Amph [The Daily Show] Once Again With Jon Stewart (sometimes)

So Jon Stewart is quitting because he's sick of watching Fox News clips. Same reason I stopped watching his show.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/...y-fox-news-home-most-conservative-republicans

 

I'm pretty sure that he was just joking about the Fox news thing. I watched the episode where he said that and it didn't come across as his real reason.


Months ago, I listened to a NPR interview with Jon Stewart and they asked him, since Colbert was leaving the network, if he would ever consider moving on too. Jon got very emotional and suggested that, like Colbert did in his final few episodes, his current career had drained him of energy and taken him away from his family due to the hours of work involved. It seemed at that point, so soon after Colbert's show had ended, that he was indeed contemplating a departure from the Daily Show.

That interview revealed a better look into his reasons than a quick, obligatory skit about Fox News.

 

I'm watching the Daily Show and I'm wondering about these little interviews within the reports. Who gives these interviews? Are these people for real? Surely, when you hold an illiberal viewpoint and you get a call from the Daily Show team, you're going to think it fishy? So how do they actually get people to give the interviews - are those people a. very stupid, b. unfamiliar with the Daily Show, c. actors or d. overconfident?

 

It's a mixture of a, b, and d. Mostly d these days, I suspect, though I do vaguely remember one instance a couple of years ago where some guy said something really, really stupid during the interview and it tanked his (admittedly very local) political career.

 

I remember a couple on Colbert. There was one who thought the Ten Commandments were the Most Important Laws Ever and could only paraphrase about three. And there was that one Congressman Colbert goaded into saying, "I love cocaine." When news organizations started jumping on it, that was the only time I remember Colbert (not the character) being visibly annoyed. I don't think either of their careers tanked, though.

 

It's one of the most valuable aspects of the show and I sure hope it continues after Stewart's left, and that this Klepper guy stays.

 

Oh man, that is gruesome!
I suspect evil editing. Googling "daily show editing".

 

Yeah, the edits are pretty noticeable if you look for them. They never seem to misrepresent the person's point of view, but they'll do stuff for the sake of a joke (on the correspondent as often as on the subject).

 

The best Colbert interviews were: a) getting that Democratic House member to debate in defense of throwing kittens into wood chippers and b) the "better know a candidate" in a classic Dracula costume and accompanying makeup.

 

Easily my favorite daily show correspondent interview

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/dxhtvk/suppressing-the-vote

The guy got fired for his comments.

 

That's the one I was thinking of! The magic of the internet, or something.

 

Also while we're here, I think the best outcome is Aasif Mandvi replacing Stewart. He's the most Jon Stewart of all the current correspondents.

 

Those bits, all counted, were... two?
And, even though they were about our resident pet peeve (Americentrism), I thought they weren't that good - very acted, and the guy came across as vain instead of funny.

 

Middle aged white guys just can't catch a break.

 

Like Vivec, I would have rather had Mandvi. Noah hasn't been on the show long enough for my taste-- what, less than a year? I guess everyone more senior didn't want the job.

 

I think Jason Jones or Samantha Bee would've been my top picks, but I'm happy with Noah - but I mean, any pick they make is still a reluctant acceptance on my part because I don't want Stewart to leave.

 

That seems like the most likely theory to me. From what little I've seen of Trevor Noah, he's fine, but it's a bit surprising considering his relative position on the totem pole.

I do suspect we might've seen Larry Wilmore picked if he wasn't on The Nightly Show, though.

 

Based on the way that program runs, I doubt Wilmore had any interest in doing this style of program in the first place. He doesn't even seem to be that interested in comedy. Certainly, he's a funny man, but these shows subordinate any concerns about actual issues to comedic value, and it seems like he's attempting something more substantive than that.

 

Wilmore is fine, but the panels are terrible. They're usually dominated by people who don't know much, if anything, about the subject (the comedians) and they're way too short. Is he still doing the "keeping it 100" gimmick segment every episode? I stopped watching a few weeks into its run.

And I'm pretty sure that the format is just to differentiate it from the Daily Show/Colbert Report/Last Week Tonight. Comedy Central had tried panel shows before.