The Decline of The Daily Show
 

Have any Daily Show fans recently turned on the show like i have? I used to watch that ruckus every single night, without fail, but now I couldn't care less. It irritates me. Isn't Stewart just kind of a douchebag now?

I mean, to be fair, I don't think it's possible to be a cable news pundit and not become a total douche, sooner rather than later. Rachel Maddow, for example, is a person I really dug when she was paired up with Pops Buchannan on MSNBC. But now she's got her own show and she's become almost as bad as Olbermann. Hannity, Lou Dobbs, Chris Matthews, the list goes on.

Jon Stewart, a pretty funny guy, has not been immune to this douchetastic phenomenon, even though he puts on the fake cable news. The Daily Show, i think, worked it's way up and at some point over the past couple of years, became the sort of voice and outlet for a very particular demographic. Realizing the newfound reach and cache of his show, Stewart's been getting more and more self-important and it's horrible. The Daily Show's always been overly mean-spirited but, at this point, it's become something else entirely. Stewart throws some misinformed nugget out there, makes it sound like a punchline, puts on silly face and the audience laughs. It's not even funny anymore. Stewart hides behind the hypocritical notion that he's simply pointing out the absurdities, yet whether he likes it or not, he's lumped himself in with all those ridiculous caricatures of real newsmen/women. They cherry pick out of context clips, laugh at them and then defend themselves by saying: hey, it's just a comedy show. That'd be all well and good if it were just some regular ol' comedy show, but it ain't

How say you?

Watch the Colbert Report.

What do you mean by this?
Besides the show doesn't seem to be getter any worse.

The Colbert Report is, will, and will always be better, in my opinion.

present, future, future

as opposed to the ever-cliche

past, present, future...

I like it.

Oh for Christ's sake not again.

Poking fun of the news media while having an opinion of his own. Subjective political humor on a POLITICAL COMEDY SHOW? What f*cking blasphemy.

Honestly, I think Obama is making Stewart's job hard. I mean, Bush, now there was a comedy gold mine, but Obama just doesn't deliver that kind of hilarious material that the Daily Show needs to thrive.

Stewart and Colbert has done the best they can however to point out all the lies and contradictions Obama has made so far, he's no Bush that's for sure, but rest assured Jon and Steve are keeping an eye on him and everytime he f*cks up, they're on it.

They're the only (intentional) comedians going after Obama right now and for that they deserve credit.

would one of you ****ing pussys actually tell me what your ****ing problem is with Matthews?

You love you some Hardball huh B?

Absolutely.I feel like people who are actually politically center love that show. And Pat Buchanan kicks ass.

I love Buchanan too, but every time I say so someone tells me it's because I am conservative slappy.

I'll admit I've tuned in much more regularly to Matthews since you're recommendation and I have to say it's pretty good as far a shows of that format go.

And the Daily Show and Colbert are both garbage to me, recycled Jokes with new headlines thrown in, it's a longer, unfunnier weekend update five nights a week.

Matthews as in Chris? Well he talks a little more than he should. Sometimes his guests can't get much of a word in. I mean, he's pressing, which I kinda like, but it gets in the way of letting his guests talk.

I don't mind him too much though. My dad certainly hates it.

The thing about the show that I appreciate is that you're never able to predict where he'll come down, because he actually thinks and goes on opinion.

Yeah and he fully admits that. What he doesn't let his guests do is get off on talking points, long winded points, or bull**** either. And he's said on his show, when you come on, regardless of where you are, his goal is to tear you down. The people who know what they're talking about are fine. Those who don't are embarrassed.

They had John Ensign on pre-scandle and he was talking about the Iran Resolution Congress passed, and he drilled him about how it compromises out Foreign Policy for a good 7 minutes, and then at the end he says "I think you guys did a brave thing, and I think its a very good position, I respect what ya did and for coming out here today"

I'd have never given him Meet the Press, but after Russert left us, he's the only guy out there actually grilling people.

Good point. That is all.

As far as Matthews goes, he's essentially MSNBC's answer to O'Reilly. Self-important blowhard who hosts a show that never accomplishes anything. Not wholly his fault, as that's the way cable news is set up right now. They tell one side what they wanna hear and tell the other side everything they'd expect to hear. But, still, he doesn't look at things rationally, he's stubborn, and he never admits when he's wrong. Plus, he thinks he's a lot more perceptive than he actually is. He might've been nice to John Ensign, sure, but I'm still pretty confident he's a creep. I just hope he doesn't run for office, because I'd hate to see his ego get fed any more

Anywho, I agree with the op on pretty much everything he said. This is in the wrong sub-forum, though

Why don't you just ask Matthews himself?

