Jon Stewart 'Apologizes' For Calling Fox Viewers 'Misinformed' By Listing FNC's Own Miscues
Real men know how to apologize for their mistakes, especially when made on national television.
Apparently we can't put Jon Stewart in this category, for after acknowledging that the fact-checking organization PolitiFact found his statement to Chris Wallace concerning "misinformed" Fox viewers false, he proceeded to childishly spend three minutes listing all the times PF determined FNC's comments were likewise (video follows with transcript and commentary):
JON STEWART: Hey, welcome back. So as we've been discussing this week, I visited “Fox News Sunday” to chat with Chris Wallace about "South Park," President Obama, and I may have during the interview mentioned that Fox News viewers are quote "the most consistently misinformed media viewers. The most consistently misinformed? Fox. Fox viewers consistently – every poll.”
As it turns out, I was misinformed. Which should not have been surprising, because I do watch a lot of Fox News. Dammit! I did it again. Wait.
[Applause]
So, don't applaud my ignorance. PolitiFact, the non-partisan fact-checking guy or guys or girls, thoroughly researched my statement, and they found that while in two of the news surveys, Fox News viewers scored the lowest, in other polls they were merely near the bottom.
[Laughter]
Some of Fox’s individual shows scored as more informed than let's say viewers of, I don't know, this show. So thanks for fact-f--king me, stoners. Get a job!
[Applause]
We can't all teach world history. Anyway, ultimately PolitiFact declared my statement false. I defer to their judgment, and I apologize for my mistake. To not do so would be irresponsible. And if I were to continue to make such mistakes and misstatements and not correct them, especially if each and every one of those misstatements happened to go in one very particular direction on the political spectrum, well, that would undermine the very integrity and credibility that I work so hard to pretend to care about.
All and all, not a bad apology. If only he had stopped there:
STEWART: Hey, I wonder, I know PolitiFact checks mostly political statements of politicians and such, but has PolitiFact ever checked Fox for false statements? I'm hearing they have.
From there, Stewart spent three full minutes enumerating various times PolitiFact found a statement made on Fox to be false. Said comments were listed on the screen until the "Daily Show" host could no longer be seen behind them.
This is how a child admits a mistake, not a grown man, especially as Stewart chose not to address the error he made the previous evening when he falsely accused Wallace of saying Fox doesn't tell both sides of the story.
Instead, he chose to further belittle the organization that he twice inaccurately besmirched in so many days.
And this is the man folks on the left hold up as being the nation's top political satirist.
On a personal note, I, too, used to have a lot of respect for Stewart as a comedian and an entertainer.
Sadly, this esteem has diminished in recent years to where he now oftentimes comes across as a bitter little man needing to castigate others in order to elevate his own stature while compensating for his own insecurities.
This is what we've seen from him in the past four days.
Shame on you, Jon. You used to be so much better than this.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Politifact
Submitted by JohninAustin on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:27am.
I think it might be useful to mention that Politifact is not a "non-partisan" organization, but instead a left leaning one. (Any organization that uses the hyper partisan and completely biased
'Maryland study " as "proof" or "fact" is not being fair and balanced.)
This what a narcissist does they blame
Submitted by gmaniac1 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:41am.
everyone else for their own shortcomings. The left has always been this way and the fact that Stewart cannot anty up to his own mistakes is no suprise.
I'm ashamed I ever thought of
Submitted by poseA on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:54am.
I'm ashamed I ever thought of Mr. Stewart as anything but a two bit liberal hack.
Stewie
Submitted by well99 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 3:13am.
I didn't think I could lose any more respect for him but what very little I had is gone.He now is in the Olbermann category.Pure partisan sycophant that isn't man enough to own up to mistakes he made.
Wallace - great job
Submitted by Gat New York on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 6:04am.
This is a result of the skillful interview Wallace did with Stewart. Wallace drew him in and got him to show his ignorance and expose his left wing bias. He made him look like a fool and Stewart is desperately trying to undo the damage he did to himself. But the more he tries the more he digs a deeper hole.
Gat
Submitted by well99 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 6:08am.
Exactly.Especially when Wallace brought up about him wanting to be a political player.
Notice how angry Stewart got
Submitted by Gat New York on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:46am.
Notice how angry Stewart got when he was trying to convince Wallace that he was a comic first? I guess he is an angry comic.
Wallace maintained his composure and a "smile" the entire time of the interview.
Gat
Submitted by well99 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:50am.
Yes and well worth watching.The only time he was worth watching.It is getting so old him hiding behind he is a comedian.
