As was already posted here at Crooks and Liars, Fox News Sunday's Chris Wallace decided to bring in Comedy Central's Jon Stewart and grill him about how his comedy show and his criticism of their network which apparently doesn't live up to the fine journalistic standards at Fox, even though he hosts... you know... a comedy show and that fact that it's a joke that Fox should not be considered a "news network" didn't seem to hamper the irony of Wallace doing this interview in the first place.
I think Steve Benen hit the nail on the head with this criticism of the portion of interview which is shown above.
“The Daily Show” host argued that bias may exist in media, but it’s towards “sensationalism, conflict, and laziness.” His host didn’t see it that way.
Host Chris Wallace pressed Stewart on why he didn’t consider the New York Times and the Washington Post biased for asking readers to help read Sarah Palin’s email trove.
“They never said ‘help us go through the 2000 pages of the Obama health care bill,’” Wallace noted.
“I think their bias is towards sensationalism and laziness. I wouldn’t say it’s towards a liberal agenda. It’s light fluff so it’s absolutely within the wheelhouse,” said Stewart.
I had no idea the Palin email thing was seen as evidence of a “liberal media” in Republican circles. I thought it was evidence of “ridiculous media,” and certainly “lazy media,” not to mention “a misguided media lacking in editorial judgment and a sense of priorities,” but not “liberal.”
Indeed, the very idea strikes me as self-defeating. If major news outlets are obsessed with combing through emails of a former half-term governor turned right-wing media personality, isn’t that evidence that the media isn’t liberal? Wouldn’t an actually liberal media be more inclined to ignore the emails?
As for the fact that major outlets didn’t try to crowd-source the Affordable Care Act’s legislative language, the comparison seems bizarre. For one thing, the bill had far fewer pages, and had been scrutinized over the course of months as it worked its way through the committee process. For another, legislation and emails aren’t similar — filled with technical and legal jargon, bills aren’t written in a way to be read by a general lay audience.
If Wallace is looking for evidence of media “bias,” he’ll need to come up with some far better examples.
If Fox News Sunday wasn't desperate for some better ratings, I can't imagine another scenario of why they'd allow Stewart on one of their shows in the first place to make a fool out of Chris Wallace.
Full transcript below the fold.
WALLACE: Even you make fun of the fact that "The New York Times" and the "Washington Post" when this document dump of 24,000 e-mails of Sarah Palin was released, and they got so excited about it, they asked their readers, can you help us go through these 24,00 documents?
STEWART: Right.
WALLACE: How do you explain the fact that they would do that? They would ask the readers to help them go through the Palin e-mails -- inconsequential as they turned out to be --
STEWART: Right.
WALLACE: -- but they never said help us go through the 2,000 pages of the Obama health care bill?
STEWART: Because I think their bias is towards sensationalism and laziness. I wouldn't say it's towards a liberal agenda. It's light fluff. So, it's absolutely within the wheelhouse.
I mean, if your suggestion is that they are relentlessly partisan and why haven't they gone and backed away from Weiner? Now, they've dove, they've jumped into the Weiner pool -- so, with such delight and relish, because the bias --
WALLACE: Some things are indefensible.
STEWART: -- the bias of the mainstream media -- oh, I'm not saying it's defensible, but the bias of the mainstream media is toward sensationalism, conflict and laziness.
So the media has a liberal bias because it did not scrutinize an essentially right-wing health care bill?
Mike Wallace must be ashamed that piece of shit sprung from his loins.
Just kidding - your point is well taken.
The truth has a liberal bias. To bad the Teabaggers can't thing deep enough to understand that sentence.
.
Steven Colbert earned his medal of the Titanium Balls for telling George Bush Jr that "Reality has a Liberal Bias" right to his face.
In front of some of the word's most powerful men, and most of the major players in the GOP.
He said those words and made the shrub eat them. It was a thing of beauty.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
"Chris, of course real journalism, and reality in general, seems to have a liberal bias from your point of view."
