On Journalism

It is a dark day for journalism when one of the White House Press Core refers to an interview conducted by comedian Jon Stewart as "serious journalism". Not because it isn't true, but because it is.


Phyvo said...

Many of my friends actually don't like Jon Stewart anymore.

This illustrated by an interview he recently had where the interviewee made concessions to him after 3 minutes of wrangling, and once those concessions were made Stewart immediately shifted the subject from the interviewee to all his ilk as well.

Basically, sometimes as an interviewer he just wants to argue with people. Sometimes I feel he just brings them in because he wants to say that they're stupid.

Colbert is better because although the show's politics still exist and are communicated, he merely plays a character and does let the guest actually talk. Nothing deep, but then 30 minute entertainment doesn't have time for serious philosophy.

Matoushin said...

Interesting, I suspect that Stewart's increased focus on stupidity and hypocrisy rather than simple ridiculousness is the key turn off for your friends. These foci endear Stewart more to those of us in the world at large where we have direct experience with these forms of incompetence. Colbert's theatrical parody is less savage.

I do believe you're slightly too harsh on Jon Stewart's interviews. His argumentative interviews are extremely rare, and the Jim Cramer interview is an aberration within that subset. It is the only time I am aware of where the interviewee was completely unable to defend themselves.