In the Media: The Blogs Must Be Crazy

[formerlyfreedom]

Two interview Jon did at Telluride. With Hitfix and with Craveonline. 

 

ETA: Found another one on The Frame from KPCC radio.

 

Great pieces! Here's another from The Vulture.

[alexvillage]

Has anyone here read the book? Is it too depressing, in a way that would make you feel that there is no hope for human rights in Iran? I would like to read it, but right now I can't handle depressing/unhopeful reading. 

[Fremde Frau]

Here are some articles unrelated to Rosewater.

 

HuffPO, regarding his criticism of Israel:

"Jon Stewart's 'Daily Show' Represents the Best in Jewish American Thought And True Support for Israel"

 

IndieWire, in comparison to Last Week Tonight:

"TV Watch: How John Oliver Beat Stewart, Colbert, and Broadcast News at Their Own Games"

 

PopMatters, a review of the new biography by Lisa Rogak:

"The 'Angry Optimist' Is Clearly a Search-Engine Approach to Biography"

Edited September 2, 2014 by Fremde Frau

[Victor the Crab]

O'Reilly didn't have a leg to stand on when Megyn Kelly, of all people, successfully challenged him on his bullshit over that. Given his history with him, he'll end up in full body cast mode if he tries to TAKE ON JON STEWART!

[Fremde Frau]

I kind of hope Jon drops by Fox again sometime soon, if only because it's always a pleasure to watch him say "go fuck yourself" in their home to their face and in the most cordial manner imaginable as their own production crew laughs with him. That said, I'm a little disturbed by O'Reilly. I can't tell if he's scared to death of Jon or if he's got some secret crush (or if he honestly believes that he wins all of their encounters). Hannity is intimidated by Jon, I think, and Kurtz... who even knows? Mostly, I think he just wants to score a dance.

 

EDIT: Among other things O'Reilly had to say tonight was this nugget (emphasis his).

When you hear something on a partisan-driven program, do not believe it. ... Distortions are how some people make a living.

 

Edited September 4, 2014 by Fremde Frau

[purist]

 

Among other things O'Reilly had to say tonight was this nugget (emphasis his).

When you hear something on a partisan-driven program, do not believe it. ... Distortions are how some people make a living.

Not enough facepalming in the world. UGH.

[Fremde Frau]

@Chattygal, I'm not sure. I only saw that one clip.

[Fremde Frau]

I stumbled across this comparison and had to share. From the Boston Globe (an interview with New Testament scholar Amy-Jill Levine):

IDEAS: What would be a modern-day parallel to the parable?

LEVINE: Something like “The Daily Show.” When I hear Jon Stewart talk about politicians whom I actually like doing things that make me distressed, I’m called to account. I’m challenged, I’m sometimes indicted. Although I’m not sure Jon Stewart would appreciate the comparison to Jesus.

Yeah, probably not. For several reasons.

 

Thanks for those links, Victor the Crab! I didn't expect to see one of the correspondents there. I wonder what movie Michael is in?

[solotrek]

CBC Metro Morning radio interview with Jon.

[dusang]

And some partying going on at the Grey Goose.

 

For reals I thought Jay Pharoah was Kanye when I first glanced at this.

 

Thanks for those links, Victor the Crab! I didn't expect to see one of the correspondents there. I wonder what movie Michael is in?

 

According to his IMDb page, none, although he may have a cameo in Chris Rock's film Top Five.

 

ETA He definitely has a cameo in Top Five.  Also, reading a person's Twitter feed can really alter your perception of that person.  140 characters means he's either really bitingly sarcastic or a total asshole.

Edited September 8, 2014 by dusang

[Fremde Frau]

Thanks for the link, maculae!

 

ETA He definitely has a cameo in Top Five.  Also, reading a person's Twitter feed can really alter your perception of that person.  140 characters means he's either really bitingly sarcastic or a total asshole.

His Twitter feed is interesting, to say the least. I think he's bitingly sarcastic, but Twitter humor is sort of its own thing. Even someone like George Takei can be (or obliviously come across as) an asshole on Twitter. 

[solotrek]

CBC video interview with Jon, Maziar, and Gael. Though really, it seems like they just shoved the trailer into something and had snippets of an interview.

 

ETA: Carrell's reaction to Rosewater. Granted his is a very bias opinion, but it's still nice to read.

 

ETA 2: An interview with some sort of entertainment show. First Gael then Jon. I like how Jon mentions that a journalist asked him why he wears the same thing everyday.

