|
|
|
|
|
#1
03-14-2009, 12:12 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Jon Stewart and Jim Cramer face off on the Daily Show
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=220534&title=intro
Stewart is no slouch at debating and expressing his point. Some say he began the end of Tucker Carlson's "Crossfire" shoutfest with this appearance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE Good piece about the show in question: Stewart roasts CNBC host Joe Garofoli, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, March 13, 2009 Jon Stewart likes to say that he's just doing a fake news show. But the host of the "The Daily Show" on the Comedy Central Network cemented his position as a powerful populist with serious news credentials this week with his on-air thrashing of Jim Cramer, the former hedge fund manager who hosts the "Mad Money" show on the CNBC financial news network. On the day Bernard Madoff went to jail for a securities fraud that financially devastated more than 5,000 investors, Stewart voiced the frustration of those who wish financial journalists had been less cheerleaders for Wall Street millionaires in recent years and more protectors of everyday folks who lost large portions of their pensions in the recent market crash. On Thursday night, the comedian's studio audience interrupted his interview with Cramer with applause more often than laughter. What Stewart did not say is that CNBC's ratings, though small even by cable news standards (it averaged 282,000 home viewers at any time in the first two months of 2009) are up over last year. "I understand that you want to make finance entertaining, but it's not a ****** game," Stewart told Cramer, who was a guest on his program. "Listen, you knew what the banks were doing, and yet you were touting it for months and months. The entire network was. And so to pretend that this was some sort of crazy, once-in-a-lifetime tsunami that nobody could have seen coming is disingenuous at best and criminal at worst," Stewart said. On Friday, James Fallows, national correspondent for the Atlantic magazine, said, "It's true: Jon Stewart has become Edward R. Murrow." "I'm not sure that there is anyone who can call people out with the same ferocity," said Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism. "('Tonight' show host Jay) Leno isn't going to do it because he's too mainstream. And while ('60 Minutes' reporter) Steve Kroft is a fine journalist, you don't hear anyone say about someone he's going to interview, 'Oh, I wonder how he's going to handle Steve Kroft?' " Cramer is a Harvard graduate, a lawyer, a former Goldman Sachs trader and co-founder of TheStreet.com. He didn't handle Stewart well. While the host of "Mad Money" billed himself Thursday as "a guy trying to do an entertainment show about business for people to watch," for the past four years he has handed out stock tips and occasionally interviewed CEOs. New York Times financial columnist Joe Nocera, whom Cramer described as a friend, told NPR in 2006, "The people who are watching this and following the advice are fools." While Stewart said he didn't mean to personalize the financial media's failings through his indictment of Cramer, the CNBC host appeared sheepish during the interview, rarely trying to deflect Stewart's verbal beat-down. "Should we have been constantly pointing out the mistakes that were made? Absolutely. I truly wish we had done more," Cramer said. CNBC spokesman Brian Steel would not comment on the Stewart interview, but said in a statement: "We are proud of our record and remain committed to delivering coverage in real-time during this extraordinary story and beyond." Stewart's interview resounded everywhere Friday, from the blogosphere to the White House, where President Obama's spokesman Robert Gibbs said: "I enjoyed it thoroughly." "Despite, even as Mr. Stewart said, that it may have been uncomfortable to conduct and uncomfortable to watch, I thought it was - I thought somebody asked a lot of tough questions," Gibbs said. "Stewart is not just playing for laughs," Rosenstiel said. "This is sharp satire in which he is engaging in night after night. He wants to make people laugh and make people think." "He is like a combination of (former CBS anchor Walter) Cronkite and (former 'Tonight' show host Johnny) Carson," said Brian Copeland, a San Francisco comedian, playwright and talk show host. "People trust him." Stewart regularly uses the steady stream of overheated, underreported stories coming from the 24-hour cable news networks as comedic fodder. But Thursday's interview was another example of the passion for good governance and aggressive journalism that informs his satire. In 2004, he went on CNN's "Crossfire" and told the hosts that they were "hurting America" with hackneyed, partisan banter, which he found long on opinion and short on reporting. Three months later, when CNN canceled the program, network president Jonathan Klein said, "I agree wholeheartedly with Jon Stewart's overall premise." Last summer at the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Stewart gathered a dozen national political reporters for breakfast. He scolded them for letting the 24-hour cable networks set the nation's political agenda and for being so cuddly with the people they cover. Rosenstiel said Stewart helped reshape the opinion of the Iraq war (through his ongoing segment dubbed "Mess-o-potamia") and helped highlight the foibles of the Bush presidency. Now, the question is, what will the fallout be for Cramer and his show? Last week, Stewart opened his program with an eight-minute takedown of CNBC's failures to be a watchdog. And he ripped CNBC reporter Rick Santelli for failing to appear on the show a few days before that. At the end of Thursday's interview, Stewart asked Cramer to go back to fundamentals of reporting so that he could "go back to making fart noises and funny faces." "Oh, that's what I say all the time: I'm not a journalist, I'm a comedian," said Copeland, who hosts a Sunday morning show on KGO-AM 810. "But once Jon Stewart comes after somebody, that person has no credibility. Especially with all the people under 25 who are getting their news from 'The Daily Show.' "
__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K 1984 300D, 138K Last edited by cmac2012; 03-14-2009 at 12:55 AM. 
