U.S. media's great hope

[naomiglover]

Having had the opportunity to travel to Europe and some parts in the middle east (Israel, Lebanon and Turkey) and witnessing their media and even witnessing some of the media here in Canada, it's become difficult to take the U.S. media seriously.

Whether it's the power of the advertisers or other influences, U.S. media, television in particular, has become void of what news is supposed to be: Honest and unlimited information.

There are, however, a few in the mainstream U.S. media, who are able to deliver the news without censorship and limitations. One of those is Jon Stewart. Here is an example of an interview that you would not see on any of the major networks. An interview that some groups tried to prevent from happening:

Canada

U.S. part 1 and U.S. part 2

The audience member who yells "liar" at Barghouti a few minutes in to the conversation is a useful reminder of the challenges of talking rationally about this issue. "People...can't even agree to begin the conversation," Jon says; "how can you remain hopeful?" Barghouti finds hope in the strength of the movement of which he and Beltzer are a part - "a movement of non-violence," he says, and the room applauds.

Beltzer talks about how she grew up with an image of Israel as the peaceful party in this conflict, and how her understanding didn't change until she actually spent time traveling around and meeting people. I wish more American Jews were open to meeting Palestinians and encountering the "facts on the ground" - this is exactly what I admire about the work that Encounter does.

"Neither group is homogenous, Palestinian or Israeli," Jon points out - another reality which is too-rarely discussed in our polarized and polarizing discourse about Israel and Palestine. "What has entrenched both of these cultures in the self-destructive spiral that they appear to be on?" It's a hell of a question.

Thanks, Jon, for being a host to the kind of conversation that I wish our actual mainstream media were capable of. I guess I shouldn't be surprised anymore that America's best "fake news" show offers more nunced coverage of these issues than most of the "real news" I see.

Edited November 11, 2009 by naomiglover

[eyeball]

Talk about laughing in the face of terror.

I was terrified there might not be any hope at all, thanks for this. Listening to Mustafa Barghouti invoke Ghandi's name feels like a real vindication.

[bush_cheney2004]

The Daily Show is distributed to cable and satellite television by Viacom in several countries. Viacom is one of America's largest media conglomerates, more than happy to co-op "great hope" and sell it right back to us.

[Alta4ever]

Jon Stewart? Really?

Jon Stewart is not even news commentary, it is satirical it is on par with the weekend update on SNL, it is not news, it most definitely is not funny, it is pure and utter drivel.

[Alta4ever]

Describing itself as a fake news program, The Daily Show draws its comedy from recent news stories, satirizing political figures, media organizations, and often, aspects of the show itself. The show typically opens with a monologue from the host relating to recent headlines and frequently features exchanges with one or more of several correspondents, who adopt absurd or humorously exaggerated takes on current events against Stewart's straight man persona. The final segment is devoted to a celebrity interview, with guests ranging from actors and musicians to nonfiction authors and political figures."

Its never been news and never will be "news".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Show

[eyeball]

Jon Stewart? Really?

Jon Stewart is not even news commentary, it is satirical it is on par with the weekend update on SNL, it is not news, it most definitely is not funny, it is pure and utter drivel.

Jon Stewart's brand of satire is a very specific type of commentary that's a lot purer than what's passed for news for years now.

The fact you don't get it only shows how close to the mark it really is.

[Alta4ever]

Jon Stewart's brand of satire is a very specific type of commentary that's a lot purer than what's passed for news for years now.

The fact you don't get it only shows how close to the mark it really is.

I get it, its just not that funny, and it is not news.

Its his attempt at a half hour political cartoon, with a strong left wing slant.

Real news commentary is found on the editorial page of the news paper.

Heck the rick mercer report is a more "pure" satire, as in he doesn't pretend its news. Jon Stewart looks like a wanna be that couldn't quite cut it to make it on CNN or MSNBC.

Edited November 11, 2009 by Alta4ever

[Moonlight Graham]

Jon Stewart? Really?