Edited September 8, 2014 by maculae

[Victor the Crab]

In an off topic comment in Toronto, Jon was asked who he'd vote for as the city's mayor in the upcoming election, if he lived there. His answer: Olivia Chow, which thrilled her as she and her late husband, former federal NDP leader Jack Layton, are and were big fans of his and went so far as to attend a couple of his standup shows when he was in town.

 

(P.S., avoid the comments at the bottom of the page, as most of it is what one would expect from the readership of the Toronto Sun, aka The World's Worst Newspaper™.)

[solotrek]

Daily Show will be taping in Austin Texas at the ZACH Theater between Monday, Oct. 27 through Thursday, Oct. 30.

[Victor the Crab]

Will they get Rick Perry as a guest, I wonder?

[formerlyfreedom]

Folks,  was kind enough to create a topic for Jon's movie, Rosewater. I'd been holding off to see if there was enough interest, and it seems there is!

 

I'd ask that if you have posts that you'd like to have moved over there, please PM me, and let me know. I'll be happy to do that for you.

 

Thanks for posting, and thanks for enjoying The Daily Show as much as me!

[Fremde Frau]

If you haven't yet heard or watched this TED Talk by Zak Ebrahim, I highly recommend it. Not only is it relevant to this forum, given that he credits Jon with helping to change his perspective and his life's trajectory, but his story in and of itself is incredible.
 
"I am the son of a terrorist. Here's how I chose peace." Quoting the relevant part below:

Then there was "The Daily Show." On a nightly basis, Jon Stewart forced me to be intellectually honest with myself about my own bigotry and helped me to realize that a person's race, religion or sexual orientation had nothing to do with the quality of one's character. He was in many ways a father figure to me when I was in desperate need of one. Inspiration can often come from an unexpected place, and the fact that a Jewish comedian had done more to positively influence my worldview than my own extremist father is not lost on me.

Reflecting back on Jon, it's quite powerful to see that the philosophy he promotes on the show as its host and its voice has a real, positive impact on people's lives. It's nothing he asked for, and it's not something I expect, but it's heartwarming and amazing to hear stories like these.

[solotrek]

Goodbye Michael Che.
 

He actually left “SNL” to join “The Daily Show” this summer. After that short stint, he returned to NBC's famed Studio 8H. Che is no longer with “The Daily Show.”

Via his twitter:

i wanna thank Jon & the entire @TheDailyShow staff for letting me do this. i had a FANTASTIC time there. 1st class all the way

 

 

Edited September 12, 2014 by maculae

[Fremde Frau]

I just read that, too, maculae. Wow, that was quick. I enjoyed his work while he was here; best of luck to him!

[trow125]

I'm really bummed by the news, I have to admit. I thought Che was doing a fantastic job in his short time as a correspondent. I guess SNL is a higher profile gig, but it's no TDS!

[shoregirl]

I wouldn't imagine you could have a better audition tape for Weekend Update than the Daily Show.

[peeayebee]

I'm not happy to see him leave TDS, but I'm looking forward to seeing him on SNL. I never really cared for Cecily at the Weekend Update desk.

[Fremde Frau]

I feel like a horrible fan of comedy saying this, but I've never watched Weekend Update. Actually, I've only seen a handful of clips from SNL. It wasn't something that I had access to for most of my childhood in Japan, and when I moved to the States, I had other interests that took up time. I basically only know the clips that make the news, like the Sarah Palin parody, and clips from various "best of" lists. Is it anything like TDS/TCR/LWT? How badly am I missing out?

[dusang]

I feel like a horrible fan of comedy saying this, but I've never watched Weekend Update. Actually, I've only seen a handful of clips from SNL. It wasn't something that I had access to for most of my childhood in Japan, and when I moved to the States, I had other interests that took up time. I basically only know the clips that make the news, like the Sarah Palin parody, and clips from various "best of" lists. Is it anything like TDS/TCR/LWT? How badly am I missing out?

 

It's hard to say because it changes quite a bit based on the host(s).  There are some true classics and I'm sure some elements that have directly influenced TDS (Even Stepvens seems a direct descendant of Point/Counterpoint to my mind).  However, I'd have to say no, it is not like TDS/TCR/LWT -- WU punchlines off headlines, it's much closer to a late night monologue than an actual news program.  I would say it's the most reliably funny part of any SNL episode, though, and definitely worth watching.