Who is surprised?
Submitted by Optionyout on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 6:34am.
Does anyone who visits this site not know this guy is a card carrying liberal? I've only seen bits and pieces of his show and not one wasn't slanted. One good interview where Jim Cramer came off like a cowering fool and that's it as far as I've seen.
power corrupts...
Submitted by jdripper on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 7:07am.
All of the hoopla about Stewart has gone to his head. He used to have friends who are conservative but even those have walked away from him. His ego has driven him to be out of control. He has entered that stage where he believes his popularity comes from his liberalism. Frankly he almost appears to be borderline megalomania.
Jack
Interesting. So when the
Submitted by amyshulk on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 7:39am.
Interesting. So when the subject is his credibility, giving all parts to the story is necessary - not so much for his targets.
Ronald Reagan
Everyone skips over the fact
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 8:17am.
Everyone skips over the fact that in that Wallace interview, Stewart himself said it's ridiculous that he's given credibility.
He says it's ridiculous that
Submitted by amyshulk on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 8:33pm.
He says it's ridiculous that he's given credibility, but must not believe it's ridiculous - why else go to such lengths?
Ronald Reagan
What lengths?
Submitted by balboa on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 8:45pm.
What lengths?
That Politifact says it's not true does NOT make it so.
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 8:12am.
In less than a minute, i debunked the Muslim Brotherhood one:
Muslim Brotherhood: Prepare for War with Israel
and it's still being argued whether the Obamacare law includes "death panels."
So Stewart takes it that if Politifact says Fox lied, they leid.
But no problem....as Stewart himself says, It's a fake news show!!
Stewart
Submitted by Texndoc on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 8:26am.
Never watch him. I assume he spends all his time mocking Conservatives. But here's the rub: what worked in 2008 won't work in 2012. Sorry, even the stupidest college student realizes Stewart sold them an Edsel. As they graduate college and ponder moving back in with mom, without a job offer.
Wow, you honesty didnt think
Submitted by balboa on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 8:57am.
Wow, you honesty didnt think Stewart would use that as comedy fodder? Why wouldn't he?
balboa
Submitted by well99 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:46am.
Cheap shot = comedy.He isn't man enough give a straight forward apology.
How is it a cheap shot to
Submitted by balboa on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 10:35am.
How is it a cheap shot to point out the web site's findings?
cheap shot
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 10:38am.
It is not. To apologize by pointing fingers is childish but it is a Comedy Show and juvenile behavior is what passes for comedy in this day.
There is nothing wrong with his skit or his comments - just his apology.
Agnostic
Submitted by well99 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 10:54am.
He is using his show to get back at Fox because he was wrong.To me that is a cheap shot.It quit being comedy when he started using it to push a political agenda.
I took at as more getting
Submitted by balboa on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 10:57am.
I took at as more getting back at the people who said he was inaccurate as opposed to Fox News.
"OK, I was wrong... but based on the same web site, I'm not too far off base."
bal
Submitted by well99 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 11:06am.
I thought it was about Fox.The funny thing it is a left of center website.The thing is it's his show but using it like that is wrong.If he wants to be a opinion show like Hannity or Maddow then do it.Lets just knock off this I am a comedian cop out.
Well sure it's about Fox
Submitted by balboa on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 11:11am.
Well sure it's about Fox News, too. He said Fox News viewers were the most misinformed. The website showed that's actually not true. Stewart apologizes for being wrong, then shows that Fox News has broadcast a lot of misinformation, using the same website.
I don't see anywhere in there that he's using a cop-out of any kind.
balboa
Submitted by well99 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 11:21am.
The cop out was a general statement on my part.The part where he decided to use Fox and the website was a chicken sh$$ apology.When you said your wrong you didn't give a dissertation on all others who have been wrong.I have admitted when I was wrong but I don't bring up a bunch of others.Just a note:I know it is hard to believe but I have been wrong before.No seriously.
"Just a note:I know it is
Submitted by balboa on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 11:26am.
"Just a note:I know it is hard to believe but I have been wrong before.No seriously."
WHAT? When? And where was I when this happened? ;-)
balboa
Submitted by well99 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 12:58pm.
It was reported on BOR.Your favor pundit.How could you miss it?Just a note:I got banned on a gaming forum today..lol
bal, wrong but right
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:54pm.
so it is okay to be wrong as long as you can show you were kind of right
Isn't that close to what happened with Palin and you thought it was just awful. Neither Palin nor Stewart actually admitted to being wrong. Stewart said it but then went on to give his proof that he wasn't so he wasn't really saying he was wrong.
