356
submitted 5 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Daily Show host blasts media for treating the "most mundane bulls**t" as "Earth-shattering"

Comedian Jon Stewart on Monday launched into a fiery rant aimed at the media coverage of former President Donald Trump's hush money trial in the latest episode of "The Daily Show."

Stewart spent a portion of Monday's segment lambasting media outlets for their coverage of Trump's criminal trial unfolding in Manhattan, in which prosecutors have alleged that he falsified business records to cover up a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 election.

“This trial will obviously be a test of the fairness of the American legal system, but it’s also a test of the media’s ability to cover Donald Trump in a responsible way. A task they have acknowledged they’ve performed poorly in the past,” Stewart said before showing a montage of clips from notable outlets like CNN and MSNBC acknowledging that they need to give less obsessive attention to the former president's every antic.

all 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world 86 points 5 months ago

I've missed Stewart's ability to sum up stories in such a grounded way. Oh, how I wish that we had him from 2016-2020.

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 57 points 5 months ago

At the same time, his leaving was also a success story in itself. He had all the money he ever needed in life, he was at the top of his game except just was exhausted working that continual grind, and was feeling his age so unlike e.g. any member of Congress, decided to voluntarily relinquish his power in order to create room for new people to step up, while he went on to blaze entirely new pioneer territory outside of mainstream TV, which was quite a risk even for someone like him. Wow... what a class act! 😍

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 33 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

And now that he's back he's only working Mondays, so he's got less risk of exhaustion and new people still get the rest of the week.

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 11 points 5 months ago

Unfortunately it's only slated to last until the election results... though this is one time that I hope things do not go as planned!:-P

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

Yeah, seems like a win-win. I remember someone joking with Oliver about how he only does it once a week or something. I like the rotating host thing - when they have people that are not just substituting BEING LOUD for being funny or insightful. Having John for one day of the week and letting others take the helm other days is a nice blend.

Jordan Klepper needs a LOT more air time. He had his own show for like a hot minute and it was great but maybe it just didn't have the numbers so it didn't last long.

Also - where the heck is Samantha Bee and her husband these days?

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 10 points 5 months ago

Just that the new people that should have stepped up where mere shadows of Jon, unfortunately

[-] rigatti@lemmy.world 22 points 5 months ago

John Oliver stepped up, although not on the Daily Show itself. I'm always excited to have something new ruined for me every week.

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 2 points 5 months ago

Afaict he is the last "investigative journalist" left in America, though he is biased himself, yet who else comes close that amount of depth?

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

There are loads of investigative journalists they just don't have the audience size these satirists have.

Propublica does insane work. PBS Frontline as well. Amanapour. Many stories break from the likes of WaPo as well.

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 2 points 4 months ago

Yeah, and CGP Grey, Ian Danskin's Innuendo Studios, I enjoy the Crash Course series though more classes than topical, and Kurzgesagt is amazing though has their own type of bias.

But if I want to know something about e.g. Boeing or train derailments or a deep dive into student loans, or something I did not even know that I wanted to know about e.g. the current status of ethical farming wrt chocolate, or food delivery apps, he has it all covered. So it is not only the depth that is fascinating, but the width and breadth of coverage as well (both wrt a single video and moreover the number of those total).

Unfortunately it mixes in opinion and interpretation directly integrated alongside the delivery of the facts. So it is funny (juvenile), informative (truly!), and overbearing all at once, and seems designed to leave you feeling more informed than you actually are upon watching.:-(

Still, they offer so very many videos on so very many topics, and I have never seen anything these days that comes close - e.g. their Boeing video describes more in 10 of its 30 minutes than a typical TV "documentary" these days (at least, of the type my mother watches), and then it goes on to cover essentially what a full length feature film documentary would cover, all in something digestible while eating a lunch (or two). And I respect that so much - that takes effort and skill that is hard to match.

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 9 points 5 months ago

Tbf, those are some big shoes to try to fill:-) (I mean, not like, literally... but you know what I mean!)

[-] IHawkMike@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

Yep. I appreciate and respect Trevor and all of the other hosts, but it just wasn't the same.

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 6 points 5 months ago

Trevor's standup specials are all really good, both before and after he came to America. He has a strong act, talking about his personal life and responses to that.