Edited September 12, 2014 by dusang

[Fremde Frau]

Thank you, dusang. I spent the last hour or so looking up classic SNL skits, and the talent participating in any given skit blew my mind. I had no idea how many famous actors and comedians passed through there. Wow. I'm excited for Michael Che, since SNL is more popular than TDS and being a host is a much better gig than being a correspondent.

[Sharpie66]

Fremde Frau, if you haven't seen it, look for the Weekend Update appearance by Jesse Jackson, in which he reads "Green Eggs and Ham" as a tribute to the recently-deceased Dr. Seuss. My mom and I were watching that episode live, and when he showed up and started, we were at first shocked that they had such a good "get", and then roaring over his delivery. It was one of the funniest things I have ever seen on SNL!

[Fremde Frau]

His delivery is perfect. Thank you, Sharpie66! I had no idea this even existed!

 

[formerlyfreedom]

Folks, I'm sad that Michael Che is leaving to go back to SNL, but we do have a perfectly good SNL forum that you can discusse that and ALL things SNL in! So let's take the conversation over there, okay? Thanks!

[Fremde Frau]

I saw this today.

 

They seem perfect for each other, all the way down to the prematurely gray fuzz.

[purist]

That's gorgeous, Fremde Frau. Thank you!

[Fremde Frau]

@purist, you might like this one, too. No kitten, but it's a nice shot.

Here is a Washington Post article on an upcoming Jason Jones piece about the "Redskins" issue.
 

The four die-hard Redskins fans thought the opportunity was as golden as the vintage helmets of their favorite football team: “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” wanted them to appear on the Comedy Central program to defend the team’s name, which has been under relentless attack.

The Redskins Nation citizens eagerly signed up, most of them knowing they might get mocked in their interview with correspondent Jason Jones. But several hours into the Sept. 13 taping of the yet-to-air episode, the fans, all from Virginia, said they were suddenly confronted by a larger group of Native American activists — all of whom were in on the showdown prearranged by “The Daily Show.”

The encounter at a Dupont Circle hotel was so tense that an Alexandria fan said she left in tears and felt so threatened that she later called the police. She has told “The Daily Show” to leave her out of the segment but doesn’t know whether the producers will comply.

Edited September 20, 2014 by Fremde Frau

[possibilities]

What a bunch of delusional cowards.

[Fremde Frau]

I made the mistake of reading the comments section.
 
EDIT, from Mediaite: Thomas Ryan Red Corn, a comedian and one of the activists, posted two images on his Instagram account from the Daily Show shoot. Jason looks like he was up to his usual antics.

We had a blast shooting with @thedailyshow Jason Jones is a master of his craft. We will keep you in the loop as to when the show airs but many thanks to them for amplifying our voices to #changethename

Here's an additional quote from the Post on what the experience was like for the Native American activists:

“My heart goes out to them because they are people, too,” said Tara Houska, an Ojibwe from Couchiching First Nation who lives in the District and works for the grass-roots group Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry. “But it’s a weird position for them to take, because someone is crying over the loss of their offensive mascot when I am right there, standing in front of them. I don’t think they’re racist. I think their mascot is racist.”

The Native Americans endured some abuse, too, when they were taken to FedEx Field on Sunday to interact with Redskins fans who were tailgating before the home opener against the Jacksonville Jaguars. That also got ugly. At several points, according to one of the Native Americans, Redskins fans yelled obscenities at them, and one guy shouted, ‘Thanks a lot for letting us use your name, boys!’”

Edited September 20, 2014 by Fremde Frau

[purist]

Thanks for that extra shot of Jon, Fremde Frau. I really like that photographer's style.

[Fremde Frau]

The Washington piece will apparently run tomorrow. (via Twitter)

[dusang]

I watched Michael Che's debut on SNL -- WU guest "The Girl You Wish You Hadn't Started a Conversation With at a Party" asked him if he had a crush on anyone and he said, "There's this girl Jessica" and I immediately thought, "Jessica Williams?!?"

 

I'm going to hold to that.

[trow125]

You and me both, dusang! I wondered if that was coincidence or a way of paying tribute to his old gig.

Che also turned up in a sketch later in the show (an NFL bit that was a pretty blatant rip-off of Key & Peele's "East West Bowl") so he may get to move beyond the WU desk from time to time.

