Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Daily Show Production Team Nets Creative Freedom

Posted by Zonk on Fri Feb 18, 2005 08:44 PM
from the stephen-colbert-deserves-a-hug dept.
gremlins writes "Jon Stewart, who recently celebrated his sixth anniversary with "The Daily Show" and was a rumored possible replacement to Dan Rathers, has signed a deal which allows his production team, Busboy Productions, to develop televison projects on their own. The deal also allows Busboy Productions to flirt with other networks when looking for a home for the projects. Comedy Central still gets the right of first refusal for any projects created."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • That's great (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 18 2005, @08:45PM (#11719266)
    But why is it on Slashdot?

    (No, it's not even in the politics section.)
  • A comedian as a replacement for a serious news anchor?

    Oh yeah... Dan Rather. Sorry. I must have mis-read that.
  • Freedom? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by LostCluster (625375) * on Friday February 18 2005, @08:47PM (#11719279)
    I don't think the article says that the TDS team gets any freedom... they're just getting funding to do spin-offs.
  • Jon Stewart (Score:5, Funny)

    For more on this developing story, we turn to our senior Dan Rather analyst, Mr. Stephen Colbert.
  • The sad thing is... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nebaz (453974) on Friday February 18 2005, @08:48PM (#11719287)
    The Daily Show is often more insightful about the news than the mainstream media. You would probably be better served watching a half hour of the Daily Show than CNN/Fox News, etc.
  • political bias for a news anchor? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Prophetic_Truth (822032) on Friday February 18 2005, @08:55PM (#11719327)
    John Stewart, while very funny, definatly wears his politics on his shoulder. Stewart speaks his mind and has openly supported one political party over the other. The CBS anchor job requires a neutral position, so that the newscast is not agenda driven like Foxnews or CNN. Dan Rather was actually good at hiding his political beliefs, I doubt Stewart could be as successful.
    • Re:political bias for a news anchor? by Anonymous Coward (Score:3) Friday February 18 2005, @08:58PM
    • Re:political bias for a news anchor? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gl4ss (559668) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:01PM (#11719357)
      (http://--/ | Last Journal: Monday December 09 2002, @05:12PM)
      actually it's better if he's transparent about his political beliefs, that way you know that it's his opinion about things. if it was just hidden, but the stories chosen still with certain bias, you wouldn't figure it out so easily.

      and all that doesn't really matter.. it's not like the anchor could go against his employer(and the team behind the news, after all the anchor just reads them..).
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:political bias for a news anchor? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Quantum Fizz (860218) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:09PM (#11719392)
      You mean the Daily Show line "Where more Americans get their news than any other nationality" didn't clue you in that they're just making fun of the system as a whole?

      Have you only watched the Daily Show during the last four years? Stewart has basically been cleverly mocking the hypocrisy of the country's political leaders since the show started. It's been a Republican administration for the past 4 years (and a fully-dominated Republican Senate/House for the past 2 years), so that's where most of his focus goes.

      During the Clinton years there was definitely a slew of anti-Clinton, anti-Lewinski, anti-Gore jokes, etc. But when you have a president like Bush who gives comedians enough material without even trying (along with an administration with policies just dripping with potential for satire), you cannot expect them not to pounce on it.

      For example, I remember back during the Clinton years they basically showed a bunch of clips tacked together of Clinton saying "I did not have relations with that woman ... I did have a relationship with Monica Lewinsky", etc, showing his hypocrisy. Guess what? It was funny then, and his take on the Bush administration is funny now.

      And finally, as Stewart said on Crossfire - he didn't realize that CNN takes it's queues on integrity from Comedy Central. It's COMEDY CENTRAL, a COMEDY channel, not a NEWS channel.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:political bias for a news anchor? by jesdynf (Score:3) Friday February 18 2005, @09:09PM
    • Re:political bias for a news anchor? by ScentCone (Score:2) Friday February 18 2005, @09:25PM
    • Re:political bias for a news anchor? by Jeff DeMaagd (Score:2) Friday February 18 2005, @09:45PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:political bias for a news anchor? by theLOUDroom (Score:2) Saturday February 19 2005, @12:05PM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Jon Stewart is not a journalist! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 18 2005, @08:59PM (#11719343)
    To imply that Jon Stewart is a journalist and a replacement for Dan Rather is a gross mischaracterization and sad commentary on the state of news media.