Jon Stewart is not even news commentary, it is satirical it is on par with the weekend update on SNL, it is not news, it most definitely is not funny, it is pure and utter drivel.

Occasionally he does have good, serious interviews though and really hammers it to his guests. The Jim Cramer interview comes to mind.

Would never say he's media's last hope though.

Edited November 11, 2009 by Moonlight Graham

[naomiglover]

I get it, its just not that funny, and it is not news.

I don't think you get it.

[M.Dancer]

[quote name='Moonlight Graham' date='11 November 2009 - 12:22

Would never say he's media's last hope though.

Only if the last hope is glib satire...his show is the Fifth Estate for the ADD generation

[Pliny]

I get it, its just not that funny, and it is not news.

Its his attempt at a half hour political cartoon, with a strong left wing slant.

Real news commentary is found on the editorial page of the news paper.

you can't miss that point that Jon Stewart is "news commentary" as well in a satirical form.

Jon Stewart and editorial pages on newspapers as well as a host of radio and tv shows offer "news commentary". They definitely present an opinion and are not the news itself.

How can Jon Stewart be chastized on his stand for bringing peace and understanding. It's what we all would like to see. Unfortunately, the problems of dissent are rooted in the past, some of it recent, and violence has begotten violence. The Palestinians and the Jews should get together and blame the British. Ha ha ha.(My impersonation of editorial comment like Jon Stewart)

Edited November 11, 2009 by Pliny

[Gabriel]

Occasionally he does have good, serious interviews though and really hammers it to his guests. The Jim Cramer interview comes to mind.

Would never say he's media's last hope though.

The Jim Cramer interview was a perfect example of unbelievably fake grandstanding from a know-nothing like Jon Stewart regarding the financial crisis. It was a transparent attempt at populism, portraying this image of Jon Stewart "taking it to the bad man". Jim Cramer can hardly be blamed for the financial crisis. I was very disappointed with Cramer's performance in that interview, he could have destroyed Stewart (Stewart has what, a high school education?), yet he timidly conceded to Stewart's fake tirade and apologized for not being more careful with his reporting. Cramer has very little to apologize for, aside from not paying closer attention to the danger and shadiness of derivatives.

Edited November 12, 2009 by Gabriel

[Gabriel]

A general observation of Jon Stewart - he is becoming more and more extreme as time goes on. Did anybody else notice that on his November 9th episode (5 days after the massacre at Fort Hood), he said NOTHING about this current event? Why didn't he ridicule the absurdity of those in the media who were stunned at why Major Hasan committed mass murder? Surely this was a perfect example of stupidity and extreme PC/left-wingishness run amok! Yet Jon Stewart made NO MENTION OF IT. He is so spineless and pathetic. I used to watch his show once in awhile because some of his correspondents are funny, but the show is just getting preachier and more left-wing every day. Jon Stewart is also painfully boring. At least Stephen Colbert has personality. I'll reiterate, I cannot understand how Jon Stewart, and American, can make no mention of this mass murder, how he can't even take one moment to remember the victims of the crime. He is so out-of-touch with the mainstream it is shocking.

I also harbour a little resentment to Jews who change their last names to be more marketable. But that's just a minor detail.

[Gabriel]

Also, that interview between Jon Stewart and the Palestinian negotiator/activist Barghouti was ridiculous. Completely one-sided, with the typical left-wing no-nothing Western Jewish arts student to add some sort of credibility. Barghouti will obviously never acknowledge that the terrorist enemies of Israel are completely embedded within the Palestinian civilian population, and will never acknowledge the extreme lengths that Israel goes to to minimize civilian casualties. Israel is always fighting the most difficult war - against terrorists who exploit its mercy for civilians by operating amongst them. Barghouti and the warped Jewish girl NEVER acknowledge this fundamental component of this conflict. But I digress, getting into and Israel/Palestine debate online with enemies like naomi is the last thing I want to do... talk about UNINTERESTING and PREDICTABLE.

[Alta4ever]

I don't think you get it.

Is it impossible for you tocomprehend that someone can get a joke without finding funny?

