• Semi-old fake gold: John Stewart runs in circles around Bill O'Reilly while O'Reilly tries to Belitt
    31 replies, posted
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=745RU6QLtUw[/media] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUFSobtvydo[/media] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i17pZMOfw0Q[/media] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2CvnJivz4g[/media] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC15BUYyRDQ[/media] It's pretty much just O'Reilly doing one of two things: A/ "You're stupid because i really don't understand what this means, Jon!" B/ Cuts off Jon's response whenever he got enough to go all out of context in re-runs of individual clips. It's pretty awesome how Jon can just stay the course. I'd have rage quit miles before.
Jon is a cool guy and his show is funny, so it's no doubt he can walk all over the O'reilly character
Woah fuck John Stewart is smart [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] This can't be as good as him on Crossfire though where he actually got the show cancelled
O'Reilly's an idiot, Stewart runs a comedy show and is more educated about the news more than the host of the apparently #1 watched news show in America.
I like John Stewart, it's too bad his show is shitty now, it's probably the writers fault. I just watch the colbert report mostly and sometimes I watch the daily show in hopes they'll start being funny again
[video=youtube;3_vh_GjaeRs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_vh_GjaeRs&feature=related[/video] Colbert was on too, but Stewart is quite the academic.
jon stewart looks like he's having so much fun
[QUOTE=smurfy;37148569]Woah fuck John Stewart is smart [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] This can't be as good as him on Crossfire though where he actually got the show cancelled[/QUOTE] Link?
fake gold? what?
If i could compare choices on getting ones news to a diet, finding and researching or reading multiple news sources to figure out whats going on is like having a healthy diet, not getting any news is like being lazy and not caring what you eat/not overeating but still being lazy, and following Fox News is like getting diabetes, being too stupid to listen to a doctor and then shoving your face full of cookies and drinking nothing but soda.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE[/media]
[QUOTE=blacksam;37149472][video=youtube;3_vh_GjaeRs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_vh_GjaeRs&feature=related[/video] Colbert was on too, but Stewart is quite the academic.[/QUOTE] "Y'know what i hate about people who say shit about you bill?" "No, what?" "They never give you credit for how loud you say it, or for how long. they just don't understand the effort it takes to deny reality! You deserve the credit man!" Lol... [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Jacklus2.0;37150516][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE[/media][/QUOTE] Is this really how news work in USA? Holy fuck, they're more retarded than i ever thought. People here defending that must be utterly brainwashed. The literally most sane guy in the country is running COMEDY and is now having to lecture news networks on how news/ debates actually work... Wow... It's Less fucking accurate, factually, than Jon Stewart's comedy show. Less accurate than actual satire. If "factual" media is more absurd than satire, does the real satire then become a better source? [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] I looked this up. IT turns out that there's litterally such a phenomenon in USA as "the thinking public". REally? THis is how retarded they are on average, that the actual average people, with evaluation skills get totally separated on par with philosophical denominations? Really?
I fucking love how he pulls out the easter riot of 1916.
[QUOTE=Jacklus2.0;37150516][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE[/media][/QUOTE] Yeah that's the one. Half way through, the audience turns on the show and starts applauding Stewart, the ratings took a massive dive right after that episode and it was cancelled a few months later [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] There it is, 6:00 that's the moment when the audience decides he's right, the show's shit
This is so hard to watch.
[QUOTE=Jackald;37150164]I've never heard of Jon Stewart before, but this guy seems quite entertaining to watch.[/QUOTE] what [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] what
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;37152538]what [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] what[/QUOTE] [img]http://dev.vertinode.nl/flags/gb.png[/img]
John Stewart is pretty cool, I actually like his show better than the Colbert report.
I love jon stewart, the daily show is fucking hilarious and he's a really smart guy.
[QUOTE=smurfy;37152845][img]http://dev.vertinode.nl/flags/gb.png[/img][/QUOTE] People in the US know the British TV hosts...
O'Reilly spent that long with a live one on one with Stewart? Jesus.
It's fun watching them both go at it. Even though I disagree with O'reilly on a bunch of things you can tell he isn't stupid.
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;37154707]O'Reilly spent that long with a live one on one with Stewart? Jesus.[/QUOTE] I halfway expected him to tag in Rush Limbaugh halfway through or something.