    Jon Stewart is a comedian! The Daily Show is a comedy show! He is far from objective although he is hilarious.
  • Daily Show Rocks! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Quantum Fizz (860218) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:00PM (#11719350)
    The Daily Show is one of the greatest programs currently on American television. Perhaps part of the reason for it's success is that since it's obviously a satirical show, it can press questions many of the other "so-called liberal media" outlets feel intimidated to represent. For example, the Daily Show was one of the first national 'news' programs to publically acknowledge the whole Jeff Gannon [dailykos.com] controversy in the White House that most other media outlets are surprisingly quiet about (basically the White House repeatedly gave a press clearance to a mole, under a fake name, who planted easy questions for Bush to answer, after the heightened 9/11 White House security. This guy w/ the fake name also had access to 'classified' information before it was revealed by either Bush or other staff. Meanwhile actual journalists, like Maureen Dowd [nytimes.com] were consistently refused press passes to White House briefings. This has all been unraveled in the past 2 weeks, like Watergate, with the mainstream press just starting to hesitatingly picking up on it.)

    And of course there's this brilliant tidbit [ifilm.com] where he blasts CNN's crossfire for being theater instead of actual news. The best part is when conservative crossfire host Tucker Carlson tries to ask Jon Stewart why he gave Kerry softball questions when he was on the Daily Show, Stewart responded (paraphrased from memory) "What I didn't realize, and maybe this explains alot, is that CNN takes its queues on integrity from Comedy Central. The show that leads into mine is puppets making crank phone calls."

    Jon Stewart is brilliant, and since the Daily Show has the satirical factor embedded in it, it allows him more freedom than most other media outlets. And ironically in many cases he does a better job at explaining the news. For example, Daily Show viewers tend to be more informed [cnn.com] than viewers of many other programs.

    • Re:Daily Show Rocks! by Surye (Score:3) Friday February 18 2005, @09:08PM
    • The Study... by Caseyscrib (Score:3) Friday February 18 2005, @09:46PM
    • Jon Stewart=court jester by edremy (Score:3) Friday February 18 2005, @10:02PM
    • Strange Indeed by BigDumbSpaceApe (Score:1) Friday February 18 2005, @10:36PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Daily Show Rocks! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by demachina (71715) on Saturday February 19 2005, @12:02AM (#11720351)
      I love the Daily show but.... I unfortunately I understand why I love it, and all the rest of the Blue state'ers probably do too. Its the only American news show, or even fake news show, that people who aren't right wing wackos can watch since Bush assumed his throne, since 9/11 and especially since Bush got reelected. The Daily Show's popularity is almost directly corellated to the rise of Fox News and George W. We all fled to it to escape reality. Some people maybe fled to CNN or ABC but they all turned in to pale echos of Fox News, shameless flag waving after 9/11, their insane rush to war in Iraq, so we had to flee them too so we all landed on the Daily Show. When I tune in CNN I can barely tell it from Fox lately, except maybe Fox has more hard news.

      So we were all happily watching Jon Stewart, havin' a good laugh, and figuring the nightmare would be over in November. America would come to its senses and put a pathetic excuse for a Democrat in the White House, lesser of two evils ya know. He would suck but nothing could be as bad as George W.

      Two problems developed:

      - While were off escaping from reality, the Christian fundamentalists, the neocons, the hawks, Karl Rove and the rest played a deadly serious game to stay in power at all costs, they played hard ball and they won, while we were all off pretending Jon could just poke fun at them, everyone would see he was right and there was no way they could win. BUSHES REELECTION IS ALL JON'S FAULT....WAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH.

      - Somehow the Democratic party nominated the absolute most pathetic candidate they could find, if you went looking for the absolute most pathetic candidate to nominate for President you couldn't have found anybody worse.