I know it is not exactly the same but it was too close for me to fight the temptation to bring it up; especially when the self declared experts came out in support of Palin and against Stewart.
Palin defiantly said she was
Submitted by balboa on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 3:10pm.
Palin defiantly said she was right. Stewart admitted he was wrong when people showed him he was. But, yeah, he got in a kind of "parting shot" for a pyrrhic victory, if you will.
(And Stewart made his goof with way more conviction than Palin, and didn't say it was a "gotcha" question. :-) )
Sort of the same, I suppose.
Liberalism Does That
Submitted by Thunder Lizard on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:12am.
Stewart seems to be going the way of Bill Mahr. Unfunny and bitter.
you call those miscues?
Submitted by Hunter S. on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:18am.
I call them blatant lies fueled by Ailes' own agenda. Stewart was clearly effective this time in beating the living daylights out of everyone who accused him of stating anything but the truth.
More simply put, Stewart was spot on.
Stewart was spot on
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:21am.
probably - and you could do this with almost every news outlet. The topics may change, the reasons for errors may change but errors remain the same. The only real difference is agenda.
Damn straight
Submitted by classicliberal2 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:40pm.
And PolitiFact was out to lunch on this one. They tried to muddy the issue by citing surveys that weren't germane to Stewart's claim, misrepresenting the surveys (both the ones that were relevant and the ones that weren't), and leaving out at least one (perhaps because it, like the other relevant ones, supported Stewart), but through all that mud, Stewart was still right.
As in the past, PolitiFact has shown itself to have no class at all; while Sheppard whines, above, about Stewart acting like a child, PolitiFact acknowledged the criticism I just outlined (things a lot of people apparently noticed), but didn't retract their conclusion, and, in fact, offered no further comment on the matter (though I suppose that compares favorably to their usual practice of doubling down when they get something wrong).
~Why don't you write a blog article about it?
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:44pm.
Perhaps one of the 8 followers you've developed in the last three years can be bribed into commenting on it.
And 4 of them are his own sock puppets.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 06/24/2011 - 3:35am.
4 sockpuppets he uses to respew his original spew all over the web.
2 of his sockpuppet accounts are registered here.
anitamurie
LisaLV711
All the cool kids are on Google Friends.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 06/24/2011 - 9:19am.
Nobody uses Facebook anymore.
I noticed Jon failed to
Submitted by Boudin on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:51pm.
Compare Fox to other networks. So he could prove their viewers were "more" misinformed. I also noticed he didnt compare Fox's errors with his own. Hhmm
did you watch the segment?
Submitted by Hunter S. on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:26am.
They weren't just miscues. Stewart listed a number of statements fox has been selling, many of which have yet to be retracted. Now I spent about 20 minutes last night watching Special Ed, and that was all I needed to agree with you on the point that others do it too.
watching the segment
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:40am.
No I can't play it for whatever reason but I certainly grant that everything he puts up is accurate - even as a comedian I don't think he would risk looking a fool (unless it is about economics and only because there are so many 'experts' that are almost never correct).
There has been a decline in factual news quality across the board and it hasn't been at a high level since biases were known and you had competing outlets. The news was severely biased but you knew and you knew exactly were to go to find the opposite side of the argument. Of course, none of were alive at the time this was going on but I would much prefer to hear an honest bias than have the media try to trick me - either side of the ideological aisle.
see the segment at comedycentral.com
Submitted by Hunter S. on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:46am.
You're not on the side that believes Stewart's show is anything but political farce, are you? I mean, he used a muppet to depict Michael Steele! Regularly!
political farce
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:58am.
No, I can't blame Stewart if a large portion of his audience admits to getting their news from a show that is a political farce and it would be hypocritical of me to say he shouldn't make money off of such people that would give credence to anything he portrays as comedy/news.
Laugh-in once did a short skit that referenced a joke about Reagan becoming president but I wouldn't have considered them a news source nor would I find them a source for historically accurate information now.
The problem is that the news has become so increasingly diluted that people don't see a problem getting their news from people like Stewart, Maher, Beck or Limbaugh.
agreed
Submitted by Hunter S. on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 10:01am.
I really only watch Stewart to see who he's making fun of today. It's prime time entertainment, and I can tolerate it over pretty much any reality show in the same time slot.
Hunter S. - really dumbing down America
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 10:07am.
