On Dilemma XXIV - Ethically (at least in my religion) it is wrong to pass along ANYTHING that will reflect poorly on someone or some institution, whether it's true or not. Since by this standard, few if any journalists have ethics, let's dispense with talk of it.
In this case, all you've got is your credibility. Passing along things that turn out to be untrue will hurt your credibility. Or should. There seems to be a Republican exception to this principle operating now. But I doubt you qualify for it.
Of course, the Page Six crowd will be yelling "Dish, Dish!" right about now.
Hope all are able to read Frank Rich today.
Only substantiated rumors here, sil vous plait. There's enough of the lesser kind already.
Notice Guarino's bias on this?
"Bray's postings were revealed by Media Matters for America, a liberal group which employs ex-Democratic staffers."
Somehow he failed to mention that Media Matters is run be an ex-REPUBLICAN political activist and author, David Brock.
Re: "Is Jon Stewart too smart for his own good?"
When you get right down to it; Jon Stewart is basically just an amiable idiot reading jibs and jabs and jokes from a teleprompter; who then interviews 'guest idiots' who [as you pointed out in your article] are plugging something for the 'Daily Show' audience of cackling idiots who are sick and tired of ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN News Shows as well as the somewhat worn-out Leno and Letterman interview formats.
Hopefully Jon's future will not be like what Leno has become - How many times have you watched Leno and guessed [beforehand] the punchline of whatever lame jokes he puts out at the beginning of the show? Or felt like puking while watching Jay's sidekick with the guitar giggling like a jackal at every single lame joke?
While I'll agree that the 'Daily Show' can be humorous at times; the show itself [and Jon] – much like the rest of TV and Cable shows – accomplishes absolutely nothing. Whether or not the show has "have reached the top of the heap" there's no doubting its influence as a "news source for young viewers," quite the coveted advertising crowd this show targets.
So Dan, let me get this straight: Jon Stewart holds one of the largest TV viwerships in one of the most coveted demographics, he published a #1 bestselling satire, he's a darling of media & entertainment pro's, and you're questioning whether he is "too smart for his own good?"
Too smart for what? To host a show like Harball or This Week? To have his own Talk Radio show and web log? To write for the Phoenix?Stewart has already made it --far beyond what others achieve in a lifetime. He's an unqualified success influencing millions of people and making millions of dollars in the upper echelons of the entertainment world.
Stewart's an entertainer, not a journalist, and nothing lasts forever in the entertainment biz. So what if he doesn't do flawless interviews or if he eventually loses popularity?
Methinks you nitpick too much. Perhaps a tad jelous?
Blogger doesn't do trackbacks (as far as I can tell), so this is just to note that Dana Stevens mentions this entry (approvingly) over in her Slate "surfergirl" blog.
After Reading the article on Jon Stewart Yesterday, it was interesting to watch him interview Ari Fleischer last night.
Was Stewart so star struck as to not see that Fleischer was handing him some good material?
Stewart: So is this White House deliberately more secretive than previous administration...
Fleischer: Yes.
Pause while Stewart, taken aback by Fleischer's answer, recovers with some mugging of faux self congratulation.
Then Stewart doesn't even ask a follow up?!!!
Was it my imagination or was Ari just begging Stewart to get more out of him?
I don't know if anybody else saw this.
It kind of proves the argument, not just Dan Kennedy, but some others have made.
The interview segment is uncomfortable and awkward for Stewart and really adds nothing to the show.
The first 15 minutes though, are pure gold.
Dino Ironbody? Long live Rob Courdy.
re Dilemma XXIV: interesting how "outing" closeted gays by conservatives is hateful but doing so (re Bush Admin. operatives) in Media Log (via links) is in bounds. WTF?
Hey, Anon --name the conservatives who have "outed" closeted gays... there aren't any.
The problem is hate-mongering conservative bigots who blame gays for 9/11 (Jerry Falwell), who thank god for AIDS (Rev. Fred Phelps), who compare gays to alcoholics (Pat Buchanan), Nazis (Pat Robertson) and beastiality (Rick Santorum), and who call gays "biological errors" (Dr. Laura), "fag" (Dick Armey) and "dung eating dogs" (Rev. Moon).
The Repubilcan gays who publicly support these bigots while secretly maintaining gay lives (or working as gay prostitutes) must be exposed for the hypocrites they are.
-M. Garrity
Hey, Anon --name the conservatives who have "outed" closeted gays... there aren't any.
The problem is hate-mongering conservative bigots who blame gays for 9/11 (Jerry Falwell), who thank god for AIDS (Rev. Fred Phelps), who compare gays to alcoholics (Pat Buchanan), Nazis (Pat Robertson) and beastiality (Rick Santorum), and who call gays "biological errors" (Dr. Laura), "fag" (Dick Armey) and "dung eating dogs" (Rev. Moon).
The Repubilcan gays who publicly support these bigots while secretly maintaining gay lives (or working as gay prostitutes) must be exposed for the hypocrites they are.
-M. Garrity
Hey, Anon --name the conservatives who have "outed" closeted gays... there aren't any.
The problem is hate-mongering conservative bigots who blame gays for 9/11 (Jerry Falwell), who thank god for AIDS (Rev. Fred Phelps), who compare gays to alcoholics (Pat Buchanan), Nazis (Pat Robertson) and beastiality (Rick Santorum), and who call gays "biological errors" (Dr. Laura), "fag" (Dick Armey) and "dung eating dogs" (Rev. Moon).
The Repubilcan gays who publicly support these bigots while secretly maintaining gay lives (or working as gay prostitutes) must be exposed for the hypocrites they are.
-M. Garrity
Hey, Anon --name the conservatives who have "outed" closeted gays... there aren't any.
The problem is hate-mongering conservative bigots who blame gays for 9/11 (Jerry Falwell), who thank god for AIDS (Rev. Fred Phelps), who compare gays to alcoholics (Pat Buchanan), Nazis (Pat Robertson) and beastiality (Rick Santorum), and who call gays "biological errors" (Dr. Laura), "fag" (Dick Armey) and "dung eating dogs" (Rev. Moon).
The Repubilcan gays who publicly support these bigots while secretly maintaining gay lives (or working as gay prostitutes) must be exposed for the hypocrites they are.
-M. Garrity
M.Garrity- check 8:41 post on Tues. 3-1 before you get too convinced W.H. folks aren't being outed. If it's wrong, it's wrong, regardless of who does it. Simple, eh? (P.S. push the left button the mouse ONCE, please).
MEDIA LOG ARCHIVES
Dan Kennedy is senior writer and media critic for the Boston Phoenix.
