OT: Jon Stewart on Crossfire

maddoc1979 · Post by **maddoc1979** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:23 pm

Did anyone else see this? Jon Stewart basically told the Crossfire guys that their spin on politics does nothing to help the American people. It's actually pretty amazing to watch. Jon Stewart, somehow, has become the voice of sanity in the media.

Here's a link to download the video if you missed it, but be warned because it's quite large (66 MB).

http://www.thefreespeechzone.net/

Doc

TheMightyPuck · Post by **TheMightyPuck** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:45 pm

I'm LMFAO.

seanmac31 · Post by **seanmac31** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:02 pm

Yep, one of the great asskickings of all time. And the funny thing is that afterwards Tucker Carlson ran around insisting that he had put Stewart in his place. Perhaps Tucker didn't notice the fact that the crowd was roaring with approval every time Stewart put the wood to him.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:14 pm

Who the hell is Tucker Carlson?

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:23 pm

XXXIV wrote:Who the hell is Tucker Carlson?

Someone a little too obessesed with bowties. I loved it when Stewart started mocking him for wearing the bowtie.

TheMightyPuck · Post by **TheMightyPuck** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:39 pm

The bowtie bit was classic. It is so refreshing when someone breaks ranks and actually says something we don't expect on a show like that. Stewart was cool as ice. I think I'll write him in on my pointless (if CA doesn't go Kerry and you are still around, get ready for some weeping and wailing and teeth gnashing and other apocalyptic s***) ballot.

Diablo25 · Post by **Diablo25** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:16 pm

That was absolutely beautiful. You could literally see Carlson becoming frustrated because he couldn't come to grips with the fact that a comic was stomping him. If you notice they (especially Carlson) never did address Stewart's point of the purpose of their show. If I were 16 I would say Carlson was OWNED!

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:49 pm

Just watched it...

Simply AWESOME! He is my new hero!

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:19 am

A truly great TV moment. The Crossfire gang (Carlson and Paul B.) looked like they didn't know what hit them. For all their bluster, they seemed completely unprepared for someone coming onto their show and speaking his mind. Stewart laid into Carlson the worst because Carlson took the bait, but he was criticizing both of them for just reciting spin points instead of really debating the issues.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:26 am

Classic. I generally find Stewart's sanctimonious tone off-putting, but it actually suited him here. Principally because he was 100% right and extremely ballsy in doing it right to their faces.

krustylew · Post by **krustylew** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:32 am

I had read the transcripts earlier, but seeing it makes a world of difference. What a b*tch-slapping he did to Carlson.

My only issue is, what exactly is John Stewart bringing to the table on this subject? What is he doing to enlighten people to the real issues of this election. I don't see anything about Medicare reform or prescriptions drug pricing on The Daily Show website.

Yet he criticizes Crossfire like it is on C-Span or something. But when someone challenges his show, his response is "oh, but we're just a comedy show." Well guess what, Crossfire is an entertainment show also. I am not really aware of anyone confusing it with Meet the Press. He came across as a tad too sanctimonious.

Post by **Jared** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:41 am

I think he's trying to say that debate shows should be actual informative debate and not just regurgitation of talking points by both sides. It can still be entertaining...but it should be done so that people can't just go up with the same talking points bull and actually get challenged by the other side on what they're really saying. It rarely happens on Crossfire...it's more of an exchange of talking points followed by a few quick retorts.

And Crossfire isn't on C-Span...but it is on CNN. And it's one of the few (only?) shows where they get people from both sides to discuss an issue. If people were actually discussing issues, the show would be a lot better and it would be a great opportunity to inform people about the differences between both sides.

krustylew · Post by **krustylew** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:53 am

Jared wrote:I think he's trying to say that debate shows should be actual informative debate and not just regurgitation of talking points by both sides. It can still be entertaining...but it should be done so that people can't just go up with the same talking points bull and actually get challenged by the other side on what they're really saying. It rarely happens on Crossfire...it's more of an exchange of talking points followed by a few quick retorts.

And Crossfire isn't on C-Span...but it is on CNN. And it's one of the few (only?) shows where they get people from both sides to discuss an issue. If people were actually discussing issues, the show would be a lot better and it would be a great opportunity to inform people about the differences between both sides.

Jared, I agree with all of your points. I wish there were more shows on TV like that. But when a show is hosted by Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson, what do you expect. Begala is not some expert on the issues, he is a political consultant, a "spin master."

