S01.E07: Stephen Hawking

[Athena]

Per the instagram photo and twitter.

[Kromm]

That episode was okay, but probably no more than that. The Dingo/FCC stuff didn't work after the first iteration, and as much as I rely on this show for comedy rather than serious interviews, I'm not sure I liked the jokes in that segment.  The Immigration segment was okay, but not brilliant the way other rants have been.

 

I think it was just the week not giving him any great fodder though.  Clearly they need a bunch of stories in the "bank" for weeks like that, but those kinds of pieces won't be the best stuff.

[peeayebee]

I did enjoy the interview with Hawking. I should know this but I don't: How does his speech generator work?

[Traveller519]

I agree with Kromm, the Hawking interview felt like a bit of a wasted opportunity. There was one semi-serious question off the start, and then a bunch of what felt like nothing. It was funny, which got the point across, but I've come to expect a little more depth from the show.

 

The Immigration Reform topic hit on one aspect that I think bore some more weight. That this isn't a limited scope American issue, around the world countries with high net immigration are facing a notable level of public resistance, because of fear of change of ways of life. Or at least that's the claim. There are many countries resisting the immigration of people who "don't look like us" through whatever seemingly politically correct lens they can slap on it. Also instead of just stating that there were studies refuting those general talking points about jobs and crime, I wish he had flushed out what the counterpoints were. As is usually the case, the loudest voices tend to be the most uninformed. We've heard the talking points for keeping a lid on immigration, which can be rationalized through fear. Give us the basis for why this shouldn't be the case, John.

[Fremde Frau]

The Washington piece didn't really work for me, with the fake ad at the end. The original ad is so very powerful, and reusing the same music for a weaker, disjointed point felt like a bit of a missed mark.

 

I enjoyed the extended Hawking interview; that was my favorite part of the episode this week. Hawking seemed to be enjoying it, and they had a nice dynamic between them.

 

Speaking of that, for me the interviews reveal most clearly how the show is still trying to find its direction, not just in the sense of how they are balancing serious reporting with comedy but also John's comfort level as an interviewer. In one interview, he was mostly serious with sporadic humor (the Simon Ostrovsky interview), and then in another, he was mostly humorous with few serious questions (the Hawking interview). His relaxed, informative interview with Fareed was similar in tone to when he was guest-hosting for Jon, while his satirical interview with Keith Alexander was just like a TDS field piece that mocks its target. I think it's natural to have more of a friendly, relaxed vibe with some people and to be more serious, investigative with others (the same happens with Jon's interviews on TDS, eg. interviewing Denis Leary vs. interviewing Anita Hill), but the Alexander interview is an uncomfortable fit, being much more of an outright skewering. John seems to enjoy most the more journalistic interviews (Fareed and Ostrovsky); he's very skilled at it, and I personally love those interviews the best. But I think he might need to carefully consider what that might mean when it comes to interviewees for whom he doesn't feel any respect or affection. One aspect of both Stephen and Jon as interviewers is that they treat interviewees the same regardless of politics, ideology, scandals, crimes, etc: "Stephen" fences with them all (and wins), and Jon is always the polite host. That's a huge part of why I love both of those shows. TDS is well-served by having two distinct styles of interview: you can expect to get skewered in a field piece, and you can expect to be treated with respect when Jon interviews you in person. They're all comedians and aren't obliged to be consistent as interviewers, but it crossed my mind during the Hawking interview that it may become tricky for John if there is any sense of selection in how interviewees are treated, particularly if the show takes on the more journalistic, less comedic direction that it seems to be currently playing with.

Edited June 16, 2014 by Fremde Frau

[Sharpie66]

peeayabee, IIRC, Hawking uses his right (I think?) eye to scroll through the alphabet or a list of words to type out an answer for the voice synthesizer to read out. That's why all of his interviews are pre-recorded, because the answering process takes so long, as Hawking himself referred to during his interview with John.

 

ETA: Re: the voice synthesizer, he's been offered upgrades to the voice itself many times, but he feels that it is so specific to him by now that he has kept it, regardless of how retro it now sounds.

Edited June 16, 2014 by Sharpie66

[goodogcarl]

Re: Hawking/Oliver

 

Do you think that was a script?  Some of Hawking's answers were pretty funny.

 

I wasn't even sure they were really in the same room -- I guess they were.

[Hanahope]

Hawking looked like he enjoyed the interview, he appeared to be smiling several times.

 

I loved how Oliver's FCC bit got real life play. 

 

Yeah, America isn't the only country having immigration growing pains, but I chuckled at the reference that the Statute of Liberty's motto is now false advertising.