|
|
#2
03-14-2009, 01:27 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Damn that was fantastic
 ! I need to start watching the Daily show with consistency.... Roast doesn't describe that video, only a well known word from the gaming world describes what just happened..... 
__________________
1982 300GD Carmine Red (DB3535) Cabriolet Parting Out 1990 300SEL Smoke Silver (Parting out) 1991 350SDL Blackberry Metallic (481)  "The thing is Bob, its not that I'm lazy...its that I just don't care."
|
|
#3
03-14-2009, 02:27 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
"The Daily Show" takes exception when other shows try to horn in on their monopoly on "fake news."
The previously "unspoken" element that was brought up last night . . . the statement that there are "two Wall Streets" . . . the one that promotes the long term investment and savings via IRA and 401(k) to "little guys"; and then the other "insider" Wall Street that is being funded/captialized by the little guys for the fast buck.
|
|
#4
03-14-2009, 08:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
To me, the most comical thing about this Stewart/Cramer thing is how it exposed the lameness of Joe Scarborough. He got into his high-and-mighty routine the other day, talking about how Stewart cherry picks pieces of information, makes a funny face, and then the audience laughs out of a pavlovian reaction. He completely missed Stewart's point and failed to comprehend that Stewart did what Scarborough was supposed to have done. He did research and asked questions that went to the heart of the matter. When was the last time anything came out of "Morning Joe" that got people talking about important issues? It's sad when Comedy Central does better reporting and interviewing than a supposed news network.
On the other hand, I thought Stewart's interview would have been better if he had talked less and listened more.
|
|
#6
03-14-2009, 11:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
MBlovr '59 180 Dad's original '59 180 Dad's 2nd one '67 250SE Dad's last one '59 220 SE My first one '62 220SE Coupe second one '89 190E 2.6 5spd third one '06 E350 4matic (sold) '10 E350 4matic
|
|
#7
03-14-2009, 11:18 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#8
03-14-2009, 11:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#10
03-14-2009, 11:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I know a number of people who followed the advice of anyone on the TV, radio or a newsletter. I do not know any of them that made any money on any of the deals they got into.
The worst part about these shows is that their main purpose is not to impart information; it is to get ratings. The Daily Show even aluded to this in their intro to the Cramer show. What I think is weird is that so many people are acting as if this type of reporting is something new. During the Middle Ages the only person that could tell the King he was wrong and get away with it was the Court Jester, also known as The Fool. The Fool was only allowed to speak the truth as he saw it and not even the King could make him be quite. Kings were thought to be wise if they took the advice of The Fool into consideration. This is the part of this story that The Daliy Show plays. You may not like what The Fool says, but you cannot stop him from saying it. You can also ignore his advice, but when you find yourself disposed you have only yourself to blame.
|
|
#11
03-14-2009, 11:55 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
On an historical note, fools were only treated well if they stayed in the king's favor. They weren't compleat fools.
The same is true of modern satirist. There is no king otehr than public opinion. Today the public doesn't kill them. We kill their ratings and marginalize them.
|
|
#12
03-14-2009, 12:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
There is much truth in comedy. Unfortunately, people don't take comedy seriously.
__________________
1984 300TD
|
|
#13
03-14-2009, 12:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
What is relatively new is the "reporting", which is not reporting at all, done by CNBC, et al. It is a continuation of what the Sunday morning shows have been doing for years. There was a reason that the late Tim Russert was Dick Cheney's favorite host. Cheney knew, for example, that when he went on "Meet the Press" in March 2003, he could claim that, "We believe, in fact, that [Saddam] has reconstituted nuclear weapons," and Russert would not call him on the falsehood. To challenge his guest in that fashion, Russert would risk losing the big name guests, thereby losing ratings, thereby risking his huge income. Cramer told Stewart the other day that CNBC has to fill 17 hours a day of live TV. That's ridiculous. They have known all along that what they were peddling was crap, but they made so much money doing it there was no way they could stop themselves. I think that phenomenon might be relatively new. Perhaps someone more versed in the history of journalism and commentary can correct me on that.
|
|
#15
03-14-2009, 01:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