Both comedy shows, but Stewart is just leagues above Fox and Fox isn't even funny. What an awful way to run a comedy show.
...tried to put together a comedy show called "The Half-Hour News Hour" which SUUUCCCKED little tiny RepugniScum/Dirtbagger wieners.
It failed because ideologues (like the people at Fux) don't really have a sense of humor unless it involves cruelty, hatred, racism and sophomoric nonsense.
Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
They were primarily interested in pushing a political agenda. The "comedy" was just a cheap paint job. Stewart is primarily interested in being funny. He just chooses to use a political angle in his comedy.
It's also, I expect, why he's occasionally so out of step with liberal activists who just assume he's one of "us". As a group, I suspect we (left wing activists) would be almost as un-funny as the "half hour comedy hour" if we tried to copy the Daily Show.
You're comparing apples and oranges in your second paragraph.
Fox News tried to make a comedy show with its entertainers, and failed. A left wing activist isn't an entertainer. You can't put them in the same boat and claim they would fail equally, since they have two very different fields of expertise.
Fox News are entertainers are usually incapable of being anything more than talking heads, and are carefully chosen to preach the party line in a way that appeals to their dumbed down audience.
Left Wing political activists are just that... left wing political activists. They are there to inform and help the public. However, get when you compare left wing political entertainers to the right wing ones when it comes to talent and humor... well, the left wins hands down.
It's like bringing a knife to a gunfight. It's no contest.
There have been actual studies that prove republicans don't understand humor. They understand insults, slander, derisive comments and hostility, but they don't understand humor, sarcasm, or parody. Look up the Berkley study on the subject. It's right there in print.
You will never get a really funny republican comedian. Their idea of a joke is a boot stamping on a human face... forever (George Orwell Reference. Look it up.).
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
not sure when it's on........,go watch this p.o.s. for a week...........its quite the hit in colleges,its sick,greedy,shit......because you know,libertarians are FUNNY,because this great country will benefit from ......no EPA,NEA,OSHA and on and on and on,till we are the united states of somalia
....the fools do not realize,a population that can ,..... not paticipate .............in the 'economy'...,can not keep it viable!..........."we are listening,.......and we're not blind.,......this is your life....this is your time."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nlTwd0QuD4&fe...
http://blogs.forbes.com/danielfisher/2011/06/...
http://takeaction.walmartwatch.org/p/dia/acti...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/suprem...
http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/270...
never mind... Jon will wax sardonic, snide ofay hipsters will smirk and it'll all go away? Just like the mid-terms.
When bias is defined as everything that is not your cause, then everything outside of your cause is biased. If being liberally biased is everything that doesn't overtly sell the conservative message then everything outside of movement conservatism is biased toward being liberal.
Meaningless drivel, but it seems to work the refs over pretty good.
"Who are the most consistently misinformed media viewers?" Stewart shot back, his voice rising. "The most consistently misinformed? Fox, Fox viewers, consistently, every poll."
.... most Fox viewers probably don't know that
I'm Boycotting NewsCorp! Heres what not to buy: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=news...
They heard it on Fox News, so it must be true.
for even having Stewart on. Now, though, when questioned about the difference between his show and actual news programs, Stewart can't say "A...my show is followed by puppets making crank phone calls." Which still makes me laugh out loud.
Has Fox/Wallace ever lambasted one of their own like Stewart just did Weiner? Of course not. And that's the main difference. Stewart uses comedy and ALL are subject to being used as material, not just Republicans. Now, if they make themselves more apt to be the butt of jokes (Palin, Bachmann, Newt, Santorum, etc), that's their problem innit?
I've seen some stuff, man. And some thangs...
Imagine Thanksgiving at the Wallace home. Mike must look across the table at the corporate shill he sired and just weep into his yams.
"If Wallace is looking for evidence of media “bias,” he’ll need to come up with some far better examples."