[Fremde Frau]

Here is a brief interview with one of the writers, Delaney Yeager. She seems like a nice addition, and it's great to hear from one of the women who write the show, but the article is so much fluff that it's hard to get a sense of her as a person. And forget about getting a real answer to the question, "What's it like working with Jon Stewart?" Even if he really is generally wonderful, I don't believe that the cast and crew don't feel like screaming whenever they hear that question. That said, I'm always waiting for that insightful and seemingly genuine response (like Stephen's, Travon's, or John's).

 

You should also have a unique point of view, while being able to write in Jon’s voice.

I'm not a professional comedy writer, but that must be so difficult. I've always been fascinated by that aspect of the writers' job. Doesn't it become a grind? How do you stay motivated when it's always someone else's voice, and not just for little throwaway stories but for major issues about which you probably have your own strong opinions that may or may not align with Jon's. (As a former translator, I got sick of that pretty quickly.)
 
By the way, if anyone's interested, here is the YouTube channel of the comedy group she mentioned: Skootch Comedy.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Fremde Frau

[alexvillage]

 

I'm not a professional comedy writer, but that must be so difficult. I've always been fascinated by that aspect of the writers' job. Doesn't it become a grind? How do you stay motivated when it's always someone else's voice, and not just for little throwaway stories but for major issues about which you probably have your own strong opinions that may or may not align with Jon's.

It must be difficult but the motivation probably comes from how much does the person wants to stay as a staff writer, what are their plans as a professional. 

I think most of us have been in situations where we didn't really agree with the powers to be but stayed on for a "higher" goal

[Fremde Frau]

From the Good Men Project: "How Political Comedy Culture Breeds Social Apathy."
 

Stewart, Colbert, and Oliver don’t want it this way, of course. They really do want their viewers to care, to get involved, to alter the status quo that they inadvertently but effectively buttress. They are the clowns informing the public over and over again about the coming conflagration, shouting as loud as they possibly can. Yet all they will get for their diligent efforts are Facebook likes, Twitter shares, and a vague consensus that most things suck.

I’m not arguing for the abolition of comedy, or even for its devaluation as a form of social discourse. After all, even as it numbed my emotions during an especially difficult childhood, laughter most assuredly saved my life. It exposed the absurdities of my condition, and gave me a keener understanding of injustice and inhumanity. One vitally important function of humor, Stewart’s and Colbert’s work included, is to eliminate all superficial optimism we may have (i.e., smug taken-for-granted acceptance of the system in which we live) by explaining the reasons for despair. Yet what comedy can never do, but what we must somehow find a way to do for ourselves, is replace this superficial optimism with cautious hope. Hope calls for a willingness to act on one’s best conjectures, even if they can never be proven absolutely. Hope demands continuing to strive for genuine reforms to the problems that plague civil society.

The assumption that it's their job to be activists always bugs me when this sort of criticism comes up, and of course he pulls out the rally as some political failure. Setting aside for the moment that there is in-depth, quality work done by these shows, why must we be led by hand to think critically and deeply about things and to act on our beliefs? I don't know about any other fans, but that's not my social contract with any of these shows. I want catharsis, I want to laugh, and I still go about my life trying to stay as informed as possible, acting on my beliefs, and doing my part to try to help the world get a little better, a little more equal, a little safer. How the hell are Jon, Stephen, and John to be held accountable for how active or inactive, successful or unsuccessful I am in that? I don't need a comedian (or journalist or politician, for that matter) to tell me to vote or to see that there is inequality in our society or that our government dehumanizes regular citizens of other countries in times of war and so on and on. It's such a pointless argument to make, as though comedy itself has no value but must be a proactively, intentionally revolutionary force. Their comedy (and a lot of comedy, if not all of comedy) is deeply immersed in social commentary, and that's how it's always been. What more do we need from them?
 
The writer uses all of that elaborate rhetoric, yet it boils down to: these comedians aren't filling the very specific sociopolitical role that I want them to fill, therefore we're all fucked unless y'all wake up.
 
Er, meanwhile: Cable Operator Suddenlink to Drop Viacom TV Channels
 

Among the channels Suddenlink has signed up to replace Viacom's in its "expanded basic" cable-TV bundle are 21st Century Fox Inc. FOXA +0.41% 's FXX, Glenn Beck's TheBlaze and other independent outlets, including Pivot and the Hallmark Channel. 21st Century Fox and Wall Street Journal owner News Corp NWSA -2.68% were part of the same company until last year.

