Did you know Jon accidentally said “fuckers” on Thursday’s show? It somehow eluded the censors, and NOT ONE VIEWER COMPLAINED. Like I said, Jon Stewart is God.
You Might Also Like
![Check Out A Pic Of A Young Jon Stewart Moshing At A Dead Kennedys Show [UPDATE: Not Jon!]](http://cdn.stereogum.com/files/2012/01/jonstewartmoshing-125x125.jpg) Check Out A Pic Of A Young Jon Stewart Moshing At A Dead… |  Kanye West – “Chain Heavy” |  Vampire Weekend & Conan O’Brien Do “Walcott” @ Radio City… |
 |
 |
%s1 / %s2
Why would anyone complain, his show is on cable? It was just another off-target attempt to ridicule those who, rightly or wrongly, have complained about obscenity on *network* television. The Daily Show may be amusing, but Jon Stewart’s hardly God. Haven’t you seen The Passion yet Stereogum?
i saw that. it was hiiiilarious.
but for the record, i think the daily show is usually painfully unfunny
except for the time they used GTA as a “simulation”
I saw that night and wondered if I was just hearing things. That almost made me spit out my coke.
But seriously The Daily Show is so funny because it’s the only “news” show that can call “bullshit” on what’s going on. Dan Rather would never make fun of that freak NY Times reporter from the Democratic debate like Stewart did. And I think it’s unfair to lump The Daily Show in with Late-Night shows or even the dreadfully unfunny SNL.
When it comes to humor, nobody should lump the Daily Show in with SNL or the late night talk shows: the Daily Show wins hands down. But, in terms of its editorial voice and material, it *is* a late night talk show, *not* a news program. If you really expect network television news programs to start commenting on the behavioral characteristics of New York Times reporters, you’ve evidently misunderstood the mandate of network television. Informing the American people about bloody civil strife in Iraq is important; the “freakish” nature of reporters is not. Give the Daily Show its due for being funny. But it’s certainly not a serious nightly news program, and if you think it is, your parents wasted an awful lot on your education.
Yes, thank you. And I also know that Stephen Colbert is not *really* reporting from Iraq when he’s standing in front of a green screen.
All I’m saying is that the show is providing a voice of common sense that’s often ignored on Headline News, CNN, etc. And last I checked, network television didn’t have any mandate other than making shitloads of money.
But I applaud network news teams for fighting the good fight anyway. Sorry Dan Rather, I still love you AND your modern haircut… even if your reporting staff has been reduced to 10 people.
I think the trouble lies in trying to compare The Daily Show to regular news broadcasts – the cultural value of the show doesn’t come from it being an alternative news source (that’s totally laughable), but in being an alternative to the pundits that dominate the tv news channels. It’s editorial voice is drastically different, and I’d argue much closer to the average American than anyone else in pop culture at the moment.
Stewart’s greatest gift is his ability to talk about complex issues as a layperson without ever dumbing down the subject matter or mincing words. He’s also very smart in how it is clear that he and his writing staff generally lean to the left on most issues, he is remarkably fair and respectful when critiquing or interviewing right wing politicians and writers. They never give the left/Democrats a free ride. The Daily Show has a greater claim to being “fair and balanced” than anything else that is part of the current American cultural landscape.
First, to argue that Jon Stewart’s editorial voice is “much closer to the average American than anyone else in pop culture” is inherently contradictory — if he “leans” left, are you saying that no-one else in pop culture does too? Or does he lean further left than anyone you have in mind? Further left than Michael Moore; than Dennis Kucinich; than System of a Down? If he does lean that far to the left, it hardly makes his show “fair and balanced”, does it? And if his editorial voice is closer to the average American, then he’s certainly not left-leaning (unless, of course, your idea of the “average American” is gleaned from spending time in Manhattan, New England, California or Ann Arbor…)
Second, the Daily Show constantly dumbs down complex issues. How can it not, it’s a comedy half-hour, not an evening with Slavoj Zizek. If you want serious analysis of topical issues, attend a lecture at the American Enterprise Institute; compare Foreign Affairs and Commentary to Dissent and the New Left Review; or just watch Uncommon Knowledge, PBS Newshour or even The Charlie Rose Show, for heaven’s sake. But don’t argue that the Daily Show doesn’t dumb down issues. It is renowned for its skewering humor, not its trenchant analysis.
Thus, the argument that “The Daily Show has a greater claim to being “fair and balanced” than anything else that is part of the current American cultural landscape” rings similarly hollow. If your understanding of the American zeitgeist is that it’s limited to Hannity and Colmes and Al Franken’s masturbatory Olympiads with Bill O’Reilly, you probably ought to change the channel or, better yet, turn the television off.
I, too, once dropped my Slavoj Zizek. I think it was somewhere between my freshman and sophomore year.
I’m sorry that it took you until you were in college to begin reading Zizek and that, having started, you apparently gave up some time before your sophomore year. No wonder Europeans laugh at the American undergraduate system…
if he “leans” left, are you saying that no-one else in pop culture does too? Or does he lean further left than anyone you have in mind? Further left than Michael Moore; than Dennis Kucinich; than System of a Down?
I’m saying that’s he’s not as left as those examples. The Daily Show is relatively centrist.
Also, when did I give the impression that I believed that the Daily Show was a good place for serious analysis of news events? That’s exactly the opposite of the point I was trying to make.
What I mean is that when Stewart speaks in interviews, he speaks intelligently about issues and events while still being a layman and comedic. My praise for him is that he speaks so well AS A LAYMAN, not as an expert.
And Christ, James, try not to be such a total elitist dick in the future, alright? That last comment of yours about Zizek is well beyond obnoxious.
I saw him the other morning on 12th Street as I was coming out from getting my coffee. Mm. Jon Stewart mornings are good ones.
I think that you guys are reading to much into the Daily show. Jon Stewart is a comedian and his main job is to make people laugh. Jon Stewart brings political issues into the public eye, and since he is a comedian he can make light of these situations. The daily show is funny,original and also touches on American issues and that is why it is able to establish such a following. Ps. Lucky you Jenn!
Just wanted to point out that a study comparing viewers of different news channels and news programmes found that people who used the Daily Show as their main news source knew more accurate information about current events than viewers of CNN, Fox News or comparable news channels.
And there is no need to skewer the poor grammar of this post, English is not my first language.
aujmldosmu ieoqlrepu.