When The Funny Guy Got Serious On CNN's "Crossfire" (Joe Gandelman)
Joe Gandelman
When CNN's Bobbsy Twins of Confrontation conservative Tucker Carlson and liberal (and John Kerry advisor) Paula Begala invited him they thought it'd be a funny, breezy hour.
After all, he was Jon Stewart, host of Comedy Central's "Daily Show," a show that has grown in influence and attracted prominent politicos guests and candidates amid indications that many younger people (read that v-o-t-e-r-s) actually watch that show to get their news...and shape their views. They thought Stewart would be a lark. Instead, he was a shark.
It'll go down in media history as the day The Funny Guy went on Crossfire and — in comments that echoed what people on both the right and left that have mouthed without real public explosure — made the two hosts (particularly one of them) the subjects of ridicule on their own show. In the end, Stewart mercilessly stripped this kind of show's real meaning — and failings — to its basics. You can read the full CNN transcript here for yourself.
UPDATE: And you can view the video of the whole encounter by CLICKING HERE. But first here's the most widely quoted exchange from the program - one between Stewart and Carlson:CARLSON: I do think you're more fun on your show. Just my opinion.... STEWART: You know what's interesting, though? You're as big a dick on your show as you are on any show.
Here are a few highlights from a show that will have clips from it played over and over in broadcast and journalism classes for many years:
STEWART: I think, oftentimes, the person that knows they can't win is allowed to speak the most freely, because, otherwise, shows with titles, such as CROSSFIRE.... Or "HARDBALL" or "I'm Going to Kick Your Ass"...In many ways, it's funny. And I made a special effort to come on the show today, because I have privately, amongst my friends and also in occasional newspapers and television shows, mentioned this show as being bad.
BEGALA: We have noticed.
STEWART: And I wanted to — I felt that that wasn't fair and I should come here and tell you that I don't — it's not so much that it's bad, as it's hurting America.
CARLSON: But in its defense...
STEWART: So I wanted to come here today and say... Here's just what I wanted to tell you guys.
CARLSON: Yes.
STEWART: Stop. Stop, stop, stop, stop hurting America.
BEGALA: OK. Now
STEWART: And come work for us, because we, as the people...
CARLSON: How do you pay?
STEWART: The people — not well.
(LAUGHTER)
BEGALA: Better than CNN, I'm sure.
STEWART: But you can sleep at night.
So did he leave it at that? No. Stewart zeroes in:
STEWART: See, the thing is, we need your help. Right now, you're helping the politicians and the corporations. And we're left out there to mow our lawns.
BEGALA: By beating up on them? You just said we're too rough on them when they make mistakes.
STEWART: No, no, no, you're not too rough on them. You're part of their strategies. You are partisan, what do you call it, hacks.
And, indeed. Over the years this kind of political show has shifted, just as the typical TV talk show shifted. Back in the 60s and even 70s, a typical daytime talk show discussed more mundane issues than My Husband Likes Sleeping With Our Sheep. Guests dressed casual, but often a bit "up" for TV. TV had a certain dignity and seriousness to them.
But TV titans soon realized that conflict, anger, rage and negativity is what gets ratings (why do most people stop and gawk at a car crash scene?). The Jerry Springerization of daytime TV — minus a few old-style holdovers — spread. TV political talk shows like Crossfire, The Capital Gang, The Beltway Boys, etc. put a premium on several things:
a)People yelling at and over each other and name calling. b)People who were put on and the instant you saw them you knew exactly how they would react to a given issue since they were knee-jerk partisans (with the emphasis on the second word) of the right and the left. The days of Open Mind are gone; the days of Open Mouth are here.
The emphasis then is on anger issues, rage, personalities — but serious policy discussion is generally not done (you can't get ratings from it).
This is confirmed by Carlson putting Crossfire — a supposedly serious show — on the same playing field as The Daily Show. Here Stewart lowers the boom:
They must have thought: why did we BOOK this guy??? But Stewart was not through — and Carlson was about to get the ultimate "diss":STEWART: If you want to compare your show to a comedy show, you're more than welcome to....
CARLSON: Kerry won't come on this show. He will come on your show.
STEWART: Right.
CARLSON: Let me suggest why he wants to come on your show.
STEWART: Well, we have civilized discourse.
CARLSON: Well, here's an example of the civilized discourse. Here are three of the questions you asked John Kerry.