It is possible that over time Viacom and Suddenlink could strike a new programming contract as deals with the replacement channels expire or as channel bandwidth frees up.

Suddenlink has about 1.2 million video customers in states including Arkansas, Arizona, Louisiana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas and West Virginia. That represents just 1% of U.S. pay-TV households. Wall Street, however, is likely to view the company's decision as a troubling development for Viacom, and one that could have broader implications for the cable industry.

Carriage fees are a major driver of revenue and profit driver for the nation's major media companies. Advertising revenue at Viacom's TV networks grew a modest 2% last year, while carriage-fee revenue in the U.S. grew 10%.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Fremde Frau

[Fremde Frau]

New York Magazine: Could Jon Stewart Have Been the Host of Meet the Press?

This Sunday marks Chuck Todd’s one-month anniversary in the anchor chair at Meet the Press. Despite an opening-week ratings spike from his exclusive sit-down interview with President Obama, the Todd-helmed show has settled back into third place behind ABC's This Week and CBS's Face the Nation. This has been frustrating to NBC News executives, who at one point had considered going in a radically different direction with the show.

Before choosing Todd, NBC News president Deborah Turness held negotiations with Jon Stewart about hosting Meet the Press, according to three senior television sources with knowledge of the talks. One source explained that NBC was prepared to offer Stewart virtually “anything" to bring him over. "They were ready to back the Brinks truck up," the source said. A spokesperson for NBC declined to comment. James Dixon, Stewart's agent, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Fremde Frau

[trow125]

Here's an interesting take on the "meet the Press" story from Time.com's James Poniewozik: Could Jon Stewart Have Put Sunday Morning Shows Out of Their Misery?

I can’t read the guy’s mind, but I’ve always liked that he seems to resist the notion that his career has to advance or die. He has a chance to weigh in on national issues every night, for an engaged audience. He shouldn’t feel obligated to move “up”–especially if that “up” means a format with less freedom and less original impact.

 

[Bastet]

This Sunday marks Chuck Todd’s one-month anniversary ...

 

No, it does not.  Anniversary means the yearly recurrence or celebration of an event; there is no such thing as a one-month, six-month, etc. anniversary.  This certainly doesn't rise to the level of something TDS will mock, and New York doesn't stand alone in making this mistake, but it drives me nuts.

[dusang]

I agree with you, but fear that someday, the definition of anniversary as we know it (and has it has existed for generations) will go the way of 'decimate.' It wasn't that long ago in college (90s) that it was hammered into our heads that decimate meant to destroy one-tenth of but it's been codified in dictionary definitions since that time to allow for the misuse that crept into the mainstream in describing massive destruction or death.

 

To which I continue to respond: Poppycock!

 

There are those who argue that a language cannot be static and must change with usage -- so decimate, anniversary, nauseous, and factoid (among millions of others) must be amended to reflect the current usage rather than the original meaning.  On the one hand, I see the argument and agree -- I mean, who uses "nice" to mean "fastidious"?  But as we watch these meanings change as a result of ignorance rather than necessity it hurts.

 

(I really hate it when newly created, borderline-fake words are immediately misused -- a "selfie" is when you take a picture of yourself by holding the camera at arm's length!!  Can we please stop calling every picture taken a "selfie"?)

 

Sorry... back to topic.

[Julia]

(I really hate it when newly created, borderline-fake words are immediately misused -- a "selfie" is when you take a picture of yourself by holding the camera at arm's length!!  Can we please stop calling every picture taken a "selfie"?)

 

Thank you. Also, an entry posted on your blog? Is a blog post, not a "blog."

[Fremde Frau]

That was a great take on it, @trow125. Thank you for the link. I always enjoy reading James Poniewozik's columns on Jon. He seems willing to understand Jon on his own terms, or at least he seems willing to distinguish between his view of Jon and Jon's view of himself. It's a small thing, but it's amazing (or, somewhat irritating) how often it's lacking in coverage about Jon, Stephen, and now John.