      So at this point we are trapped, we have only three options:

      A. Stop watching television or at least the news
      B. Watch the Daily show and have a half hour respite from the insanity that has siezed hold of America. Unfortunately its just escapism, pretending that if Jon makes a joke out of something horrible the White House did today that its must not be so bad, well unfortunately it still is.
      C. Watch the network news and just lose it, and start yelling at the TV,

      "How can you people be so stupid"
      "How did you all fall for that"
      "He is lieing, can't you tell he is lieing, he is really obviously lieing, how did you fall for that"
      "When did CNN U.S. get bought out by Fox News?

      That's pretty much all I did during the run up to the Iraq war. It was driving the family nuts everytime the news came on and I started yelling they are lieing about the WMD's and about the ties to Al Qaida, the RPV's spraying American cities with Anthrax and Saring, and about the "mushroom cloud", just so they can sucker Congress, the networks and the American people in to backing a war no one in their right mind would have backed otherwise.

      Its what I do lately when I see John Negroponte getting appointed head of this new monster of a national intelligence agency and all these politicians drooling as they praise him as a great diplomat and statesman, and all these 9/11 families and 9/11 commission, god bless them, naively giving the right wing the cover they needed to create this monster that makes the KGB look puny, the right wing all the while acting reluctant about it as they salivate about going back to the good old day of the '50's and '60's when the CIA was an out of control rogue agency toppling elected government after elected government.

      This is John "Death Squads are Us" Negroponte [democracynow.org] who was ambassador to Honduras during the Contra part of Iran Contra and the reign of terror of the CIA trained Battalion 3-16 whose specialty was torture and summary executions.

      He has numerous times, under oath said he was unaware of any human rights abuses in Honduras while he was there though death squads tortured hundreds, if not thousands of people, he was briefed on it, he knew about, he
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Daily Show Rocks! by Skreems (Score:2) Friday February 18 2005, @10:36PM
    • Modappeal by Scareduck (Score:3) Saturday February 19 2005, @12:34AM
      • Re:Modappeal (Score:5, Insightful)

        by creysoft (856713) on Saturday February 19 2005, @01:27AM (#11720649)
        I concede in advance that I don't have an extensive knowledge of this topic, but I'll throw my two cents in here anyway. Rest assured, paramedics are standing by with the jaws of life to unjam my foot from my mouth.

        I believe the entire point is that TDS *doesn't* want to be treated seriously by its audience. As an earlier post pointed out, they even said as much in on of their disclaimers. You can say what you want about ulterior motives, but the fact of the matter is they are a comedy show, view themselves as a comedy show, and have never done or said anything to contradict that position.

        People get confused when they see Jon attacking the "real" media, because they don't realize that Jon isn't speaking to them as a journalist. He's speaking to them as a concerned citizen. Something along the lines of, "Look, I run a comedy show, and people still think it's better than your real news. That shouldn't be happening." I think it's time for an illustration.

        Let's say for a moment that a popular TV doctor from "E.R." breaks his leg, and goes to the real emergency room, where he is mistreated by the staff, neglected by the doctors, overcharged for the services, and denied appropriate medical treatment. As a celebrity, he has access to the public and decides to hold a conference, blasting the facility for its poor performance.

        The hospital issues a press release, pointing out numerous instances in the show "E.R." where his character failed in his duties, or where much worse events transpired. They end by saying that if the show can't get it right, he has no right to complain about the real thing.

        Can you see the absurdity of this? The only reasonable response is, "I didn't know hospitals took their cues on ethics from cable television." Meanwhile people like myself, who have little or no regard for "E.R." rail away at detractors by echoing the same arguments used in the press release.

        The point is that The Daily Show is not a news show. Jon isn't speaking as a journalist, attacking his colleagues. He's speaking as a concerned citizen, attacking the people charged with providing him accurate, unbiased information, and failing to do their job. His capacity as a news anchor for TDS serves only to grant him access to the public. To accuse Jon Stewart of hypocrisy in failing his own journalistic responsibilities is every bit as absurd as charging a TV actor with failing in his duties as a medical professional.
        [ Parent ]
        • Jon's all give, no take. by sonamchauhan (Score:2) Saturday February 19 2005, @09:45AM
          • Re:Jon's all give, no take. (Score:4, Insightful)

            by creysoft (856713) on Saturday February 19 2005, @01:42PM (#11723456)
            Jon admits to a bias and refuses to correct it... but he wants to still correct all sorts of faults he detects in the mainstream media.

