John Stewart on Fox and Ferguson

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
he is one of the most objective, ethical journalist in the US. he informs the public, something recognized by numerous polls.


he isn't better than just fox (mostly everyone is better than fox). he is better than cnn and nbc as well.

He's a comedian, not a news journalist.

Originally posted by normbenign
The you tube link has been pulled. Jon Stewart is admittedly a comedian, not a serious journalist, which isn't to say his "reports" don't contain truth. All news is a matter of perspective, including Fox. Hardly anything that has been written about Ferguson is lacking in perspective, and one has to separate fact from fiction and opinion, not an easy thi ...[text shortened]... tewart when he picks on Fox News, but ignore the occasions when he satirizes the other networks?

just from what i remember without looking, he mocked cnn for their coverage of the Malaysia missing plane

Originally posted by FishHead111
He's a comedian, not a news journalist.

which makes it even sadder. a comedian is a better journalist than most journalists.

if journalists would do their jobs, he could get back to stand up comedy

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
he is one of the most objective, ethical journalist in the US. he informs the public, something recognized by numerous polls.


he isn't better than just fox (mostly everyone is better than fox). he is better than cnn and nbc as well.

yeah he's real objective and ethical, no misrepresenting/exaggerating/misreporting/leaving out facts he doesn't like going on here:
YouTube

Originally posted by FishHead111
yeah he's real objective and ethical, no misrepresenting/exaggerating/misreporting/leaving out facts he doesn't like going on here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKucHdvCRtg

I get a number of impressions from this guy's shows but I do not get the impression I am watching a factual news report or anything other than a personal opinionated take on the political scene. It is political commentary. Is there a problem about people expressing opinions in the media without representing them as anything other than opinions?

Perhaps the problem is that they come so close to home and he asks such useful questions. Like how does Exxon get to avoid $9bn of liabilities for environmental damage, while the bought and paid for politician securing this boon for a vile multinational corporation even has the bare faced cheek to misuse the money they did pay (some $225m, vastly less than the proper liability) to cover his mismanaged budget and not a penny is going to clean up the environmental damage.

Originally posted by FishHead111
yeah he's real objective and ethical, no misrepresenting/exaggerating/misreporting/leaving out facts he doesn't like going on here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKucHdvCRtg

yes he is objective and ethical

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
yes he is objective and ethical

He's almost doing a clown act in that video you are just being intentionally thick witted and contrary.

Originally posted by finnegan
I get a number of impressions from this guy's shows but I do not get the impression I am watching a factual news report or anything other than a personal opinionated take on the political scene. It is political commentary. Is there a problem about people expressing opinions in the media without representing them as anything other than opinions?

Perhap ...[text shortened]... y) to cover his mismanaged budget and not a penny is going to clean up the environmental damage.

You're not an American, right? Where you live, why is it that you've heard of him? I'm asking, because I don't see why anyone outside the U.S. would care about a show that mainly opines on American issues.

Originally posted by FishHead111
He's almost doing a clown act in that video you are just being intentionally thick witted and contrary.

ad hominem.

him presenting the facts in a comical manner has nothing to do with them being true or not.


how about you attack the information and not the man?

Originally posted by vivify
You're not an American, right? Where you live, why is it that you've heard of him? I'm asking, because I don't see why anyone outside the U.S. would care about a show that mainly opines on American issues.

you don't see why someone would care about what happens in the world one is living in?

let's see how we can apply your reasoning to some other issues
i don't see how anyone living outside the middle east would care about what happens in siria, what Isis does, what the current political state of iraq is, the well being of women, homosexuals, jews, christians, the oppression of anyone having opposing ideas to the rulers in the region.

i don't see how anyone living outside africa would care about people starving/getting genocided there.


i could go on. but i won't. but i could.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
ad hominem.

him presenting the facts in a comical manner has nothing to do with them being true or not.


how about you attack the information and not the man?

OK let's attack the "information".
Stewart always prattled on repeatedly every chance he got "he shot an unarmed black teen!" and ignored the fact that Brown ATTACKED THE COP.
Jon Stewart don't even want to go there, it might justify what the cop had to do to save his life.
I could go on but I'm not wasting anymore time with you.

Originally posted by FishHead111
OK let's attack the "information".
Stewart always prattled on repeatedly every chance he got "he shot an unarmed black teen!" and ignored the fact that Brown ATTACKED THE COP.
Jon Stewart don't even want to go there, it might justify what the cop had to do to save his life.
I could go on but I'm not wasting anymore time with you.

"he shot an unarmed black teen!"
which is still true. brown was a teen and brown was unarmed.


"ignored the fact that Brown ATTACKED THE COP. "
which wasn't proven at all at that time. he didn't say that brown DIDN'T attack the cop.

"Jon Stewart don't even want to go there, it might justify what the cop had to do to save his life. "
he repeated again and again that we don't know the exact circumstances of what happened.



what he is mocking is how the media was covering the incident. he is mocking how people like you DID say that brown definitely attacked the cop. he is mocking how some people were sure of what happened in a case with conflicting testimonies. the fact that later on your stance was confirmed by the DOG and that grand jury means jack.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
you don't see why someone would care about what happens in the world one is living in?

let's see how we can apply your reasoning to some other issues
i don't see how anyone living outside the middle east would care about what happens in siria, what Isis does, what the current political state of iraq is, the well being of women, homosexuals, jews, christ ...[text shortened]... re about people starving/getting genocided there.


i could go on. but i won't. but i could.

Finnegan said he doesn't see the Daily Show as news. Stewart calls his own show a "fake news" show. So obviously, I'm not referring to information about what's happening in the world--which is also called, you know, news.

That said, asking Finnegan why he knows about a guy who makes jokes about (mainly) U.S. current events when he's from a different nation isn't unreasonable, is it? After all, how many comedy-based political commentators do YOU know of outside the U.S.?

Originally posted by vivify
Don't confuse "perspective" with context.

Because Fox has an unprecedented history of not only bias, but deliberately twisting truth to further their right-wing agenda. The fact that Fox is the largest single news channel in the U.S. makes their tactics dangerous; therefore, people will cite attacks against Fox much more often than other networks, because a network like Fox needs to be kept in check.

I frankly don't see the difference.

Fox News has never had an anchor, or news reader caught in deliberate lies such as those of the major networks, and its leaning right is not nearly as severe as the left leaning of MSNBC.

There is a likely reason why more people tune in and watch Fox News. It is more "Fair and Balanced" than any other cable or on air news source. I submit that Fox is satirized more than the others strictly on the basis that they present the conservative perspective along with the left's version. Before Fox News, nobody did that, and the news media was entirely biases to the left, both cable and broadcast.

The danger is not that Fox New be "kept in check", but that it be eliminated, as the only counter voice to the other networks, and broadcast news. People have lots of choices now to seek either context or perspective. More choose Fox News than all other cable news sources combined. Don't tell me that the consumer is just stupid.

Originally posted by normbenign
I frankly don't see the difference.

Fox News has never had an anchor, or news reader caught in deliberate lies such as those of the major networks

Let's start with an incredibly in-your-face lie from Sean Hannity

YouTube

^
That alone is more than enough. But here's more from Bill O'Reilly:

Lies about JFK's assassin:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2976495/CNN-publishes-audio-Bill-O-Reilly-proving-lied-Killing-Kennedy.html

Lies about war coverage:

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/22/bill-oreilly-bombshell-6-colleagues-oreilly-lied-war-coverage.html

99 times O'Reilly was caught lying:

http://www.dailydot.com/politics/bill-oreilly-long-list-of-lies/



Had enough? Will you admit you were wrong?