No he won't. Right wing ideologues are like fundamentalist churchgoers. They accept the things their leaders tell them, and it doesn't matter how stupid the argument is. For years, I heard right-wingers regularly bring up a smirk they perceived on the face of Dan Rather while announcing Clinton's election victory as proof of liberal media bias. It's asinine, and obviously just a meme repeated by countless morons who injested the story without thinking about it, but there you go.
of rush,he says he don't like the right wing shit......they are the middle,the last elections are proof......and thanks to all the 'great' americans that sat on your ass,being all mad at obama,and gave the gun to the 'other' they will use to kill the u.s.a........on second thought ,fuck-you.
....the fools do not realize,a population that can ,..... not paticipate .............in the 'economy'...,can not keep it viable!..........."we are listening,.......and we're not blind.,......this is your life....this is your time."
Is it just me or does that Benen quote make no sense? I can't tell if its sarcasm, willfull ignorance, or what.
Why did Stewart go on FOX?
Even if Wallace "treats him nicely" after the interview you can bet that the rest of the station will mock, ridicule and abuse Jon afterward. It's an evil inbred station with one show taking it's lead from the one on prior to it. Twisting guests is just par for the course, and a course Stewart should know enough not to play on.
So, in order to prove Stewart's point about Fox, Wallace introduces the next panel segment,
"Up next, we'll ask our Sunday panel why the democrats are missing in action when it comes to laying out a plan to deal with the nation's debt problem."
Wallace must be a complete idiot to not see how this proves the point about Fox's political agenda. I'm not sure this fits the conventional definition of irony, but it's close enough.
Turk Meister
Collectively, the don't hold a candle to Jon Stewart.
"Better." It's what we should ask of ourselves and of our leaders.
That should tell you all you need to know right there.
However, let's look at Jon Stewart for a moment:
"Under host Jon Stewart, The Daily Show has risen to critical acclaim. It has received two Peabody Awards, for its coverage of the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections.[116] Between 2001 and 2010, it has been awarded fourteen Emmy Awards in the categories of Outstanding Variety, Music or Comedy Series and Outstanding Writing for a Variety, Music or Comedy Program, and a further seven nominations. The show has also been honored by GLAAD, the Television Critics Association and the Satellite Awards. America (The Book), the 2004 bestseller written by Stewart and the writing staff of The Daily Show, was recognized by Publishers Weekly as its "Book of the Year", and its abridged audiobook edition received the 2005 Grammy Award for Best Comedy Album.[117] In September 2010 Time magazine selected the series as one of "The 100 Best TV Shows of All-TIME"."
I highly doubt ANY of Fox's shows, either singularly, or collectively, can match that.
Let look at Steven Colbert, Jon Stewart's protege:
"He was nominated for a TCA Award for The Colbert Report by the Television Critics Association in 2006 and also received two Peabody Awards for his work on The Daily Show: Indecision 2000 and Indecision 2004. In February 2007, Ben & Jerry's unveiled a new ice cream flavor in honor of Colbert, named Stephen Colbert's AmeriCone Dream. Colbert waited until Easter to sample the ice cream because he "gave up sweets for Lent".[116] Colbert will donate all proceeds to charity through the new Stephen Colbert AmeriCone Dream Fund, which will distribute the money to various causes.
On December 20, 2007 Colbert was named Celebrity of the Year by The Associated Press. On April 2, 2008 he received a Peabody Award for The Colbert Report, saying in response, "I proudly accept this award and begrudgingly forgive the Peabody Committee for taking three years to recognize greatness".
In 2008 Colbert won the Emmy award for writing again, this time as a writer for the Colbert Report. Colbert delivered the Class Day address to the graduating class of Princeton University on June 2, 2008, and accepted the Class of 2008 Understandable Vanity Award, consisting of a sketch of Colbert and a mirror. He also has been announced as the Person of the Year for the 12th annual Webby Awards.
In 2000 Colbert and the other Daily Show writers were the recipients of three Emmy Awards as writers for The Daily Show and again in 2005 and 2006. In 2005 he was nominated for a Satellite Award for his performance on The Colbert Report and again in 2006."