            This was exactly my point. Let me rephrase. Do you have a bias? Are you a liberal, conservative, libertarian? Librarian? Unless you're absolutely apolitical, you have some sort of affinity for a particular political party. Now, to use your argument:

            "You have an admitted bias, and you refuse to correct it. But you still assume to attack Jon Stewart for having an admitted bias. When your hypocrisy was pointed out, you say, in effect, 'I'm not a journalist!' To which I say, 'EXACTLY!'"

            Jon Stewart isn't a journalist. He plays one on TV. Your second argument, "So taking his advice about media bias is taking the advice of an arrogant joker." seems to indicate that you don't believe comedians can complain about how crappy the news has gotten. If that's what you really believe, well... I'm afraid we're probably never going to come to an agreement. :-)
            [ Parent ]
          • Re:Jon's all give, no take. by sonamchauhan (Score:2) Sunday February 20 2005, @04:34AM
          • Re:Jon's all give, no take. by sonamchauhan (Score:2) Wednesday February 23 2005, @05:43AM
          • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Jon Stewart rocks... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by GillBates0 (664202) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:05PM (#11719371)
    (http://slashdot.org/~GillBates0 | Last Journal: Tuesday July 10, @04:36PM)
    First and foremost, I should link to the last story [slashdot.org] Slashdot ran about Jon, slamming the media's coverage of the election on CNN's Crossfire.

    That out of the way, I would like to encourage people to watch The Daily Show [comedycentral.com] even though it comes on at 11pm EST (it also reruns at 7pm EST the following evening). Even those of you who reject it outright as Left Wing BS.

    Pause for a moment and try to listen to what the man has to say in as unbiased a way as possible...thinking of him as a standup comedian might help in this regard.

    Over time, you'll realize, that he indeed makes a lot of sense. Atleast when compared to the lameass corporate-owned media which the populace considers as mainstream (and factual) news. In his own, sarcastic and comedic way, he puts forth "politically incorrect" news items, which the popular media outlets are unwilling to touch, or willing to slant to suit their ends.

    Give it a try. Thank you.

    • Re:Jon Stewart rocks... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by otis wildflower (4889) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:29PM (#11719504)
      I think it works best when he's got a writing crew to keep him 'honest' when it comes to covering all sides of an issue. He's not quite so 'fair and balanced' solo. That is to say, he doesn't let his personal sympathies get in the way of a good joke.

      I form opinions issue by issue, rather than subsuming my opinion to one particular groupthink tribal mass or another. Finding the absurdity in any situation where it appears appeals greatly to me, and good satire works when it's honest, telling the truth with humor. For the most part TDS is honest and smart satire, whether it's targeting Bush (I mean, I don't love or hate the man, but it's objectively honest that he can barely string two words together in public speaking.. ) or anyone else.

      Besides, he'll have rightists on as guests often enough, and he's pretty fair. He won't usually go for the easy jabs, as a recent interview with Mike Mills demonstrated.. His interviews tend to be more thought-provoking, given that he'll engage his guests in some serious questioning, and I'd call it 2/3rds BookNotes with only 10% of the dryness.

      I consider TDS mandatory viewing, and I only wish there were more of it.

      I don't think Stewart would be a smart replacement for a network anchor like Rather though, I think he needs a guest to discuss things with, I think he'd do better as a George Stephanopoulous replacement.
      [ Parent ]
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • It's still corperate owned by Sycraft-fu (Score:2) Friday February 18 2005, @11:08PM
    • Re:Jon Stewart rocks... (Score:5, Informative)

      by mythosaz (572040) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:13PM (#11719411)
      That team of writers INCLUDES him.

      If you like the show, read his book. America: Democracy Inaction [amazon.com] is only $15, for god's sake, and anything that includes footnotes like:

      "For purposes of this chapter, "people" still refers to white land owners."

      ...and comments like:

      "Until 1920, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November was known to women as 'Stay Home and Bake Day'"

      ...can't be all wrong.

      [ Parent ]
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Uh huh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 18 2005, @09:37PM (#11719550)
    Like, has anyone else noticed that when The Daily Show's correspondents report "from the field," it looks like in-studio video effects? Yeah. Bad in-studio video effects.

