Did anyone watch Jon Stewart on Chris Wallace?

#201
#201
So, consider that while FNC ratings are as high as ever, also consider that TDS have been trending up nearly as long. For the sake of this post, I'll assume Stewart and co. are agenda-driven on the same level as FNC. The bias might cater to one crowd or another depending on the channel, but I think we can all agree that every TV show's primary agenda is increasing viewers. What does each say about a response to demand? Would anybody here buy that each tells its audience what they want to hear? Do the editorials of FNC and TDS reflect their audience, or does their audience reflect what the programs are saying? Most importantly, can we glean some understanding of the people watching these programs by looking at the thought process used in production and script writing?
 
#202
#202
milohimself said:
So, consider that while FNC ratings are as high as ever, also consider that TDS have been trending up nearly as long. For the sake of this post, I'll assume Stewart and co. are agenda-driven on the same level as FNC. The bias might cater to one crowd or another depending on the channel, but I think we can all agree that every TV show's primary agenda is increasing viewers. What does each say about a response to demand? Would anybody here buy that each tells its audience what they want to hear? Do the editorials of FNC and TDS reflect their audience, or does their audience reflect what the programs are saying? Most importantly, can we glean some understanding of the people watching these programs by looking at the thought process used in production and script writing?
Click to expand...


Actually, I would argue that both Fox and Stewart have done an excellent job production-wise and that some significant portion of the success of each has more to do with that than the message.
 
#204
#204
lawgator1 said:
Hannity is not remotely in the same ballpark as Stewart when it comes to intellect. Wallace had Stewart on and it was a good interview, and I think O'Reilly could pull it off. But Hannity rarely if ever brings capable people with opposing viewpoints onto his show. His whole schtick is similar to the Coulter thing -- just blindly insist he's right, offer up little argument and only the occasionally correct fact -- and just bash and bash and bash.

Of the shows on Fox, his is by far the most simple-minded.

Beck had a built in audience of those prone to the conspiracy and mega theories. But that ran its course and his premises just got weirder and weirder, his rants harsher and harsher, and his blatant fixation on gouging dollars out of his audience through advertising and his shows. And they just had to get ride of him before it got too f'ed up.

Fox did themselves an enormous favor dumping him when they did because it surely would not have ended well.
Click to expand...

YouTube - ‪Victim In Fatal Car Accident Tragically Not Glenn Beck‬‏
 
#205
#205
It's a bit of both - probably more so with TDS since it was in someone else's hands (Kilborn) originally.

Both are delivering media (for lack of a better word) that was missing elsewhere so in that sense they were created for some audiences. Overtime I would bet that audience has morphed some so that it has become more of a tell me what I want to hear phenomena.

Fox was a response to the 1) growing shift towards 24 hour news, 2) the lack of diversity in viewpoints in the mainstream. I've always believe the "Fair and Balanced" slogan is more about presenting advocates for both sides and letting them scream at each other than any claim that Fox itself doesn't have a slant. It is an approach to presentation, not a statement of objectivity.

Interestingly, its not only Fox and TDS with specific audiences - the same is becoming true of stalwarts like the NYTimes, and newcomers like MSNBC. People are settling in with programming that fits their ears and covers the stories they want to hear.
 
#207
#207
So is it then a logical conclusion that the way each is presented is a reflection of their segment of audience than the other way around?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#208
#208
milohimself said:
So is it then a logical conclusion that the way each is presented is a reflection of their segment of audience than the other way around?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I think it's both - the audience today is not the same as it was when these programs were created. That's not to say that each (TDS/Fox) didn't evolve along the way as it understood the audiences they were attracting.

This is why they really aren't that different. As I said in an earlier post - ratings are the real agenda.
 
#209
#209
WhichCameFirst_Fullpic_1-704421.gif
 
#210
#210
lawgator1 said:
But Hannity rarely if ever brings capable people with opposing viewpoints onto his show.
Click to expand...

Bob Beckel, Kirsten Powers, Lanny Davis, and quite a few others appear on his panel discussions, they are also fairly regular contributors in other segments of his show. He's interviewed Charlie Rangel, Anthony Weiner, and Al Sharpton. He's done public debates with Al Sharpton as well.

