Jon Stewart and the Daily Show
Filling the Michael Moore void
Every so often I get a bit of internet humour in
my email, usually from one of my Bush hating friends. I mostly find these things
mildly amusing, although some are really cute or wickedly sarcastic.
After I've had my chuckles I send them along to other friends whom I know will
enjoy a good anti-American or anti-Republican
joke.
My friends are worried about me. My blogging has revealed a disturbing tendency to give the President of the United States and his fellow citizens the benefit of a doubt now and then. When he was first elected to the office (if that's what really happened) I shared with many the perception that the man was a dimwitted inarticulate dweeb. Since then I've come to understand that he's smarter than he lets on and may be doing somethings right, at least in the mid-east. Still, as I've said before, if I had had the chance I wouldn't have voted for him last fall and I do think he's done and said many things that deserve to be ridiculed and mocked.
So to reassure my friends I keep those bits of satire in circulation. They signal that I haven't gone totally over to the dark side.
I draw the line though, at the faux comedian Michael Moore, who I think represents the worst demagogic tendencies in the left. And whom I no longer find the least bit funny. I cannot help but tell everyone who admires his work that they have been had.
Admittedly, when I first saw "Roger and Me" I thought it was a great movie. Later I was disappointed to read that he had fudged the timelines of Flint's history, exaggerating the effects of General Motors closing its auto plant in that city. I don't remember much of his television shows, except that he had a big ego and that yes, sometimes he was funny. "Bowling for Columbine" was full of dubious insinuations and assertions. It did ask some important questions about America's gun culture but didn't answer any of them, and left me feeling sympathetic for Charleton Heston, whose politics I detest, after Moore badgered the senile old coot in his home. Moore's last movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11," was nothing but conspiracy theory, cheap shots, and misleading propaganda that ignored the real state of affairs in Iraq before the war and the substantive debate about the invasion, pro and con.
Criticism of Moore is by no means limited to the right wing. Many on the left are embarrassed by him. Even his defenders admit that Moore is a "fake" journalist. Christopher Hitchens is probably his harshest critic but I think NPR's Scott Simon had the most damning assessment.
However Moore has made himself into an icon of resistance, rejection and rebellion against the evils of American capitalism. That's why my friends like him and have a hard time seeing his dishonesty and disdain for his audience. I think his targets are deserving, but not his methods. My friends are sending me their anti-Bush bytes and watching Moore's movies because they are angry and in despair. Where I see the fight for democracy in Iraq laying the basis for socialism they see the war as the onslaught of American imperialism. And paradoxically, it's a bit of both (see Marx, Karl on the American Civil War.)
Which is why I turn your attention now to the modest but oh so talented Jon Stewart and his half hour program on the Comedy Network, The Daily Show. Four nights a week his "fake news" takes on many of the same people Moore goes after. He even uses some of the same video editing techniques to catch arrogant celebrities, politicians and journalists in moments of vacuous carelessness. But he does so with an honesty and fairness that Moore lacks. Stewart often hosts people whose politics are widely different from his own and allows his guests to make their own points and jokes. At the same time he doesn't hold back from challenging those who share his own lefty political persuasion.
Stewart is also willing to express doubt about his own convictions. After the Iraqi elections he worried that the thought that Bush might be right would make him implode. A month later he was bemoaning the possibility that in a generation a transformed mid-east would result in high schools being named after the president. Recently he admitted that the American troops in Iraq were a symbol of hope to the people of Iran, who wish to see the overthrow of their own despots.
So, while I glumly wait out yet another escalation of the Iraqi insurgency, I can still enjoy a round of Bush bashing with my anti-war friends, as the Daily Show keeps its, and our, options open.
Stewart is only a comedian. It's a funny world where he and the late night talk show hosts get more respect and provide better political analysis than the serious news bureaus in the broadcast world. On the other hand, Moore's success as a documentary film maker has been a pyrrhic victory. He lowered the standards of journalism and lost his sense of humour.