Though you might not understand him, what with Obama's dick being in his mouth and all.

Meh w/e I still watch both....I mainly watch The Daily Show for the correspondent segments because they are so much more funnier than Jon Stewart.

I also agree that Stephen Colbert is full of win and 10xfunnier than Jon.

everything else that the OP is saying is just straight up nonsense and thinking too deeply into something that isn't even an issue.

Says the man who watches neither MSNBC, Hardball, nor Countdown with Keith Olbermann.

Matthews is absolutly not the answer to O'Reilly and you'd know that if you watch both of the shows without the prism of the Daily Show or the Young Turks.

"Hes got less perspective than he thinks he does"

"he's a creep"

and you're dope. None of those have anything to do with the show, they aren't facts, and they are your ill-informaed opinion.

And he's already run for office once after working in Ralph Naders office on his return from the Peace Corp. But you wouldn't know that because Jon Stewart didn't tell you.

He's said repeatedly he's not running again. His job is journalism. If you had half as much integrity as he did, you'd have looked at Wikipedia at least before you came in here and lobbed me a softball.


You're the Pitchfork of Political commentary. Congrats, all snark and no actual point. You're now in league with Tony here.

If anyone has a clue, feel free to debate me. otherwise just go be pissy its not 1963 anymore somewhere else.

Well, in my defense, I probably watch a lot more cable news than you do. And I made this thread to say how sick I'm getting of Jon Stewart, so I do think I can see things from outside the prism of The Almighty Daily Show. But, other than than that, you're right on. Also, hasn't Chris Matthews said repeatedly his longtime dream was to be a member of the Senate?

I mean, listen, you're the one who asked one of us "****ing pussys" to actually tell you "what our ****ing problem is with Matthews." That's all I was doing. It's just my opinion, ill-informed or otherwise, and I might be wrong, sure. It seems to me that you suffer from a lot of the same personality flaws Matthews does, though

I should be so lucky.

In all seriousness though, your opinion is one thing. To flex objective as if its fact is quite another. What I'd love to know is how you think Olbermann isn't a better comparison to O'Reilly.

You claim to watch more Cable news than me, but I don't know how much of its sinking in. What cable news do you watch? Who do you watch?

Regardless of who's opinion falls where, you painted punditry, punditry you clearly don't watch, with a broad stroke. I'm asserting that theres still good jorunalism exhibited out there, and I used examples.

You're welcome to do the same. I suggest you Youtube a few shows quick so you have some reference point.

I mean, they're all pretty similar and blowhardy, but I think Olbermann is a better analogue to Hannity in that they're both these sort of calamitous doom-sayers who overstate everything and who always feel like they know more about things than you do. But, yeah, again, all these guys are essentially the same clown.

And, hey, how could you possibly rail on me for not being objective when you're a flippin Chris Matthews fan?

Hmmmm, well I check in on every cable news networks' biggest shows semi-regularly. I cringe the whole way through and I dislike I think all of the hosts on a personal level but, for whatever reason, I still watch every show. That was one of my points in my first post - how the cable news pundit is given this platform and, without fail, becomes an unlikable, self-serving, self-aggrandizing douche. I used Rachel Maddow as an example. Rachel Maddow was charming and informed when she was paired up with Pops Buchanan, but ever since she landed her own show, she's morphed into another Olbermann. Lou Dobbs, Chris Matthews & Sean Hannity are the worst, I think

Well, look, I'm all about broad strokes and generalizations, but I really do think the 24 hour news cycle has many flaws

And these studio shows with the one blowhard in the middle are the absolute last place I'd look to find "good journalism"

I know its the last place you'd look, I've been telling you ya don't watch these shows for the entire conversation.

1. You call Pat Buchanan "Pops." I don't know if thats supposed to be funny or clever but it says enough to me about your positions.

2. Using Rachel Maddow as an example of bad punditry is not helping your arguement. She's easily one of the least aggressive pundits, with the least interuptive or gotcha-style interviews around.

What i'm gathering from this is that you had a bad experience, or are rallying against something that happened once, because saying Dobbs, Hannity, and Matthews are the same is lunacy.