I don't see how o'reilly tried to belittle stewart? if anything, stewart did it more to him and interrupted him more that said, stewart owns
[QUOTE=Aman VII;37154837]It's fun watching them both go at it. Even though I disagree with O'reilly on a bunch of things you can tell he isn't stupid.[/QUOTE] What, really? O'Reilly is only good at being snide and manipulative. He never offers counter-arguments that hold up and whenever he's shown the holes, he cuts him short and changes subject. That's a shallow imitation of journalism. American information broadcasts are equal to Europe's most sensationalist tabloids. He eve outright verbally assaults the Colbert guy, which is just unbelievably juvenile and unprofessional. That is literally the same shit Jon just called out Crossfire on. Being a tabloid pretending to be educative. I can't actually believe that he didn't ask them what if their paycheck wasn't for providing news/debate and then ask them why, then, they deliver a tabloid cirkus where no one gets any screen time. This is literally holding a debate for clear answers, yet cutting off the answer before it's clearly elaborated. It's like taking rumors and serving them as facts. Fox likely calls this enhanced news. The rest of call it shit journalism or opinionated bullshit. [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=BrickInHead;37154955]I don't see how o'reilly tried to belittle stewart? if anything, stewart did it more to him and interrupted him more that said, stewart owns[/QUOTE] What, really? Both Crossfire AND Bill constantly cut him off. He never got to finish a point or elaborate when they didn't get it before they just rambled on. It's not really for nothing that Colbert called it the No-spin zone. These peopler seem to perceive themselves as the centre of everything. THEY know better!
[QUOTE=Bomimo;37155043]What, really? Both Crossfire AND Bill constantly cut him off. He never got to finish a point or elaborate when they didn't get it before they just rambled on. It's not really for nothing that Colbert called it the No-spin zone. These peopler seem to perceive themselves as the centre of everything. THEY know better![/QUOTE] I didn't mention crossfire because crossfire is different than O'Reilly. And if you think that O'Reilly was being more of a dick to Stewart than Stewart was to him, you're watching it through rose tinted glasses, lol. You can hear him trying to interrupt O'Reilly numerous times and stopping himself. And he often just flat out does it. The scoffs and digs at O'Reilly get laughed off because Stewart's a comedian, while the scoffs and digs at Stewart get pronounced because O'Reilly puts himself out there as a "trusted news source," someone to be taken seriously. But you can tell they still have the joking relationship by the end, because if you've watched all of the interviews with O'Reilly on Stewarts show it cements the statement that O'Reilly likes Stewart. i'm not saying O'Reilly is immutable or amazing, but don't talk shit about him just because you disagree with what he's saying, and don't make him out to be something he's not. there's plenty of instances of o'reilly cutting off plenty of people, he just very rarely does it to stewart because he actually has respect for him. and as far as changing topics i think that's more because of the fact that you can't go overwhelmingly deep into one subject in just 40 minutes, and if anything i think that was to stewarts benefit as it demonstrated his ability to carry himself in a wide array of political issues. o'reilly only really changed the subject once or twice, and that was usually to get them back on track (as demonstrated by the cut version of part 3 vs the uncut part 4) [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] btw can you link to this "thinking public phenomena" that you're talking about? because i'm interested and can't find anything on google or scholar.google.com
[QUOTE=Bomimo;37150547] I looked this up. IT turns out that there's litterally such a phenomenon in USA as "the thinking public". [/QUOTE] I tried to google this but i couldn't find it, wanna help me out?