Reality Shows - Now there is a fine example of the networks trying to really dumb down America and they aren't even pretending to be ashamed about it. These are the same networks that almost refused to air Gilligan's Island and The Beverly Hillbillies because they were too silly.
whatever sells, I guess
Submitted by Hunter S. on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 10:12am.
I blame MTV and the Real World. They taught Americans that anyone can be famous for nothing.
Hunter S.,
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 12:40pm.
Throw in the media's seeming fetish for trying to create an American equivilant to a Royal Family whether it is hollywood or political and I have to agree. Lazy, tabloid filled media is all the rage.
The Daily show
Submitted by dreamsincolor on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 9:56am.
At one point was a anticipated part of my day. Jon is a funny guy, he has excellent timing and a good writing staff.
When he started bashing Fox news viewers on a regular basis, I stopped watching him as I generally watch TV to be entertained or informed, not insulted...
The two most trusted names in
Submitted by Peter K on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 10:15am.
The two most trusted names in news, i.e. Comedy Central on the left, and Fox for normal people, going at it.
SNOPES is also left
Submitted by marpel on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 11:10am.
SNOPES is also left leaning...be mindful of that when you go to that website to check a "fact".
"Deep within my heart lies a memory. A song of ol' San Antone..."
Facts, it seems, have a
Submitted by classicliberal2 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:43pm.
Facts, it seems, have a liberal bias.
classicliberal2 =~ /Troll/
Submitted by Free Stinker on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:49pm.
Do not feed the fact challenged Trolls.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
It should be noted that Major
Submitted by balboa on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:49pm.
It should be noted that Major League Baseball leans left, so, you know, remember that when you see "results" from "games."
Stewart was never "better than this"...
Submitted by OxyCon on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 11:25am.
...he just operated without anyone pointing out his activist bias before. Now that he's being challenged, he's coming unglued and striking out in anger.
misinformed or uninformed
Submitted by alvin on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 12:58pm.
Readers noted that PolitiFact examined whether Fox News' viewers were uninformed - meaning they have an absence of information, but Stewart claimed Fox News' viewers were misinformed - meaning they have factually incorrect information.
"To give you a simple, though slightly extreme, example, an ill-informed person wouldn't be able to name the president, but a misinformed person would think he was a Kenyan," one reader explained.
Two studies - the "Misperceptions, The Media and The Iraq War" study (PDF) and the "Misinformation and the 2010 Election" study (PDF) - did in fact find that Fox News viewers were the most misinformed media consumers, as PolitiFact noted.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/jun/21/readers-soun...
PolitiFact acknowledges this
Submitted by classicliberal2 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:49pm.
PolitiFact acknowledges this (really obvious) criticism, but not others, and doesn't correct its initial judgment.
"This is how a child admits a
Submitted by classicliberal2 on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:21pm.
"This is how a child admits a mistake, not a grown man"
Actually, this is how a comedian makes a point--through jokes. It was a point you missed, Sheppard. And it was damn funny, too.
classicliberal2 =~ /Troll/
Submitted by Free Stinker on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:25pm.
Do not feed the Trolls
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
I don't mean to bring this up impolitely (sorry for the length)
Submitted by Sgore on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 1:54pm.
But I've been trying to contact Mr. Sheppard on twitter about this article. It seems like he's condemning Stewart for something he was fine with coming from Sarah Palin only a short time ago, in almost the exact same situation (In response to her "North Korea" gaffe):
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/11/26/sarah-palin-sends-...
One could make the argument that Stewart's initial statement was based in something he actually believed, while Palin's was merely misspeaking, but even so, the tactics they used to respond to criticism were exactly the same, and that's what's at issue here.
My problem here isn't specifically with what Stewart or Palin themselves did, but with the lack of consistent standards in opinion that comes from blogs like this. And mind you, I don't mean that in a partisan manner. Liberal oriented bloggers are guilty of it too.
For instance:
Here Palin is Slammed for similar reasons that you slam Stewart: http://www.politicususa.com/en/palin%E2%80%99s-thanksgiving-spite
And on the same blog, video of Stewart’s show last night is used, but the aspect of his response that seemed to bother them regarding Palin, gets no mention here:
http://www.politicususa.com/en/jon-stewart-politifact
(One on the other side of this could certainly point out that the second article is focused on disproving Politifact rather than on Stewart’s response to Fox News, but the fact that it used the video without even mentioning any issue with the kind of rhetoric that it called Palin out on seems problematic.)