Dobbs attempted to ressurect his career on the immigration issue just as it was ending. He's not comprable to any other pundit. Politically he's also a mismash of libretarian conservatism, and lefty populism. No other pundit is alligned with him point for point.

Hannity has at least been consistent, though he's a talking-point pop-up on the Republican's Outlook calendar. Hannity is decidedly on the right and never flaggs from it, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

I want you to tell me what points Matthews is with these guys on. He's more well-versed in history than they are, he's got more political experience than either of them do, and he always has high-level guests from both sides of the spectrum.

I'm a fan because he's good at what he does. He does interupt, sometimes too much, but this isn't music we're talking. Its not opinion based only. He does a job and he does it well. You don't become a fan of Matthews because you share an opinion, he'll almost always let you down in that regard. You become a fan of Hardball because its a damn good show that covers the meat of an issue. For all he interupts, he's getting guests to come to a point.

And if you watch all the shows, are you tivo'ing or are you just watching roughly 10 to 14 hours of punditry a day?

Three of them are on at the same time, all with at least an hour long show. Each station has roughly 4 people saying their peace.

We're to believe you watch "all of them" on a regular basis?

https://scontent.fbed1-1.fna.fbcdn.n...66&oe=5D393C4F
https://boxden.com/smilies/2umMvfa.png

Love Noah. Check out his episode of Coffee in Cars if you're a fan.

Trevor Noah's shaping up his routine into something that's actually funny. In his first season on the show, it seemed like his punchlines were all reliant on the applause sign in the studio.

ok :)

i thought he was just rough around the edges at first but hes getting better at getting me wanting to watch his videos on youtube :pimp:

I used to love Stewart, Colbert and Bill Maher when I was in high school and I in no way shape or form gave a **** about politics back then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqNGRGQrpw0

can a mod change the thread title to "The Daily Show Thread" :o:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I30_q6Tjaxk

This show is gonna keep declining probably. Stewart was the best. Noah was not nearly as funny and his jokes were practically indistinguishable from the rest of the late night comedy shows of the time (Kimmel, Fallon, Seth Meyers) - and now with Noah leaving, it will probably get worse. Probably my pessimism - and I can't say I'm a regular viewer any more.

Stephen Colbert late show is pretty good, Kimmel and fallon and meyers too. But I dont watch any of them anymore since I haven't had cable tv since 2013, I just sometimes watch what they upload to YouTube.

I enjoy Colbert the most but I've been getting stuck in compilations of Craig Ferguson. He is very funny. His guests are always pretty great too.

Craig Ferguson has been out of the game for years at this point but he was the only late night host worth a damn since Conan went to cable.

I gotta disagree on Colbert, he's probably the most unfunny, unlikeable host on TV these days. Which is sad, because on the Colbert Report, he used to be a lot funnier. I forgot about Conan. He's funny - John Oliver is pretty great too, even if his accent can wear on me.

Yep, I also enjoy S Colbert, but like Mindfulness, limited to what is uploaded to Youtube. Most often, I just watch his monologue; fairly short, well-written and a quick take on the issues of the day.

Kimmel, and Meyers' "Closer Look" also turn up on Youtube but are not as funny as Colbert imo. Both of them make the mistake of cutting to an "off-stage" straightman who is completely unfunny: Kimmel has a plump Latino guy, Meyers a guy holding up prompt cards, but for me they add nothing to the humour of the segments.

:laughing: well, this is very hurtful to us Brits! ;) Actually, I'm always impressed by Americans' willingness to laugh along with J Oliver, even though he is so often ridiculing something going on in the US. John Oliver wears on me too, though: not the accent, but the constant call to feel angry, then more angry, then even more angry, but I suppose that's inevitable when he is, quite rightly, exposing the injustices of the world.

The only thing good about Kimmel is the mean tweets bit and that is other people's content.

Yeah, I don't care who criticizes America - as long as you make it funny. Which is I suppose the big difference between Oliver and Colbert.

Here's a recent Colbert classic:

I think he occasionally does some funny interviews as well. I was gonna say he's got The Roots as well, but then realized that's actually Fallon.

Well, that clip really makes your point, SGR! Complete filler material, embarrassing to someone like me who has just been singing Colbert's praises. My tip: stick to the monologues, which have more actual jokes per minute.