[attica]

Do you think that was a script?  Some of Hawking's answers were pretty funny.

 

If I'm not mistaken, Hawking can be pretty snarky. He doesn't suffer fools, as I hear it.

[peeayebee]

peeayabee, IIRC, Hawking uses his right (I think?) eye to scroll through the alphabet or a list of words to type out an answer for the voice synthesizer to read out. That's why all of his interviews are pre-recorded, because the answering process takes so long, as Hawking himself referred to during his interview with John.

Thanks. Yes, now that I read this, I remember hearing the explanation before. The editing in this interview was seamless, so I kept wondering how he could respond so quickly.

[Victor the Crab]

I lolled hard at Stephen Hawking's responses to Ollie's questions. I just hope that, before he leaves, Stephen will do a one on one interview with Hawkings on TCR.

[Sharpie66]

FYI, there is an excellent made for tv bio of Hawking starring Benedict Cumberbatch which is really well done and demonstrates his high level of snark. I saw it on the Science Channel a while ago, but someone posted it on YouTube.

Edited June 16, 2014 by Sharpie66

[roamyn]

There are bound to be some clunker episodes along the way, and I felt this was one.

I think he spent too much time on Dingo, wasted the ISIS bit (more time should br spent on that), and while I agree w/the Redskins offensive ness, it doesn't bother my 1/2 Arapahoe husband and it never bothered my full blooded FIL.

And I fear my beloved Cleveland Indians will be next.

[Kromm]

There are bound to be some clunker episodes along the way, and I felt this was one.

I think he spent too much time on Dingo, wasted the ISIS bit (more time should br spent on that), and while I agree w/the Redskins offensive ness, it doesn't bother my 1/2 Arapahoe husband and it never bothered my full blooded FIL.

And I fear my beloved Cleveland Indians will be next.

I agree/get that there will be plenty of native Americans who don't give a crap (in fact, it's almost in a way coming off as one of those "white liberal guilt" causes the way it gets talked up these days).  That said, because of forces outside of his show, it has so much momentum as a news story that it likely had to be covered by Oliver at some point.  Admittedly his BEST work so far has been doing rants on stories that the mainstream media is ignoring/underplaying or screwing up (ignoring: Brunei's brutality, underplaying: FIFA's brutality, screwing up:  Net Neutrality), but maybe the Redskins story actually fits that last "screwing up" category. There was probably a way to do it that was less predictable than what they did, and that was the issue with the piece.  I'd in fact have picked up the banner of "white liberal guilt" and played with that a bit, and done some dual level story where on one level it addressed the story straight, while on another level it drove home all the OTHER much deeper ways Native American communities are currently getting screwed over--but that are getting ignored in the media because the Redskins story is a cause celebre and easier to report shallowly.

Edited June 17, 2014 by Kromm

[Grammaeryn]

FYI, there is an excellent made for tv bio of Hawking starring Benedict Cumberbatch which is really well done and demonstrates his high level of snark. I saw it on the Science Channel a while ago, but someone posted it on YouTube.

 

Thank you for the tip! I just watched it. Just a lovely film. Youtube commenters were even nicer than usual. 

[Fremde Frau]

Part of my problem with the segment was that the fake ad trivialized the issue as more of a thing lazy white people should feel guilty about, rather than being a perspective that is coming from Native American voices. There are far more systemic, devastating problems, like poverty and restoration of land, that should be addressed over and over in mainstream media until the general public wakes up to it and people with the power to make foundational changes are pressured to do so. The Washington team name, in the broader context, is a small transgression and an easy fix that white people can feel good about supporting without thinking too deeply about the rest. But that said, there is a lot of support for the name change among Native American people, too, and the ad itself was a labor of love and pride. (I remember when Suey Park was promoting #CancelColbert, there was some pushback that she had taken the focus off of the original issue.) I do think it is astonishing (for lack of a better word) how normalized it is that our society doesn't consider it on the same level as other ethnic or racial slurs, which would have no ground to stand on as a team name or mascot.

[iMonrey]

I actually thought the Dingo thing was the best part of the episode. That's exactly what a Dingo would say to try to convince people he's not a Dingo! I loved the certificate from the school of zoology certifying that he's not a Dingo. And how John managed to circle around back to it at the end of the show because of the Statue of Liberty's false advertising. The immigration piece was good too.

 

I can't be the only one who feels uncomfortable watching Stephen Hawking. I can't help it, I just do. I had to skip that segment for the most part.

[Gemma Violet]

I did enjoy the interview with Hawking. 

 

I did as well.  I enjoyed the whole episode really.