Brian Stelter confirmed the MTP story. Here are some opinions on the topic: The Atlantic, The Christian Science Monitor, CNN, The Daily Beast, Huffington Post, Mediaite, Mother Jones, Newsday, Salon (who can't seem to decide whether they think maybe-racist Jon is yesterday's news or still vital), TYT, The Washington Post. And the usual Fox/Blaze/Hotair contempt that I won't bother with. They are all mostly against the idea, for journalism's sake and/or for Jon's. I think my favorite non-serious take on it was by A.V. Club:

Coldly indifferent to its burning desire for them to come together as political talk show and political talk show host, New York magazine reports that before Chuck Todd took over last month, Jon Stewart rejected NBC’s offer to host Meet The Press. Although neither NBC nor Stewart’s agent is willing to comment on the situation, New York cites a source that claims NBC would have given Stewart “anything” to bring his hip cache to its long-running Sunday morning snooze-fest. “They were ready to back the Brink’s truck up,” the source said. But Stewart was unmoved by NBC’s offer of cold hard cash and chose to direct a movie instead, leaving NBC to occasionally look over at Chuck Todd, sleeping peacefully in front of the TV, and wonder what could have been.

The amount of coverage doesn't surprise me, since every rumor seems to blow up for at least a day, but the readiness of the more thorough arguments leads me to believe that some people have had this general topic (Jon moving into journalism or hosting a serious interview show) on their mind for some time. The tidbit about 60 Minutes in the Newsday article blew my mind. Is that confirmed or just another rumor?

 

EDIT: As pending evolutionary linguist and anthropologist, I can't resist adding my opinion to this discussion of language. I get frustrated reading student papers and so on, but I have to remind myself that the rules we use today are arbitrary and based on the conventions of a once-elite group. So, I take turns banging my head against the wall and taking a bunch of notes on how the internet effects language change. On a related note, I do wish that we could retire the word "devolution" as it is used to describe so-called evolutionary degeneration, whether that be linguistic, biological, or cultural changes. Evolution is not teleological. But the linguist in me has to remind the anthropologist in me that convention creates meaning, and so I just go back to banging my head against the wall. /pet peeve

Edited October 10, 2014 by Fremde Frau

[attica]

I dunno, Sources or not, the MTP story doesn't pass my smell test. I have no doubt that somebody at the network might have considered Jon's effect on Sunday morning ratings, but no conservative pol would come to a Stewart-hosted MTP. And what would a Sunday show do without a weekly visit from John McCain? The DC world would end. I just think the network news divisions take themselves too seriously, and take Stewart/TDS as fundamentally unserious, to have such a scenario actually play out.

 

It would be a breath of fresh air, don't get me wrong. But I don't think network news culture wants fresh air. They want musty, fusty, reliable, recycled, stale air, that all of their Georgetown friends are used to. There must be no jokes at the expense of the powerful, let alone dick jokes.

[Julia]

It's enough for me that the buzz about this is going to make Tucker Carlson eat his liver. It's got to be killing Little Lord Birdseye that Jon Stewart is considered a hot property as a journalist these days. 

[alexvillage]

 

I dunno, Sources or not, the MTP story doesn't pass my smell test. I have no doubt that somebody at the network might have considered Jon's effect on Sunday morning ratings, but no conservative pol would come to a Stewart-hosted MTP.

I am with you. 

They needed something to agitate and become "news". One problem is that journalists these days don't really ask the questions, the Sunday morning shows became the means for politicians to spin their ideas and for commentators pretend they are discussing important things. Not that the things are not important, but it is all a big fantasy, they way it is done.

Russert did it well, then Gregory came it wanted a sound bite from ear guest, and he is not very knowledgeable of things. Todd seems to be smarter, but is terrible in front of the cameras. I am sure there are people as intelligent/smart as Jon, but they are afraid to get the real news, afraid of losing guests because they need to keep the "balanced" approach. Since Jon does that through satire, they want to believe that's what is needed in journalism. 

These shows should just retire. Sunday morning cartoons would be more informative

[Fremde Frau]

It would be a breath of fresh air, don't get me wrong. But I don't think network news culture wants fresh air. They want musty, fusty, reliable, recycled, stale air, that all of their Georgetown friends are used to.

 

Yeah, I'm not sure that the offer was well considered, even if Stelter is right. The novelty of it was probably the main appeal, as well as the buzz that Jon can generate with his political interviews. Some of the articles mentioned this, as well, but the thought of Jon actually moderating a panel and discussing the finer points of campaign strategies with the regular blowhards week in and week out is surely enough to make Jon want to curl up and die. Aren't the Sunday morning shows where talking points go to welcome in the new week? It's bad enough that he has to watch it to mock it; doing it himself would suck the life out of Jon. Right now, he has these flexible, open-ended conversations with his guests, not interviews in the traditional sense, and he seems to be most comfortable doing exactly what he does right where he is.