[Alta4ever]

you can't miss that point that Jon Stewart is "news commentary" as well in a satirical form.

Jon Stewart and editorial pages on newspapers as well as a host of radio and tv shows offer "news commentary". They definitely present an opinion and are not the news itself.

How can Jon Stewart be chastized on his stand for bringing peace and understanding. It's what we all would like to see. Unfortunately, the problems of dissent are rooted in the past, some of it recent, and violence has begotten violence. The Palestinians and the Jews should get together and blame the British. Ha ha ha.(My impersonation of editorial comment like Jon Stewart)

Jon Stewart is not news commentary he satire commentary. The Editorial page is news commentary.

[BubberMiley]

Jon Stewart is not news commentary he satire commentary. The Editorial page is news commentary.

Satire is commentary. It's just commentary that's meant to be funny, whether or not you can take a joke.

For example, last week he showed how Fox provided fake footage of Michelle Bachman's rally in Washington to make it look like there were more people than there were (they actually used footage from a tea party rally last September). Not only is it political commentary when he shows that this so-called "real" news channel deliberately manipulates its viewers and feeds them lies to advance their political agenda, it's funny too.

Edited November 12, 2009 by BubberMiley

[naomiglover]

Is it impossible for you tocomprehend that someone can get a joke without finding funny?

It's not about the jokes. I don't think you get the information that is passed on through Jon Stewart's show. He shows the mockery that the U.S. politics has become and the failure of the mainstream media to hold them accountable.

Don't worry, he doesn't just attack the conservatives. He also goes after Obama and his administration.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's not about the jokes. I don't think you get the information that is passed on through Jon Stewart's show. He shows the mockery that the U.S. politics has become and the failure of the mainstream media to hold them accountable.

Has become? Stewart's satire is not a new phenom...U.S. politics is the same as it ever was. Frankly, I found the Smothers Brothers to be far more clever considering existing network restrictions. Stewart has it easy, and still manages to get the timing wrong.

[lictor616]

Having had the opportunity to travel to Europe and some parts in the middle east (Israel, Lebanon and Turkey) and witnessing their media and even witnessing some of the media here in Canada, it's become difficult to take the U.S. media seriously.

Whether it's the power of the advertisers or other influences, U.S. media, television in particular, has become void of what news is supposed to be: Honest and unlimited information.

There are, however, a few in the mainstream U.S. media, who are able to deliver the news without censorship and limitations. One of those is Jon Stewart. Here is an example of an interview that you would not see on any of the major networks. An interview that some groups tried to prevent from happening:

Canada

U.S. part 1 and U.S. part 2

The audience member who yells "liar" at Barghouti a few minutes in to the conversation is a useful reminder of the challenges of talking rationally about this issue. "People...can't even agree to begin the conversation," Jon says; "how can you remain hopeful?" Barghouti finds hope in the strength of the movement of which he and Beltzer are a part - "a movement of non-violence," he says, and the room applauds.

Beltzer talks about how she grew up with an image of Israel as the peaceful party in this conflict, and how her understanding didn't change until she actually spent time traveling around and meeting people. I wish more American Jews were open to meeting Palestinians and encountering the "facts on the ground" - this is exactly what I admire about the work that Encounter does.

"Neither group is homogenous, Palestinian or Israeli," Jon points out - another reality which is too-rarely discussed in our polarized and polarizing discourse about Israel and Palestine. "What has entrenched both of these cultures in the self-destructive spiral that they appear to be on?" It's a hell of a question.

Thanks, Jon, for being a host to the kind of conversation that I wish our actual mainstream media were capable of. I guess I shouldn't be surprised anymore that America's best "fake news" show offers more nunced coverage of these issues than most of the "real news" I see.

there are two types of media: 1/Americanized, which is liberal and at worst neo con (and hence left wing)

or 2/ Socialist: which is crypto communist

there is no articulate right wing , or centrist outlet anymore.

I find it very discouraging that people who criticize the american media, talk about the Guardian and other such liesheets as alternatives...