Friday, October 30, 2009

Fairly Unbalanced


The Daily Show With Jon Stewart
Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
For Fox Sake!
www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor
Health Care Crisis



This segment really says it all.

27 comments:

oneblood said...

I think it pretty much says some of it.

When the Daily Show has the chutzpah to do an 11 minute segment on liberal bias at NPR...but of course that wouldn't be funny.

Because DS viewers probably don't listen to NPR nor realize how influential it actually is.

On the other hand, Fox News worries me, to the point where I don't think satire does any good.

oneblood said...

Sorry, most DS viewers.

Michael Lockridge said...

Isn't the Daily Show where most people get their news, these days?

Richelle said...

lol. what amazes me is how these people can bitch about the school "indoctrinating" these kids with the obama song, but they don't give a damn about religious indoctrination.

Asylum Seeker said...

First off, I don't really know if that is true, but a lot of people do watch the Daily Show and progressively less are watching actual news programs or reading the newspapers, so I guess it's possible.

As for NPR: I personally don't know a hell of a lot about it, but that's mostly because I am internet person, not a radio person. I honestly wouldn't expect the Daily Show to expose the influence of NPR or its bias (which I can neither confirm nor deny) because they, from what I have seen, deal almost exclusively with television news media. I rarely ever hear them mention Limbaugh or Savage's programs, for example (but Colbert has been known to dip in those more, but he is more superficial in the way he deals with things).

The network that they would most often address as the liberal equivalent of Fox is MSNBC, and they take a jab at them every so often. But one of the reasons I was drawn to this segment was because it showed how many of the defenses that have been on behalf of Fox fall short because it actually is biased in its actual news coverage, and not just the opinion shows that MSNBC has its own liberal counterparts to. The only claim they have left is to state that Fox is "just as biased" as everyone else. Which, depending on the context of the criticism (did not pay attention to what the White House's actual complaints against the network actually were) this falls anywhere from a valid counterargument (if one argues the network is biased, therefore bad) to a complete non-sequitur (if one is arguing that they are biased and, more importantly, factually wrong).

Of course, I don't exactly remember what was in the video at this point, why I liked it, or if I had a point in posting it. That's what I get for not leaving more typical babble afterwards.

Asylum Seeker said...

It's not indoctrination if you agree with the message. I've learned that from my tendency to use the term to demonize the teaching of ideas I don't agree with to the impressionable.

In other words "indoctrination"="education" + EVIL!!!

At least that's how the term seems to be used now. If there was ever a use for that term that didn't involve that, I am unaware of it (i.e. can't be bothered to look up original usage).

Jared said...

"indoctrinate" has kind of a complicated etymology. It stems from the Latin "in" prefix which is kind of like just using the accusative (or the phrase "to bring to") for that word. In this case, it would be "doctrine" which would be a belief or tenet of an ideological philosophy or a body of religious teachings. Indoctrination is, in this sense, to bring someone to a particular ideological tenet. This is from the Latin "doctrina" rather than "doceo." It means "that which has been taught." To indoctrinate is not to teach, but to expect another to know what the indoctrinating individual believes as a consequence of his or her education.

"How much is a semantic worth? About 3.5 billion dollars"-Steven Pinker

Richelle said...

well boys, i must say i wasn't quite expecting the semantics and etymology and complications, so let me just clarify the definition i was referring to:

to instruct with a biased or ideological pov.

all better :)

mac said...

Who mentioned Limbaugh? What's so funny about him is he earned his chops deriding the "Liberal media"....the same media that gave his sorry ass a job? Exactly what is this liberal media of which he speaks?

Pliny-the-in-Between said...

Until the media can discern the difference between balance and equivalence nothing much is going to happen.

In order to appear balanced the media resorts to placing the director of the NSF next to Fred R Turbo to discuss global warming, evolution, vaccinations, etc.

Until they routinely come on the air and say, "we have investigated the claims of so and so and have determined they are bullshit. So no more airtime will be devoted to this non issue."

I'd subscribe to that media outlet!

Jared said...

Pliny, I'm in favor of that type of media as well. It is so difficult to sift through the garbage and find the gem of accurate information that I rarely bother anymore. I just pick up the factual bits, such as "Obama proposes amendments to health care bill" and ignore the "These amendments will destroy Real America(tm)"

Stacy S. said...

Personally, I do think that Stewart does a pretty good job of calling "Bullshit" - where it is warranted. (sp)? I watch the news all day long and am on teh intertoobs, but he seems to have the ability to see things that I miss. I know he's just a comedian bu I think he has a pretty important job.

oneblood said...

Ok, maybe there's a 'new' type of liberal about. But almost without qualification, all the liberals I know, even the yutes, except you Asylum (not a jab, I was actually surprised), know NPR, at least as a liberal icon. Which it is for good reason.