    This guy's a little slow

    • No kidding by Sycraft-fu (Score:3) Friday February 18 2005, @11:16PM
      • Re:No kidding by evilviper (Score:2) Saturday February 19 2005, @02:38AM
  • by Zotnix (844035) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:48PM (#11719624)
    (http://www.zotnix.com/)
    We all know that Jon Stewart is all about bringing back integrity to the news. Just look at The Daily Show, now that's a show based on good, sound, family values!
  • Who the fuck... (Score:2, Funny)

    by uhlume (597871) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:50PM (#11719636)
    (http://www.last.fm/user/uhlume/)
    Is Dan Rathers?
  • by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Friday February 18 2005, @10:21PM (#11719795)
    where is a reliable source of Daily Show torrents?
  • Daily Show (Score:1)

    by Solidsnot (169219) on Friday February 18 2005, @10:36PM (#11719862)
    I like TDS and I think John Stewart is hilarious, however there is something slightly disturbing about the fact that so many people get their news from a comedy show. I saw the tidbit he did on Crossfire and although I do agree that his show is comedy, for him to play it off as if he doesn't have an impact on how people think about politics was an artful dodge on his part.
    I do agree that his show is brilliant even with his admitted left wing bias, at least he's honest.
    • Re:Daily Show (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TWX (665546) on Friday February 18 2005, @11:48PM (#11720274)
      "...although I do agree that his show is comedy, for him to play it off as if he doesn't have an impact on how people think about politics was an artful dodge on his part."

      He's never claimed to be anything but comedy. He delivers deadpan frequently, but he directly makes fun of news. The reason why there is irony here is that he, a self-proclaimed (and acknowledged) comedian goes on a supposedly serious news show, blasts them for their practices, and when they try to attack him for journalistic integrity they are left with nothing specifically because he isn't a journalist, but they have confused him for one. They can't make any logical retort at that point because his comedy is more accurate news than their journalism is.
      [ Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Rather not. (Score:4, Interesting)

    I'd rather not see Stewart dishing out real news. He's perfect where he is. I doubt CBS would allow him to do the satire that comedy central does, and that's the strength of the Daily Show.
    • Re:Rather not. by pipingguy (Score:2) Saturday February 19 2005, @07:15PM
  • Interview (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lord_Dweomer (648696) on Friday February 18 2005, @11:51PM (#11720292)
    (http://haltingpoint.blogspot.com/)
    The one Slashdot interview I'd LOVE to see would be a John Stewart one.

  • Rathers???? (Score:1)

    by Deitiker (732739) on Friday February 18 2005, @11:56PM (#11720319)
    Is this really just a excuse to make up silly names like "Dan Rathers"?
  • Daily show is on CNN in Asia (Score:5, Informative)

    by johnnywheeze (792148) on Saturday February 19 2005, @12:29AM (#11720473)
    vis-a-vis Jon Stewart not being a serious journalist. The Daily Show has an International Edition that actually plays on CNN on weekends (if you live in asia). Which at last look was accepted as a serious news channel.

    Political satire has always been just as, or indeed more effective in changing opinion on policies and governments than the regular news media.

    Dismiss this man at your peril.

  • by boingyzain (739759) on Saturday February 19 2005, @04:37AM (#11721264)
    Here's [64.233.161.104] the google link of the "replacement to Dan Rather" link that we so beautifully slashdotted.
  • Lose the actor interviews (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Sloppy (14984) * on Saturday February 19 2005, @05:51AM (#11721412)
    (http://www.biglumber.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday September 18, @12:25PM)
    There's one thing the Daily Show should do, to turn it from a good show into a great one: get rid of the interviews with entertainers, who are just trying to promote their new movie or something like that.

    It just doesn't fit, and I almost always fast-forward through it (and when I don't fast forward through it, I always regret it, because it turns out to be incredibly boring, even if it's Eric Idle). It's never funny or entertaining. Lose it, and the show will improve. Interview authors and politicians instead.

  • by bob beta (778094) on Saturday February 19 2005, @09:34AM (#11721949)
    Daily Show Production Team Nets Creative Freedom

    Now that they have it caught in a net, will they kill it, or are they planning on sticking in a cage somewhere?

