I recently re-watched Jon Stewart's Crossfire spectacle during a poli sci class. The prof was trying to persuade us that the media have failed in their role as a fourth estate. I'm open to that argument. But I continue to be underwhelmed by Stewart's so called ethering.
If Stewart was committed to speaking truth to power, I'm not sure why he chose Crossfire as his forum. The show got lower ratings than the early morning call-in segments on C-Span. It would have been ballsy if he had pulled his Howard Beale stunt on Hannity & Colmes (now minus the Colmes), which draws in millions of elderly Red State voters a night. But maybe he knew that his indignant routine would get more comedy mileage if one of his foils was wearing a bow tie.
Stewart is again the toast of the chattering classes after his recent evisceration of Jim Cramer. And maybe the praise is due. I'm certainly not apt to defend the host of a show called "Mad Money." But color me skeptical.
Tucker Carlson, the bow-tie wearing half of Crossfire, has a post up at Daily Beast criticizing the media's fawning over Stewart's so-called take down. The immediate inclination is to dismiss this as sour grapes. Crossfire was canceled not long after Stewart's appearance. And Carlson's subsequent MSNBC show also ended up in talking head heaven.
But I thought it was a good analysis. Maybe that's because I've always enjoyed Carlson. He's more P.J. O'Rourke-style libertarian/conservative than partisan Republican hack. And his Esquire article recounting a trip to Africa with Al Sharpton almost made a subscriber out of me.
Carlson really nails the curious rapport Stewart enjoys with the media he perpetually mocks:
The relationship between Stewart and the media is a marriage of the self-loathing and the self-loving: He insists their real news is fake, they insist his fake news is real. He doesn't take them seriously at all. They take him way too seriously. But nobody takes anybody as seriously as Jon Stewart takes himself.
One thing Carlson doesn't mention in the piece is that the Jim Cramer beat-down is something of an anomaly. As a long timer viewer, I can confirm that Stewart is rarely confrontational with his guests. William Kristol is a practically a weekly fixture. Bill O'Reilly, Rick "Man-Dog" Santorum, even Katrina bungler Mike Brown have all been given the kiddie-gloves treatment. Youtube 'em if you don't believe me. Again, Jon Stewart has had ample opportunities to berate true slime balls (like O'Reilly) and failed to do so. Maybe he chose Cramer because he knew he wouldn't fight back.
Look... I enjoy The Daily Show as much as the next Obama-voting twenty-something. But let's be honest and concede that it's generally closer to problem than solution. I'm not convinced that encouraging our nation's public servants to swing a dildo around while reciting the pledge of allegiance--or whatever shenanigans John Oliver is up to this week--is really elevating the discourse. (Familiarity with these staged scenarios leads to diminishing comedy returns. Politicians see the dildo humiliation coming from a mile away. Yes, John Oliver, I will happily take time from my busy day dealing with pressing national issues to twirl around your dildo. Anything for the kids.)
If you were genuinely concerned that politicians don't take enough heat from the media, why place one of your fake news correspondents in the limited White House Press Pool? Wouldn't this space be better served with an actual journalist asking non-dildo related questions? Yes, yes... we're all familiar with the "what actual journalists?" rebuttal.
I think Colbert has been producing a better brand of comedy for a while now. And he's a far better inquisitor. Watch the sockdologer he lays on Dinesh D'Souza:
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Dinesh D'Souza | ||||
| ||||
1 comments:
I think the dilemma that Stewart and crew has faced over the years is the same one that a lot of news organizations face. If you ostracize the powers-that-be too much you'll lose your access to them. If Stewart had come down hard on, say, John Kerry, he would have doomed his chances at getting another politician on that level to appear on the show. The Daily Show is, ultimately, a left-leaning comedy show beholden to the limitations of its politics and its forum. It can't ostracize its guests or challenge its audience anymore than Rush or Lars can theirs. They're all beholden to their viewership.
Post a Comment