The radio/internet comment however was interesting. Hadn't thought about that, radio even on the internet might be a media we're "abandoning." This distinction is important to me symbolically because I'm in my thirties and could've been focusing on an older liberalism. The yutes that I know (to qualify the earlier statement) who are extremely liberal are the kids of old school liberals.

NPR was/is to radio the way the NYTimes was/is to newspapers, and things are changing.

I would still be interested to know what you think about my last statement, "On the other hand, Fox News worries me, to the point where I don't think satire does any good."

Satirizing Fox is trite, Jon Stewart isn't treading dangerous ground. He and his writers are acute but at what cost to themselves? Fox has become a propoganda mill. When I watch Glenn Beck he genuinely scares me on account of who he's going to provoke.

NPR is influential that I know of to college professors (at my school), one rabbi, a couple pastors, our local newspaper editors and others of that ilk. But none of them are as incendiary as Fox.

oneblood said...

When Brian went off about Limbaugh a while ago, I felt Limbaugh's speech was impotent, a hurrah for the party past its prime.

But the way Fox is going, and gaining popularity has all the signs of a political movement that's ready...

To do what? I don't know, but it doesn't look like it's voting.

---

Then again I'm probably being to black and white about the video, NPR, and FOX.

Asylum Seeker said...

"Until the media can discern the difference between balance and equivalence nothing much is going to happen."

Very, very true.

"know NPR, at least as a liberal icon."

Well, I know of NPR. Do I get partial credit?

"NPR was/is to radio the way the NYTimes was/is to newspapers, and things are changing."

Like that. I think I knew that (I make no promises though).

"Satirizing Fox is trite, Jon Stewart isn't treading dangerous ground. He and his writers are acute but at what cost to themselves? Fox has become a propoganda mill. "

I don't know about that. Sure, it's easy to poke fun and it has been done to death by this point, that much is certain. But, you also have to think, if people weren't incessantly them, then they'd be milling propaganda unchallenged. Then again, if people weren't mocking them, they wouldn't be able to pull any victim card and people might lose interest. It's a kind of "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. But if you chose "do" at least you get some easy laughs!

"But the way Fox is going, and gaining popularity has all the signs of a political movement that's ready...

To do what? I don't know, but it doesn't look like it's voting."

Don't worry, they don't know what they want to do either. It's all about "fear". Mild fear, admittedly, more akin to a slight feeling of anxiety or a touch of paranoia, but fear nonetheless. They don't actually have anything that they want to do, they just know that they don't like what they see going on now, and are expecting a jumble of worst case scenario or "logical conclusions" that they can spread to one another. By doing so, those that believe that these scenarios make sense attempt to reassure each other of a hope for changing off this course, and that their expectations make sense. Once this happens, comes the impotent rage. If they ever think of a way to defeat the phantoms that they are collectively cowering from and shaking their fists against, they would probably easily be encouraged to do it. But right now I think it is more about the fist shaking and cowering. Obviously, I exaggerate a little, and phrase a bit too condescendingly. But I think that the images used have a certain level of appeal. It just feels right.

Nishant said...

what amazes me is how these people can bitch about the school "indoctrinating" these kids Work from home India

Asylum Seeker said...

Yes, that part is particularly bad since the "indoctrination" consisted entirely of a motivational speech for kids to study and do well in school. I really cannot begin to fathom what their actual complaint was.

Richelle said...

wtf?

why does the "work from home" link bandit have to copy and paste part of MY comment.

i don't want to be associated with that douchebaggery.

i couldn't help but notice it was posted at 11:11, guess i should hop over to brian's blog and tell him seeing how he and mac were just discussing the 11:11 thing the other day.

oooooooowww sweet sweet syncronicities.

Asylum Seeker said...

Heh. Didn't even notice. Thought it was spambot when I followed the link to a site that made me rather dizzy. Clever, clipping a sentence from one of the comments to make it sound like it was actually responding. Should have known that I haven't been drawing in enough attention to get drive-by commenters. Haven't done enough blog-whoring to pull that off.

As for 11:11, damn, I am a few minutes too late!

Richelle said...

Haven't done enough blog-whoring to pull that off.

---------------

maybe it's time for you to put on the red light, get your ass out on the corner.

;)

that may have been slightly inappropriate...

Asylum Seeker said...

"maybe it's time for you to put on the red light, get your ass out on the corner."

B-but...who will be my pimp?

Richelle said...

i will.

now get to work before i have to show you the strength of my pimpstress hand.

mac said...

I've got a rubber hose you could use to beat him....."Ho better get my blog post"

Jared said...

Pimpin' hose...

Richelle said...

you're so helpful mac

:)

Asylum Seeker said...

Pimp hose (nice homophone)? Will that be instead of, or in addition to, the archetypal pimp cane?

Richelle said...

yeah i'm gonna go ahead and break the mold and use the hose in lieu of the cane.