[QUOTE=BrickInHead;37155275]I didn't mention crossfire because crossfire is different than O'Reilly. And if you think that O'Reilly was being more of a dick to Stewart than Stewart was to him, you're watching it through rose tinted glasses, lol. You can hear him trying to interrupt O'Reilly numerous times and stopping himself. And he often just flat out does it. The scoffs and digs at O'Reilly get laughed off because Stewart's a comedian, while the scoffs and digs at Stewart get pronounced because O'Reilly puts himself out there as a "trusted news source," someone to be taken seriously. But you can tell they still have the joking relationship by the end, because if you've watched all of the interviews with O'Reilly on Stewarts show it cements the statement that O'Reilly likes Stewart. i'm not saying O'Reilly is immutable or amazing, but don't talk shit about him just because you disagree with what he's saying, and don't make him out to be something he's not. there's plenty of instances of o'reilly cutting off plenty of people, he just very rarely does it to stewart because he actually has respect for him. and as far as changing topics i think that's more because of the fact that you can't go overwhelmingly deep into one subject in just 40 minutes, and if anything i think that was to stewarts benefit as it demonstrated his ability to carry himself in a wide array of political issues. o'reilly only really changed the subject once or twice, and that was usually to get them back on track (as demonstrated by the cut version of part 3 vs the uncut part 4) [/QUOTE] Yeah. The ending part really underlined that it wasn't all out murderous warfare. I get that O'Reilly is making points, but if you dig deep enough, which Stewart was, you get to a point where Bill's thinking is all for show. The whole thing really ended up showing that it was all a game to Bill and he knows he's just playing around. Then he needs to stop pretending to be a news source if he's actually putting on a show instead. Jon kept being adamant that he's a comedian and even constantly downplayed how much he's actually got a clue about this in order to respect that O'Reilly has a superior background. But the thing really boils down to A comedian arguing very strongly against a man who claims to be a journalist, yet scoffs at objectivity. Comedy is extremely subjective, yet the "clown" was more objective. He didn't claim to know anything he didn't know. he cited reason. Bill doesn't cite reason, he spends a ton of time assuming and concluding. That's what's damaging to the public. They get their conclusions either outright served or heavily implied: as per the "I ain't saying your mom is a whore, i'm just saying she fucks people for money". Going deep into a subject is exactly what these progammes should do. If they can't, then they need to slice off other subjects and run those another day BECAUSE(!!!) starting an issue and only going halfway there is extremely misleading and ends in people reacting due to misinformation. Sure people should evaluate it all for themselves, but then you can't do what he does and at the same time proclaim your self the ultimate Go TO source of important information and what's going on in the world. You can't do something half-way and pretend you're done. European media doesn't do that unless it's labeled tabloid. Tabloids leave out vital information for gain, informative media doesn't. That's fraud. As for the "thinking public" Tangibly, it's mentioned in the follow-up shitstorm to the crossfire closure, but it's not the real term. The real term is not attributed to a group, but to an information-processing technique: Critical thinking, Logical thinking. Call it what you want. It's everything Fox discourages. If you don't get the conclusion they force you towards, then you're insane. Derailing a discussion to further a point without supporting the point with supporting points is NOT something that Critical thinkers find believable. Many here perceive me as having a huge problem with America in general, mostly because i'm seriously general about it. But that's attributed to the fact that, much like Jon in this interview, i gave up presenting my points to anyone here because whatever i say that makes sense, someone is going to go all sensational and decide that something irrelevant to the point that American culture is way too sensationalistic and spoon fed, Makes me wrong. Be it my eyebrows, my grammar or the fact that i don't play a lot of TF2. This is what the whole "thinking public" references was about to them. I Can't express what i actually think because no one will hear me out or even accept my basis for this conclusion. All they do is sweep it aside with: "but i am sane, therefore you're wrong!" Well that's hardly much evidence, is it? 49% of America goes to fox for news. How many of those then just swallow it up? That's a solid number. No one wants to acknowledge the reasonable background for the conclusion that It's kinda bonkers, then i don't have much of an argument, do i? Critical thinking almost seems like a sin in the south. They even vaguely reference this many times towards the end. "Let's take one square where you're at and one where i'm at..." "No, let's go to manhattan and then to the south!" [B]It's stopped being about what actually makes sense and has started being about who yells harder. Who broadcasts it most and who decries/defames the evidence/person best.[/B] [U][B]So back to 40 minutes, because those paragraphs were all about that. if you don't take the goddamn time, then we get a skittish culture where everyone is in doubt, yet are determined that They're right simply because an influential person agrees with them. It's bred a culture where what O'Reilly, Stewart, Elton John, Madonna, Rush Limbaugh and Al Gore's words weigh more than what actual experts on the subject has to say. Be it social, media, physics, fiscal, linguistic, historical, mythological, evolutional, theological or warfare experts. Their words are void because "Me and mah friends got all dis figured.!"[/B][/U] TL;DR: (You just proved my point really, but whatever. At least read the bolded part...) People fool themselves into experts based on opinions and understandings they didn't even form themselves. It's an insane circus. Now i made a giant wall of text about it. [editline]9th August 2012[/editline] They claim to deliver their material in a way that encourages people to thing. But they really just deliver their material so people can be in doubt. No matter how easily digestible the real issue was, they overcomplicate it to make a show or oversimplify things that needs way more consideration. If anyone here has ever tried making a flowchart on ANYTHING, they'll know what i mean. Your house doesn't just start as a pile of bricks, it starts way before and it doesn't END as a pile of rubble, it ends way later.
[QUOTE=Amiga OS;37157324]Yes but American TV is fucking awful.[/QUOTE] Stop watching all of the shitty channels like Fox. AMC, FX, USA Network, etc.
oh wow, haven't seen this before. that was glorious!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.