I’m sure people both here and at other blogs, regardless of ideological background have honest, true values and standards that they believe in. I’m sure you’re all (Liberal or Conservative) probably good people who have a tendency to get into heated discussion every once in a while. However, these kinds of blogs, which focus on promoting a certain partisan side, tend to fall into this trap of inconsistency quite often, both in the comments and in the articles themselves. While there is certainly nuance in politics, and different gaffes seem to develop their own rules of proper etiquette to deal with, the cases here seem so similar that calling out one figure without calling out the other is as clear a double standard as one can get.
If I may speak on a larger level, it seems symptomatic of what people put into and expect from political rhetoric nowadays. If a media outlet’s focus is on such blanket and so often contentiously defined ideas as representing Conservative or Liberal values, rather than having clearly laid-out, objective standards on how information should be gathered, things like this get by. I find myself reading political blogs like yours and others often (on both sides of the political spectrum), and it strikes me as counter to what the real goal of journalism should be.
Any media outlet (from a Local news network to a blog on media criticism) needs to have a set of defined, publicly available standards of news gathering that explain how they try to remain objective in how they do their job, so that when one comes down especially hard on one side or the other, the public can see it’s not a matter of personal bias, but objective reporting. Criticism, of course, could come in how said networks deviate from their own expressed standards, but at least having such a process would avoid situations like this on a regular basis, would allow for a better process. It’s certainly not your fault most other outlets don’t have this kind of set up, but I’d consider publicly explaining what your standards are for remaining objective. It’d lead to a better system than the one most online political rhetoric has now.
Mr. Sheppard, if you are reading this, I respectfully ask for your response, please. Thank you.
12hr? I smell sockpuppet!
Submitted by Free Stinker on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:20pm.
I'll still answer the most obvious one. Palin doesn't hide behind "It's Comedy" and she doesn't think any public figure, including herself is above criticism. Stewart thinks he is above criticism.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Free,
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:23pm.
It thinks it's Batman. :-O
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
I detect traces
Submitted by UpNorth on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:26pm.
of Hank Mud, meself. Er, myself. See, it's catching.
UN,
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:32pm.
LOL - That would mean it's a dreaded frankentroll.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave
Submitted by Free Stinker on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:28pm.
Well, I think he has the "Batty" part right. ;-)
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Hmm, it seems Noel has an Internet stalker
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:25pm.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
and other thing . . .
Submitted by Free Stinker on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:26pm.
Don't lecture Conservatives about civility. The Tea Party protests have been the most civil public gatherings of all time. Meanwhile, Liberals have physically attacked Conservatives in CA, New Orleans, St.Louis and elswhere, and we are seeing angry-mob tactics in WI and MD, again from Liberals. Liberals talk about raping Sarah Palin, raping her 2nd oldest daughter, killing Sarah, and refer to her youngest son as a vegetable. Don't lecture us about civility. Start with your own side of the aisle.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
I don't believe I mentioned the word "civility"
Submitted by Sgore on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:49pm.
In fact, I don't believe I was lecturing anyone (conservatives or liberals) on the issue of Civility at all. I have my own thoughts on the issue, but I wasn't talking about that here, and I do apologize, but I don't really see the relevance of the situation you brought up just now FreeStinker. No sides of the aisle were claimed by me here.
To clear a few other things up: I am not a sockpuppet. (and certainly not a stalker. No need for name calling. I only sent 3 tweets on this issue, and the 3rd was only after not getting a response to the other two) I read this and other blogs often, like I said, and I've noticed a few troublesome trends on them. Again, I say this regardless of political side. I figured having my criticism as comprehensive, clear and respectful as possible would come across well, especially in my first post on this blog, and I hoped I'd be met with respect in turn. Right now I don't feel anyone's being disrespectful, as I can certainly take some gentle ribbing. I'm afraid I don't know who Frank Mud is, and in all frankness, the Batman thing was me being silly...you probably already got that though and were just having fun. Again, I come in here with no hostilities. I'm sure you're all probably nice people, and I don't mean to offend, but I happen to feel the issue I've brought up is worth examining closer.
As for the difference you point out between Palin and Stewart, FreeStinker, I do thank you for responding, but I have to say, that argument doesn't quite seem to fit here. Even if one were to accept the claim that Stewart "hides behind" being a comedian, the clip of his Apology/Critique on Fox News at no point seems to have him state that he shouldn't be held accountable for what he's saying at that moment because he's a comedian. Perhaps I have missed it, and if so, I apologize, but regardless, even if it was in there, such a distinction still wouldn't explain why one figure would be justified in responding by pointing out the flaws of another, while the other would not, and it especially doesn't justify the double standard, which is what the main point of my post was.