But also, the name CNN doesn't mean anything anymore. At least to me that is. They are in direct competition with Fox News and [to some extent MSNBC]. This has brought out the worst in the supposed "news stations." Why do you think they spend so much time on this Lacey Peterson story. I mean isn't Crossfire starting to run their show like PTI now?

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:59 am

Jared wrote:I think he's trying to say that debate shows should be actual informative debate and not just regurgitation of talking points by both sides. It can still be entertaining...but it should be done so that people can't just go up with the same talking points bull and actually get challenged by the other side on what they're really saying. It rarely happens on Crossfire...it's more of an exchange of talking points followed by a few quick retorts.

And Crossfire isn't on C-Span...but it is on CNN. And it's one of the few (only?) shows where they get people from both sides to discuss an issue. If people were actually discussing issues, the show would be a lot better and it would be a great opportunity to inform people about the differences between both sides.

This is a great point Jared.

That is what I took from it also. While I did hesistate for a momnet to think that Stewart was dodging the re-directs and using the 'comedy show' as a easy cop out, his points are valid. Why should the country look to a comedy show to get truthful, un-biased, informative, non-spined news. We should be getting that from shows on CNN. They are the ones that should have an obligation to uphold those principles. Not a comedy channel.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:07 pm

I think Stewart was making the broader point about pundits in general. It has gotten out of control, adn Crossfire has been a trailblazer in that regard. Watching the post-debate masturbation in particular was appalling. The idea has taken hold that you don't have to tell the truth if you're offering an opinion. That is absolute rubbish.

Carlson's admonishment of Stewart for being to soft on Kerry was ridiculous. The Daily Show is a parody news program. It would be like the New York Times criticizing The Onion for not checking its sources. But the frightening thing is, even through the veil of satire, you get better critical analysis from the fake news show than you do from the real news shows.

Stewart himself admitted that he's a consumer of these same shows he criticizes. He got a chance to offer his criticism as an audience member, and he did so with extreme candor. Something the Crossfire gang is obviously not used to.

krustylew · Post by **krustylew** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:07 pm

Spooky wrote: This is a great point Jared.

That is what I took from it also. While I did hesistate for a momnet to think that Stewart was dodging the re-directs and using the 'comedy show' as a easy cop out, his points are valid. Why should the country look to a comedy show to get truthful, un-biased, informative, non-spined news. We should be getting that from shows on CNN. They are the ones that should have an obligation to uphold those principles. Not a comedy channel.

Again I agree. But what I'm saying is, it is so easy for Stewart to say these things. Why doesn't he do something about it, besides complaining. Spend some time on his show discussing the real issues.

If he is going to complain about it, he does have an obligation to do something about it.

anchester · Post by **anchester** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:08 pm

It's very easy to critcize, but i did not really hear any concrete solutions. Stewart is trying to say that the debate should be unbiased, but there is always some bias. Who is to say by really making an effort to do a news show that is completely free from bias, that the show really has no bias.

There is always bias of some kind.

Sure crossfire is talking points from the left and right. That's what politics will always be. But by having both sides biases weighted out equally, the viewer can listen and call BS on the side that sounds worse.

Stewart is a funny guy normally. I found him to not be that funny on this crossfire show or "enlightening" as he so egocentrically tried to be.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:14 pm

krustylew wrote:
Spooky wrote: This is a great point Jared.

That is what I took from it also. While I did hesistate for a momnet to think that Stewart was dodging the re-directs and using the 'comedy show' as a easy cop out, his points are valid. Why should the country look to a comedy show to get truthful, un-biased, informative, non-spined news. We should be getting that from shows on CNN. They are the ones that should have an obligation to uphold those principles. Not a comedy channel.
Again I agree. But what I'm saying is, it is so easy for Stewart to say these things. Why doesn't he do something about it, besides complaining. Spend some time on his show discussing the real issues.

If he is going to complain about it, he does have an obligation to do something about it.

Krusty, I totally disagree. We complain about the AI in sports games, but we can't really do anything about that issue (aside from not buy them). Does that mean we shouldn't complain?

The media is like any other organization. Organizations hate change. Organizations will take the path of least resistance in most cases. They often have to be shocked, embarassed, or cajoled into making changes. The media has gotten very lazy in the last ten years. Stewart is the first person I have seen on TV that has finally decided to say what many others out there are thinking. If enough people do complain, changes will likely take place.

Post by **Jared** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:18 pm

krustylew wrote: Again I agree. But what I'm saying is, it is so easy for Stewart to say these things. Why doesn't he do something about it, besides complaining. Spend some time on his show discussing the real issues.