I'll agree that Hannity can be very single-minded and will drive a particular issue into the ground, but to say he doesn't have capable opposition voices appear on his show is wrong. Compared to the competition in the 9pm time slot, Hannity's show presents a far more diverse group of opinions.

edit: Kudos to Chris Wallace taking the final segment of yesterday's show to present the facts concerning Stewart's assertions that FNC viewers are misinformed. Turns out Stewart was the one who was misinformed.
 
Last edited:
#211
#211
MG1968 said:
Bob Beckel, Kirsten Powers, Lanny Davis, and quite a few others appear on his panel discussions, they are also fairly regular contributors in other segments of his show. He's interviewed Charlie Rangel, Anthony Weiner, and Al Sharpton. He's done public debates with Al Sharpton as well.

I'll agree that Hannity can be very single-minded and will drive a particular issue into the ground, but to say he doesn't have capable opposition voices appear on his show is wrong. Compared to the competition in the 9pm time slot, Hannity's show presents a far more diverse group of opinions.

edit: Kudos to Chris Wallace taking the final segment of yesterday's show to present the facts concerning Stewart's assertions that FNC viewers are misinformed. Turns out Stewart was the one who was misinformed.
Click to expand...


A "diverse group of opinions" isn't necessarily meaningful if the presenter is a goober (Davis) or a caricature (Sharpton).

I'd like Hannity to invite Matthews onto his show. That would be good. Or Stewart.

And not do it with the guest surrounded by the usual good looking sniping conservative harpies that Hannity seems to have a penchant for.
 
#212
#212
I find it funny that FNC and a show on Comedy Central are actually being compared.
 
#213
#213
rjd970 said:
I find it funny that FNC and a show on Comedy Central are actually being compared.
Click to expand...

stewart's poltiical influence should not be underestimated. if he wants to just make it a comedy show he should stick to the comedy and keep his political views out of it. it's not as though there isn't plenty of dumb to go around in DC to make fun of without driving your agenda.
 
#214
#214
droski said:
stewart's poltiical influence should not be underestimated. if he wants to just make it a comedy show he should stick to the comedy and keep his political views out of it. it's not as though there isn't plenty of dumb to go around in DC to make fun of without driving your agenda.
Click to expand...

I think it's being overestimated.
 
#218
#218
volinbham said:
With FNC, TDS or both?

Personally I don't think either has an agenda other than ratings.
Click to expand...

when talking about a network i surely agree, but stewart clearly is trying to influence the young in this country. otherwise why even go there in the first place? surely ratings would be higher without it.
 
#219
#219
droski said:
when talking about a network i surely agree, but stewart clearly is trying to influence the young in this country. otherwise why even go there in the first place? surely ratings would be higher without it.
Click to expand...

At worst he's giving his own opinion - which I doubt - how is that an agenda?
 
#220
#220
droski said:
when talking about a network i surely agree, but stewart clearly is trying to influence the young in this country. otherwise why even go there in the first place? surely ratings would be higher without it.
Click to expand...


Let's be honest, conservatives are tight a**es. It would be difficult to find a conservative version of Stewart... I just can't see the laughs.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#221
#221
KiffinKiller said:
At worst he's giving his own opinion - which I doubt - how is that an agenda?
Click to expand...

because he doesn't state it as his opinion. he hides behind it being comedy. if he was open about it i wouldn't have a problem with it.

BoseefusTheVol said:
Let's be honest, conservatives are tight a**es. It would be difficult to find a conservative version of Stewart... I just can't see the laughs.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

liberals say plenty of dumb things too.
 
#222
#222
BoseefusTheVol said:
Let's be honest, conservatives are tight a**es. It would be difficult to find a conservative version of Stewart... I just can't see the laughs.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
I get what you're saying but there's a bit of irony in this post.
 
#225
#225
droski said:
because he doesn't state it as his opinion. he hides behind it being comedy. if he was open about it i wouldn't have a problem with it.



liberals say plenty of dumb things too.
Click to expand...

I said I doubted it was his opinion - he has a team that comes up with jokes about recent news. You're reading wayyyyy too far into it. He has a news comedy show - making it into a news show with an agenda is giving it too much weight, imo.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top