And that's just the 'reader's digest' version of their accolades.
All of Fox News, collectively, will never match them.
By the way, remember when Bill O'Reilly lied on air and claimed he had won, not one, but TWO Peabody awards?
Remember when John Steward made fun of him for being caught in that blatant lie?
So funny.
Know what's even funnier? Jon Stewart, and Steven Colbert aren't even real newsmen. They're comedians... and their doing a better job of presenting the news than most of the so called 'newsmen and women' out there.
Now, while Stewart and Colbert are brilliant, the fact that they're showing up the so called 'professional news-people' is not only funny, it sad as well.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
One more differentiation: As comedians, Stewart, Colbert and their associates are still doing a better job of journalism than the combined efforts of not only FOX, but CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS, which are only doing base propaganda.
The wingers at fox news do not hold a candle to Jon Stewart. As if !
Jon is a titan. He is awesome. The Weiner thing was a bit embarrassing but he will have the last word.
Mujin
Saw Wallace's show a few month back when Juan Williams was still with NPR. Wallace asks his panel (with a straight face) "why do you think that a large number of people believe that Obama was not born in the USA?". Williams answers (with a straight face) "because of the media". 'Nuff said right there. Of course I didn't expect Juan to call out FOX for their involvement. I also don't expect FOX's misinformed viewers to make the connection that "the media" that Juan is talking about is FOX itself. It being Sunday and all the majority of the FOX nation would be at church.
"why they'd allow Stewart on one of their shows in the first place to make a fool out of Chris Wallace"
They enjoy the occasional spanking. Or in the case of Stewart on O'Really, the massacre.
For anyone that didn't see this when it originally aired- it is a MUST WATCH!
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-novembe...
Jon Stewart is amazing. I'm upset that he one of the very few adults left on television.
being credibly accused of having as much brains as a sack of hammers. Aside from being a sleazy liar, the poor man is dumber than a dog turd. What a dipshit.
Dog turds are actually very good fertilizer. What useful function does Chris Wallace actually perform?
No need to insult canine fecal matter like that...
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
E Coli
the bad German kind or the good indispensable for human life?
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
Ran a piece on this story today, never realizing that he was included in the sorry state of news Jon was referring.
on msnbc they showed stewarts comments which were strong weakened when they edited out the part where stewart basically said fox newscasters get their marching orders from bill sammons.....even with that part deleted jon made chris look bush league
Then there were two quislings on with Jan Hamsher who DID NOT expand on the fact that Stewart named names. A point he missed, the NYT will never live down their collusion with bushco in giving judith miller the face time to spew the crap that scooter libby was feeding her.
Tweety even tried to brush back stewart's attack at wallace as an ad hominum.
Fox will never get it. :/
Bite my shiny metal ass.
http://www.startalkradio.net/
I think Wallace learned his lesson. Next time he will ask for Jon's answers in advance. Another lesson is that someone that earns a living reading a teleprompter should not go one on one against someone that earns his living ad libbing. Stewart could word his answers in seconds better than Wallace's production staff could word the questions in hours.
Fox News, Wallace and their Ilk promote Bigotry, Fear, Lies and Violence, directly causing 'Moral Degeneracy' in our once civil society.
"War, violence and death have become the organizing principle of governance and culture in the United States as we move into the second decade of the 21st century. Lacking a language for the social good, the very concept of the social as a space in which justice, equality, social protections and a responsibility to the other mediate everyday life is being refigured through a spectacle of violence and cruelty. Under such circumstances, ethical considerations and social costs are removed from market-driven policies and values just as images of human suffering are increasingly abstracted from not only their social and political contexts, but also the conditions that make such suffering possible. Moreover, as public issues collapse into privatized considerations, matters of agency, responsibility and ethics are now framed within the discourse of extreme individualism. "
http://www.truth-out.org/reveling-pain-others...
Comments are closed on this entry