If he is going to complain about it, he does have an obligation to do something about it.

I think it's because his show is a comedy show and it would turn off lots of viewers if it turned into a PBS news program. People like the show because it's funny, and a format like that would be less funny.

Of course, they could do a spin-off of the Daily Show where they do something like that....more analysis, less funny. Though I doubt it would be on Comedy Central. Who knows....maybe they're working on something like that.

krustylew · Post by **krustylew** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:29 pm

Brando70 wrote: Krusty, I totally disagree. We complain about the AI in sports games, but we can't really do anything about that issue (aside from not buy them). Does that mean we shouldn't complain?

Brando,

I don't know if that comparison holds up. If I were a software designer and I complained about a sports games AI, then sure I would have an obligation to do something about it.

My point is Stewart has the avenues, that you or I don't, to address his complaint. Yet he has not chosen to do it [yet].

dougb · Post by **dougb** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:29 pm

Jon Stewart does spend most of his time discussing or highlighting real issues, though he does it through satire. There seems to be tendency to think that just because he's using comedy he's not making a serious point. At the same time, it says volumes about Carlson and Begala's view of their show when the compare themselves to Stewart. One gets the impression that the Crossfire crew view their role as one of entertainment, or perhaps more charitably as infotainment. Stewart was prodding them to expand their ambitions and turn the show into something that might truly fulfill that public interest.

One of the real issues that the Daily Show has highlighted has been the utter lack of responsiblity with which the media covers political issues and the campaign. They often act as simple mouthpieces for politicians, claiming that they are being objective. For instance, you'll often get a piece which can be summed up as "John Kerry says one thing, and the Bush campaign has dimissed the statement" - with very little follow-up or analysis. But who learns anything from this style of 'reporting'?

He said/she said journalism is very inexpensive and easy to produce, but it doesn't leave readers or viewers any more enlightened as to the relative merits of each sides positions. Debates are enlightening only if both sides present honest arguments. Otherwise, when either or both sides engage in making sh*t up, the media have to be prepared to come in and call them on it. Otherwise, all that is being presented is political theatre. And perhaps this is what the networks want. If they can get both sides to come on and trade charges than that is a pretty inexpensive way to fill programming time. And in a dose of OJ, Chandry Levy, Monica Lewinsky, or Lacey Peterson and they've got their programming day filled.

And don't even get me started on polling, which is the laziest goddamn way of filling newspaper space. If I had my way I'd ban the bloody things during the entire period of the campaign.

Best wishes,

Doug

TheMightyPuck · Post by **TheMightyPuck** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:48 pm

If Stewart wants to come on to Crossfire and say it blows that's his prerogative. They knew coming in that he didn't like the show and invited him on. He was awesome and funny and IMHO dead on target. It is preposterous to suggest that Stewart shouldn't criticise the show. He gave his opinion and he offered a solution to the problem. He said STOP. Did he sucker punch them. Yeah. But it was still awesome cuz they had it coming. Frankly I think Stewart was deeply affected by the 9/11 tragedy. After that, I can understand his frustration with shows like Crossfire. I think he truly believes that Crossfire is hurting America.

EDIT: Just saw an article in NYT (reg req.) on this http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/arts/ ... ogin&8hpib

krustylew · Post by **krustylew** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 2:40 pm

I never said he shouldn't criticise the show. I don't even disagree with what he said. We need shows like the one he talks about. But what I'm saying is "talk is cheap."

Stewart is in a position to make a difference, lets see if he does.

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:10 pm

krustylew wrote:I never said he shouldn't criticise the show. I don't even disagree with what he said. We need shows like the one he talks about. But what I'm saying is "talk is cheap."

Stewart is in a position to make a difference, lets see if he does.

How is Stewart in the position to make a difference? Just because he is in the 'entertainment' business? He is a comic with a comedy show. What, is he supposed to quit his great gig ato go try and start a real, no-spin show on CNN that no one will support? I think he is better off just telling the people already in that position what he thinks they should do.

krustylew · Post by **krustylew** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:32 pm

Spooky wrote:
krustylew wrote:I never said he shouldn't criticise the show. I don't even disagree with what he said. We need shows like the one he talks about. But what I'm saying is "talk is cheap."

Stewart is in a position to make a difference, lets see if he does.
How is Stewart in the position to make a difference? Just because he is in the 'entertainment' business? He is a comic with a comedy show. What, is he supposed to quit his great gig ato go try and start a real, no-spin show on CNN that no one will support?

Well, if that's what is so important to him, I guess the answer is yes.