I saw no evidence of her coercing those idiotic statements from his lips. I have no problem with a politically motivated comedy show exposing idiots and their idiotic positions.
Why do you absolve the interviewee for not properly vetting the media (fake or not) he was giving an interview to? It would've literally taken the person less than 15 seconds (not counting time it takes to open browser) to type www.youtube.com and then typing "the daily show with john stewart". Dubious nails it for me.
I do fault them for not knowing better, but it doesn't excuse the behavior. It's also not funny to cut up someone's words to make them look foolish/unethical/uncaring. It's bullying and a cheap shot. Stewart stacks the deck in every way imaginable. A sycophant audience, an army of writers, and everything pre-taped and editable.
This guy was a guest on the show back in 2009; he knew the rules. <embed style="display:block" src="http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:video:thedailyshow.com:230058" width="288" height="247" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="window" allowFullscreen="true" flashvars="autoPlay=false" allowscriptaccess="always" allownetworking="all" bgcolor="#000000"></embed>
how is that different from any other edited TV comedy show? Unless you are solely based on high brow humour, comedy is about making fun of something, including people.
But they aren't. The Daily Show isn't making a point with those edited interviews. The point was made going into the interview, and there was no surprise what that point was going to be.
That interview was pre-taped, but in front of a live audience it's much harder to splice (although he did do it to Jonah Goldberg), and Stewart can't ask questions over and over to try and provoke a misstep. Schiff said he had been on the show before and figured he would get honest treatment based on his previous experience with Stewart.
The sad part is that these people are getting death threats over what TDS is making out they said. It's very unlikely TDS doesn't know that people don't understand. Even in this thread, you see people saying this guy is crazy simply because he looked bad in the TDS clip even though what he said was taken out of context. So TDS is doing what they're doing with informed consent that what they're doing eventually leads to these people get death threats. If The Daily Show really doesn't have an agenda, why don't they release the undoctored interviews of these people upon their request (which they have done)? Or why don't they have an an screen saying these interviews have been doctored and that these people are not really saying what the clip will have them seem to say? Because it's not funny? They'd resort to people getting death threats for the sake of laughs?
Wrong thread title - should be "for fans of Ron Paul and world's worst investor/economic forecaster, Peter Schiff"
While you may not . . . .. some folx take TDS just as seriously as Limbaugh and them They are one of the top 3 places people get 'News' Seriously . . . . . While you can dismiss it as people being stupid there are a lot of them Rocket River
If it's not "wrong" when every single news channel on cable do it, why in the world would I care if a comedy show does it?
There is no such thing as "unbiased". All human brains are wired by their experiences. Mine just happen to be the scientific method for discerning the best available version of truth, fairness, egalitarianism, democracy, truthfulness, shared sacrifice, humility, comfort and love. Sure The Daly Show has an agenda, but oddly enough for a bunch of Jewish Harvard elite writers, it seems to be right in line with The New Testament, The Founding Fathers and Superman. To wit: taking care of those less fortunate, sharing natural resources with all our citizens, responsibly stewarding our environment, considering all people on the planet, and cooperating for the greater good. They proselytize with humor rather than fire an brimstone but the message is of a noble plane, certainly higher than the hate, greed and discrimination that many who pass as some kind of twisted defence of liberty.
I question the efficacy of pre-taped interviews in general (the interviewee is at the mercy of the interviewer as far as which of their words get heard), but splicing together questions and answers is not something news programs do. There is a classic episode of The Simpsons where Homer is accused of sexual harrasment and goes on TV to defend himself. They splice his answers to make him look like a predator, and his reputation is destroyed (it's funny because you can see the clock beind him jumping around in the interview). That's what The Daily Show does (Samantha Bee appears to be particularly egregious in using this technique). It's not as much funny as it is cruel (and cheap). I can't find where he said it, but I remember Steve Carrell saying how uncomfortable he was on TDS interviewing people under false pretenses with the intent to make them look foolish. Instead he would play the role of an incompetent journalist and make himself look dumb by asking stupid questions and getting his facts intentionally wrong.
old but http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/arts/television/17kaku.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Just as most people don't give DittoHeads credit for seeing through Limbaugh I guess . . .. it is wrong to think that There are StewartHeads don't see it as comedy but . . . both groups are out there Rocket River