    Needless to say, they're slaves to their ideology, and won't just set it loose again.
  • Re:News for Nerds? (Score:1)

    by glenkim (412499) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:09PM (#11719396)
    (http://www.say11.com/)
    short (obvious) answer: apparently nerds like the Daily Show.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:That's cool... (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by srini91 (859711) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:40PM (#11719574)

    Perish the thought.
    I've heard enough of :
    • "Google is good, Microsoft is bad"
    • "We're hypocrites."
    • "Wifi is going to change or change the world."
    • "New Linux desktop released."
    • "Global warming: fact or fiction?"

    Yet, I still keep reading...
    It's nice to have monkey-controlled robots and Jon Stewart to break the cycle?
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:News for Nerds? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by /dev/trash (182850) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:54PM (#11719662)
    (http://s87365085.onlinehome.us/ | Last Journal: Tuesday October 28 2003, @04:22PM)
    he's anti-Bush. That goes over real well here.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:News for Nerds? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by hastings14 (646760) on Friday February 18 2005, @09:57PM (#11719673)
    To be a nerd requires the ability to think critically. An sense of humor about the nature of the universe doesn't hurt, either.

    One of the primary sources (possibly the primary source) of critical thinking and humor on TV today is the Daily Show.

    Karma-wise, we're all on the same wavelength....

    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Remember? (Score:2)

    by jay-be-em (664602) on Friday February 18 2005, @10:16PM (#11719766)
    (http://r-i-d-i-c-u-l-o-u-s.com/)
    I had already been a fan of Jon Stewart for some time before he took over the chair at The Daily Show; but I must admit, it took him and the writing staff a year or so to become consistently funny. The show was often painfully bad for the first season.
    [ Parent ]
  • by unitron (5733) on Saturday February 19 2005, @12:29AM (#11720474)
    (http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Tuesday February 24 2004, @04:37AM)
    " That's cool. I wish they gave Enterprise the same freedom."

    First thing I thought of was maybe they could develop the next Star Trek series--as a comedy. Seriously.

    [ Parent ]
  • Um, dude, you do know it's a comedy show right? As far as I understand it, it doesn't matter what kind of bias a comedy show has. He doesn't care about presenting an objective viewpoint. And he doesn't have to.

    Think your argument and your problem through again, except this time replace all instances of "The Daily Show" with "The Man Show" and see how it comes out.

    ...sigh...

    B

    PS - as an aside, I'd say that The Daily Show was just about as biased towards the Left during the election as FOX News was towards the Right. Of course, FOX News *does* present itself as an objective, credible source of information. Which was a hefty portion of Stewart's point when he was on Crossfire on CNN.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Remember? (Score:1)

    by stevenvi (779021) <stevenvi@yahoo . c om> on Saturday February 19 2005, @01:36AM (#11720684)
    (http://ija.no-ip.org/stevenvi)

    I still think that Craig Kilborn was by far funnier than Jon Stewart. Then he moved to CBS for a late night show that totally sucked... And Jon Stewart was terrible the first couple years, though these days I do tend to flip to it every so often.

    Guess what bitches?

    What? I'm clearly missing your point...

    [ Parent ]
  • Jon Stewart is *far* from partisan. If he singles out anyone for a heavier bashing it's extremists on *both* sides of the aisle, be they wildly conservative Repubs or mind-numbingly liberal Dems. This is not "partisan". this is making fun of the bullshit that exists on both sides of the party line.
    [ Parent ]
  • The biggest political partison on the air? Not Bill O'Reilly? Not Michael Savage? Not Ann Coulter? Jon Stewart is not a journalist, right?

    95% of his guests were Kerry shills? Ed Gillespie? Fareed Zakaria? John Leguizamo? Samuel L. Jackson? Kevin Spacey? Jude Law? Desmond Tutu? Bill O'Reilly? Jerry Seinfeld?

    [ Parent ]
  • by dkh (125857) on Saturday February 19 2005, @10:37AM (#11722304)
    wow. flamebait becuase I don't belive the show is what it once was - my evil ways have been exposed...
    [ Parent ]
  • 10 replies beneath your current threshold.