Again, I thank you for your time.
As you well know, Hank
Submitted by UpNorth on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:58pm.
it was Hank Mud, as in Henry Clay, another persona who graced us with his presence.
Again, I don't know who that is.
Submitted by Sgore on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 3:01pm.
It's a pretty big internet, as you well know yourself. I'm guessing I'm not the only person ever to post on this blog with a similar rhetoric. I really don't know who Hank Mud or Henry Clay are. I'll take your word that they posted here at one time, but having no way to convince you that I am not them, I'm really at a loss. Still, UpNorth, I hope you can see where I'm coming from in my posts, and I do thank you for reading them.
A. RHayes B. Barracus C.
Submitted by Free Stinker on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 3:08pm.
A. RHayes
B. Barracus
C. Hater
D. Hank Mud
E. New Troll
A B C and E seem to have been ruled out . . .
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
None of the above.
Submitted by Sgore on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 3:16pm.
I'm afraid there seems to be some kind of misunderstanding as to who I am. I don't really know how to prove to you I'm not any of those people. I'm certainly not trying to hate on anyone, and as for Trolling, I've never been a fan of it myself. I'm not in here to mess with people, merely to express a criticism I have and hopefully, get a comprehensive response from the author of the article. I'm sorry for the confusion.
In that case . . . We know
Submitted by Free Stinker on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 3:57pm.
In that case . . .
We know its you John Stewart. Give it a rest.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Now that would be an interesting turn of events...
Submitted by Sgore on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 4:04pm.
But, as far as I know, I've never hosted the Daily Show. Also rules out me being Craig Kilborn, but I doubt anyone was going to think that was the case.
Blogs vs News
Submitted by IdahoJim on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 5:23pm.
Do I need to point out the difference between Blogs and News? Journalists abandoned objectivity because it made for bad ratings in print, radio, TV and the internet. Simple greed. They strive to make the news more entertaining so they get more attention that they can direct towards their advertisers. Ad companies call these eyeballs and give the most revenue to the outlets that get them the most eyeballs.
Blogs, on the other hand, free to be as objective as they please. If they do not want to be, great! If they ever get as dry and dull as their objectivity increase, I probably won't read that many.
As far as comparing Palin bashing with Stewart bashing, don't. In my humble, non-objective opinion Jon Stewart's show is ony tiny step above a Saturday cartoon show. If Newsbusters is about news shows, they ought to stop reporting on him and those other two nobodies on Comedy Central.
IdahoJim
http://idahoandy.net
Well, at that point, what can I say?
Submitted by Sgore on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 6:14pm.
If you truly feel objectivity need not be a concern when it comes to the kind of reporting blogs do, then I'm not really sure I can convince you of any other part of my argument. I don't agree with you, but I don't begrudge you for disagreeing. I'm still hoping for a direct response from Noel Sheppard, but, it's looking like I won't be getting one at this point, unfortunately. My entire argument rests on the idea that double standards are wrong and steps should be taken to make sure they do not fall into a person's judgment, but If he agrees with you, and truly doesn't believe a system of objective standards is important to the kind of media criticism he does, then it pretty much renders all my points moot, sadly. I personally feel that caring about objectivity is the foundation that sincere reporting is built on. I was hoping I would at least find some agreement on that, but I'm sorry that I can't.
I really do thank all of you for talking with me. It was a intellectually interesting experience, and I say that with complete sincerity. I don't know if you'll believe me on that, but I do mean it. Some of you probably still don't believe I am who I say I am. I usually avoid posting on the more partisan blogs because I'm afraid I'll be shouted down, or my arguments will go ignored, but I'm glad I posted here today, and it was nice meeting you all. There were some digs at my expense, but I didn't mind, and regardless, you do seem to be kind-hearted people. Thanks again for your time. -Sgore
Forsoothe!
Submitted by Rukus on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 5:18pm.
.
Cmon, Noel, stop hiding.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 2:42pm.
LOL.
Suddenly its about
Submitted by tombaker on Wed, 06/22/2011 - 8:39pm.
Suddenly its about personality and not content. Stewart points out many times where FOX has their story screwed up. Heck if you don't recognize that O'Reilly thinks that what comes out of his mouth is the gospel you have not been watching.
Now Maddow and Wallace think that Stewart is doing the same job as them. Mocking those in Government is not a replacement of it. Its just that FOX news gets its panties in a bunch if you mock them.