But he wasn't as good a fit in a team environment talking about mainstream American matters, except ironically when the show was "over" for the day and he talked more in his personal voice again. I strongly hope to see him land somewhere else where I can enjoy him again - I'd definitely keep following his comedy specials.

Though nothing compares to Jon Stewart being back in the saddle again!!! 🎉 🤩

[-] negativenull@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

He was the biggest loss during the last presidency for sure.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

I wish we still had Trevor Moore.

Yes, a different Trevor.

E.g. https://youtu.be/fn3g21Yfd18

Can you imagine part 2 to that?

Or what he would do with the trump saga?

[-] nieceandtows@programming.dev 71 points 5 months ago

They don't care. As long as they get financial gain out of it, they don't mind. Whether Trump gets acquitted or convicted, they have their hands full covering either side's outrage for the next few years.

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 46 points 5 months ago

Jessica Williams‘ rebuttal was kind of legit though. Everything else in the news is miserable, and this case is pretty funny. Involves an orange jackass, a porn star, and opening testimony from a dude named pecker. Maybe is ok to have some trash reality TV at Trump’s expense.

[-] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 25 points 5 months ago

Sure, but that’s not what I want from the news.

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Even when I’m consuming my straitlaced NPR, I do enjoy a little Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me making fun of this case. Tragedy straight is pretty crushing. I need some comedy to sprinkled in so I don’t give up in complete despair.

[-] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

Sure, and you can get that from shows like The Daily Show on The Comedy Network.

The news is supposed to be informative.

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

The news has had stuff like this in it since the dawn of the printing press.

IMHO, the problem isn’t infotainment, it the quantity of infotainment.

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world -5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)
[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Eh it's 24/7 news.

Jon nailed it that covering this stuff isn't necessarily an issue unless something more important comes up.

And sure we could say these news outlets could cover a range of topics if not just teach civics when nothing is happening... But they're viewer/profit driven.

[-] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

But they're viewer/profit driven.

That’s the problem right there.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Absolutely. I didn't mean to sound like I'm excusing it as Jon also noted the problem is how everything is a crisis and breaking news and it just exhausts what actually is urgent.

[-] xc2215x@lemmy.world 30 points 5 months ago

Covering Trump gives them great ratings so they will do it.

[-] reagansrottencorpse@lemmy.ml 15 points 5 months ago

They don't give a fuck. That's one of the many reasons young people have turned away from mainstream stream media. I suspect that's why they want to take down TikTok as well. They can't control the narrative there.

[-] AlternateHuman02@kbin.social 18 points 5 months ago

While I agree, China controlling the narrative on their platform isn't a great option either.

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 6 points 5 months ago

That’s one of the many reasons young people have turned away from mainstream stream media.

It isn't just young people, it's basically anyone who understands that Media gets paid from views / clicks and that outrage is the single best generator of them. The horseshit is meters deep in coverage of everything political or politically related, not just Trump.

It doesn't matter whether you are watching Fox News, reading articles from Vox, or consuming CNN; every bit it of it is specifically crafted to get you outraged...because that's how media gets paid.

It's a vortex of flaming shit.

[-] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I disagree about Vox, most of what I see from them is fairly straight reporting with an obvious left-leaning bias. But as far as I can tell, they don't embellish facts and as far as clickbait goes, it's way way better than most news outlets.

This is their front page right now. Their headlines are refreshingly straightforward.

[-] Haggunenons@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I didn't want to read this article, and couldn't find a video about this article about a video from the media about how the media is spending too much time covering trump, but here is the original video that is about how the media is spending too much time covering trump that this article is about.

Edit: for clarity sake, that link is just to the Jon Stuart video that this article is talking about.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

I liked the bit between him and Jessica that followed.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

It showed some self-awareness I appreciated, and damn do they have good chemistry.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Broadcast Media doesnt care.

Broadcast Media spent 6 years salivating over the ratings that trump pulled in pre and post election in the 2020 election. It was like having multiple mass shootings a day, without the viewer burnout. (Which is why you dont hear much obsessive coverage about the multiple mass shootings a day anymore)

Broadcast Media will burn this country to the ground as long as it can continue to pull in the ratings and viewership

[-] crusa187@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago

It’s finally happening folks

The walls are closing in on Trump!!!

[-] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

The media have a vested interest in keeping him relevant, otherwise they're going to lose a ton of money when politics becomes boring again.

this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
356 points (98.6% liked)

politics

18894 readers
2957 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS