For fans of The Daily Show

I'm trying to think of anything else that's chopped up or misrepresents their statements as much, but also as inconspicuously (I never knew they completely swapped or pieced together their responses)- like the snl cartoon stuff with real audio misrepresents, but is obviously not real to everyone, because it's a cartoon.

Maybe jimmy kimmel's unnecessary censorship, someone might think people are really making profane statements under the beeps. Nothing as blatant as this though. Probably shouldn't be able to do it, but idk what if any laws they're breaking. Oh maybe ali g's interviews, those were probably edited as much, except set up more so the interviewer looked dumb more so than the interviewee.

 

So to clarify, a comedian on the Comedy Network takes clips out of context to make a skit on his comedy show and... fauxrage!

 

The Daily Show is a humor show on Comedy Central. Claiming they are something other than a comedy show is not credible.

The stock in trade of The Daily Show is satire. Satire is a form of humor whose "greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon and as a tool to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society." (a quote from wikipedia, but accurate enough).

Given that their standard humor form is satire, all of it is coming from a pre-existing point of view. That is how satire works. Most of the time, though not always, a liberal point of view.

One of the specific formats they have used through the years is interviews. The "correspondents" hate them because they are taking things out of context and ridiculing people. While there have been frequent discussions about eliminating them, they haven't been eliminated because they are comedic gold. The one thing they have tried to do is limit them to politicians or public figures who should know what they are getting into, where formerly that was not done.

If you read interviews with John Stewart or The Daily Show writers, all of this has been discussed many times. They also express their amazement that anyone does these interviews with them, as they have been doing the exact same thing for the entire history of the show.

The key point in this long winded comment is that the reason they keep the out of context interviewing is comedic. It has nothing to do with any agenda of the show.

 

Throughout the history of man, more scientific, more egalitarian, more democratic "progressive" thinking is proven to provide a richer more rewarding life for more people. Political satire is an effective platform for exposing the false foundations of discriminatory power since before Aesop and the Emperor's New Clothes. The clarity in humor's contrast is a devastating weapon.

This planet will move on in it's entropic path toward more complexity in social systems despite the efforts of the privileged to retain their concentrated power. But all energy diffuses eventually.

 

See, you are just not very bright. You should realize that and let other people do the thinking.

 

You kind of feel obligated to respond to every post huh? You don't have to you know, even as the thread starter. That's how the trolls take advantage of you, the strawman arguments etc. that keep getting to you.

 

Kings eventually lose absolute power to the Lords and Lords eventually lose power to commoners. Large centralized republics eventually lose break-away provinces. Idealized cultures (say like a Judeo-Christian ethic) eventually become more libertine. This is all driven by the innate desire of every individual for self-determination.

For everything in creation, over time, simplicity evolves into complexity. Concentrations of potential (energy, money or power) diffuse into to lower potential states.

Class war is about those with greater power wanting to stave off change, where their money, power or cultural dictates get more widely distributed. or diluted. But the tide of human desire for self-determination always wins, eventually. The choices about change are not if but how. Political Conservatives try to stop change for their own purposes, Progressives try to direct change for the greater good.

If you have power you can use it in conventional ways, like buying support for your opinions or the corruption of egalitarian principles (gerrymandering, buying votes) but if you are on the powerless side, you can promote your vision only with commentary and truth, humor being one of the most effectice weapons.

 

Jon Stewart is not antagonistic at all to conservative guests.

 

Conservative guests are self-made targets of antagonism because of their hypocrisy.

How can you profess to be a New Testament Christian and support decreases in the social safety net?

How can you be for "freedom" but discriminate against race and sexual orientation?

How can you decry a deficit budget and support anachronistic military spending?

How can you support a "free market" when people with money don't have to play by the rules and don't go to jail when they break law.

How can you support "democracy" when money is allowed to buy journalistic integrity and there is no truth to make good decisions with.

 

I find it ironic that some of the same people who have cited and defended the late Andrew Breitbart are upset about deception and selective editing.

 

I go to the daily show to be entertained, that's all I expect. If you are actually expecting factual information/news then you are an idiot. If you go on it, and expect not to be made fun of, then you are just mentally devoid of any sense at all.

 

True they do not do investigation or leg work on their own, but they critique other real news shows to show where they fail and the bias they "report" with, so I think they serve to get you closer to what the real information is.

 

It's like the advice that Shaq/Chuck offer to players, it's entertainment, but if they actually knew something they just might be coaches.

 

Shaq and Chuck couldn't afford the pay cut to coach, plus their work week would go up from about 10 hours to 70.
Jon Stewart makes $25 million dollars a year, to laugh his ass off as a critic-at-large.

You know they may not leave the office, but his staff is deep into the available information. Their ability to pull on the recorded quotes from anyone about anything from any time in the past is pretty amazing. And valuable to show that politicians just take positions for the political effect and when the winds of opinion change, their convictions will change with it.

Politicians are just actors reading their handler's lines and they need to be called on it, every time.

 

The argument is TDS is using untruths to promote their progressive vision.

The left is hardly powerless. They have total control of Hollywood, all of mainstream media outside of talk radio and FNC, the academy. All the top political donors are on the left.

They also have a much easier sell. Namely, giving away other people's money (talk about buying votes), with no upper limit.

 

Frankly, if Jon wasn't making so much money for Viacom, they wouldn't tolerate him.

And again as usual, your fear of somehow "rich" socialist is just another propagated perception from your dubious sources.
And why would rich people donate against their own self interests? Because it's the right thing to do.

These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America