My friends are worried about me. My blogging has revealed a disturbing tendency to give the President of the United States and his fellow citizens the benefit of a doubt now and then. When he was first elected to the office (if that's what really happened) I shared with many the perception that the man was a dimwitted inarticulate dweeb. Since then I've come to understand that he's smarter than he lets on and may be doing somethings right, at least in the mid-east. Still, as I've said before, if I had had the chance I wouldn't have voted for him last fall and I do think he's done and said many things that deserve to be ridiculed and mocked.
So to reassure my friends I keep those bits of satire in circulation. They signal that I haven't gone totally over to the dark side.
I draw the line though, at the faux comedian Michael Moore, who I think represents the worst demagogic tendencies in the left. And whom I no longer find the least bit funny. I cannot help but tell everyone who admires his work that they have been had.
Admittedly, when I first saw "Roger and Me" I thought it was a great movie. Later I was disappointed to read that he had fudged the timelines of Flint's history, exaggerating the effects of General Motors closing its auto plant in that city. I don't remember much of his television shows, except that he had a big ego and that yes, sometimes he was funny. "Bowling for Columbine" was full of dubious insinuations and assertions. It did ask some important questions about America's gun culture but didn't answer any of them, and left me feeling sympathetic for Charleton Heston, whose politics I detest, after Moore badgered the senile old coot in his home. Moore's last movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11," was nothing but conspiracy theory, cheap shots, and misleading propaganda that ignored the real state of affairs in Iraq before the war and the substantive debate about the invasion, pro and con.
Criticism of Moore is by no means limited to the right wing. Many on the left are embarrassed by him. Even his defenders admit that Moore is a "fake" journalist. Christopher Hitchens is probably his harshest critic but I think NPR's Scott Simon had the most damning assessment.
However Moore has made himself into an icon of resistance, rejection and rebellion against the evils of American capitalism. That's why my friends like him and have a hard time seeing his dishonesty and disdain for his audience. I think his targets are deserving, but not his methods. My friends are sending me their anti-Bush bytes and watching Moore's movies because they are angry and in despair. Where I see the fight for democracy in Iraq laying the basis for socialism they see the war as the onslaught of American imperialism. And paradoxically, it's a bit of both (see Marx, Karl on the American Civil War.)
Which is why I turn your attention now to the modest but oh so talented Jon Stewart and his half hour program on the Comedy Network, The Daily Show. Four nights a week his "fake news" takes on many of the same people Moore goes after. He even uses some of the same video editing techniques to catch arrogant celebrities, politicians and journalists in moments of vacuous carelessness. But he does so with an honesty and fairness that Moore lacks. Stewart often hosts people whose politics are widely different from his own and allows his guests to make their own points and jokes. At the same time he doesn't hold back from challenging those who share his own lefty political persuasion.
Stewart is also willing to express doubt about his own convictions. After the Iraqi elections he worried that the thought that Bush might be right would make him implode. A month later he was bemoaning the possibility that in a generation a transformed mid-east would result in high schools being named after the president. Recently he admitted that the American troops in Iraq were a symbol of hope to the people of Iran, who wish to see the overthrow of their own despots.
So, while I glumly wait out yet another escalation of the Iraqi insurgency, I can still enjoy a round of Bush bashing with my anti-war friends, as the Daily Show keeps its, and our, options open.
Stewart is only a comedian. It's a funny world where he and the late night talk show hosts get more respect and provide better political analysis than the serious news bureaus in the broadcast world. On the other hand, Moore's success as a documentary film maker has been a pyrrhic victory. He lowered the standards of journalism and lost his sense of humour.
Posted: Thu - June 9, 2005 at 06:10 PM
Quick Links
A blog by Jim Monk
XML/RSS Feed
Archives
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Categories
My Favourite Blogs
My Favourite Sites
Subscriptions
Windsor - Essex Blogs
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Sep 12, 2007 03:13 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Sep 12, 2007 03:13 PM