, there is a 1.8 million viewer base per night. So a large part of 20-somethings is innacurate. Maybe a large part of 20-somethings you know? In any case, this line is a brilliant response to your claim: “We’re not provocateurs, we’re not activists; we are reacting for our own catharsis,” Stewart says. “There is a line into demagoguery, and we try very hard to express ourselves but not move in…

I guess I will be heavily downmodded today. > According to the article, there is a 1.8 million viewer base per night. It gets viewed more often than that (through video streaming). It also appears on CNN International at different times (WTF?). Many people also watch it irregularly. > In any case, this line is a brilliant response to your claim: He just confirms what I've said, but put it more eloquently. > And I wil…

You don't like the Daily Show because it fails to provide serious, non-partisan, in-depth and balanced analysis of current events????

Did you miss the part about it being being a mock news program?

Re: The Jon Stewart Decade

#20

Post by vaksel »

w00pla2 wrote: post #6

John Stewart’s show is probably the worst show that someone could create. He does not even attempt to be objective. A large part of 20 somethings use this as their main news source. It is sad when people are not willing to watch news for news’ sake (instead of having it mixed with comedy – like a child gets medicine mixed with syrup). And whilst the Daily Show serves as the main news source for many of 20 somethings,…

1. According to a study, Daily Show viewers are more informed about current events than those that watch FOX, CNN, etc.

2. They are a comedy show, so it's ok to do that(even though they don't abuse that). FOX on the other hand does more than that, and they are supposed to be a news channel. i.e. take that Hannity clip from a few days ago: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-9-2010/are-y... (fast forward to 5 minutes)

3. Everything doesn't have to be objective, just because you have a scientist on talking about evolution, doesn't mean you have to bring in someone who wants to talk about creationism. This whole "balanced" reporting that you want is one of the reasons all these fringe nut jobs get their legitimacy. "Of course the president was born in Kenya....I saw someone say that on a news show".

Post reply on HN