STEWART: Yes.
CARLSON: You have a chance to interview the Democratic nominee. You asked him questions such as — quote — "How are you holding up? Is it hard not to take the attacks personally?"
STEWART: Yes.
CARLSON: "Have you ever flip-flopped?" et cetera, et cetera.
STEWART: Yes.
CARLSON: Didn't you feel like — you got the chance to interview the guy. Why not ask him a real question, instead of just suck up to him?
STEWART: Yes. "How are you holding up?" is a real suck-up. And I actually giving him a hot stone massage as we were doing it.
CARLSON: It sounded that way. It did.
STEWART: You know, it's interesting to hear you talk about my responsibility.
CARLSON: I felt the sparks between you.
STEWART: I didn't realize that — and maybe this explains quite a bit.
CARLSON: No, the opportunity to...
STEWART: ... is that the news organizations look to Comedy Central for their cues on integrity.... So what I would suggest is, when you talk about you're holding politicians' feet to fire, I think that's disingenuous. I think you're.. But my point is this. If your idea of confronting me is that I don't ask hard-hitting enough news questions, we're in bad shape, fellows.
CARLSON: We're here to love you, not confront you.... We're here to be nice.
STEWART: No, no, no, but what I'm saying is this. I'm not. I'm here to confront you, because we need help from the media and they're hurting us. And it's — the idea is...
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Let me get this straight. If the indictment is — if the indictment is — and I have seen you say this — that...
STEWART: Yes.
BEGALA: And that CROSSFIRE reduces everything, as I said in the intro, to left, right, black, white.
STEWART: Yes.
BEGALA: Well, it's because, see, we're a debate show.
STEWART: No, no, no, no, that would be great.
BEGALA: It's like saying The Weather Channel reduces everything to a storm front.
STEWART: I would love to see a debate show.
BEGALA: We're 30 minutes in a 24-hour day where we have each side on, as best we can get them, and have them fight it out.
STEWART: No, no, no, no, that would be great. To do a debate would be great. But that's like saying pro wrestling is a show about athletic competition.
And it gets worse:CARLSON: Jon, Jon, Jon, I'm sorry. I think you're a good comedian. I think your lectures are boring.
STEWART: Yes.
CARLSON: Let me ask you a question on the news.
STEWART: Now, this is theater. It's obvious. How old are you?
CARLSON: Thirty-five.
STEWART: And you wear a bow tie.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
CARLSON: Yes, I do. I do.
STEWART: So this is...
CARLSON: I know. I know. I know. You're a...
STEWART: So this is theater.
CARLSON: Now, let me just..Now, come on.
STEWART: Now, listen, I'm not suggesting that you're not a smart guy, because those are not easy to tie.
CARLSON: They're difficult.
(LAUGHTER)
STEWART: But the thing is that this — you're doing theater, when you should be doing debate, which would be great.
BEGALA: We do, do...
STEWART: It's not honest. What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery. And I will tell you why I know it.
CARLSON: You had John Kerry on your show and you sniff his throne and you're accusing us of partisan hackery?
STEWART: Absolutely.
CARLSON: You've got to be kidding me. He comes on and you...
STEWART: You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls... What is wrong with you?
And WORSE:CARLSON: Well, I'm just saying, there's no reason for you — when you have this marvelous opportunity not to be the guy's butt boy, to go ahead and be his butt boy. Come on. It's embarrassing.
STEWART: I was absolutely his butt boy. I was so far — you would not believe what he ate two weeks ago... You know, the interesting thing I have is, you have a responsibility to the public discourse, and you fail miserably.
CARLSON: You need to get a job at a journalism school, I think.THAT'S THE POINT: Crossfire and shows of its ilk have become the Winking Spin Zones. Haven't you noticed that obnoxious little wink from the newscasters and political yell shows, the half smile that says: "We know this is all B.S. but we and they have to say certain things — and this is the way our game works. Why we'll all go out for a nice dinner and drinks after the show and forget all about this..." More:STEWART: You need to go to one...The thing that I want to say is, when you have people on for just knee-jerk, reactionary talk...
CARLSON: Wait. I thought you were going to be funny. Come on. Be funny.
STEWART: No. No. I'm not going to be your monkey....I watch your show every day. And it kills me.
CARLSON: I can tell you love it.
STEWART: It's so — oh, it's so painful to watch.
(LAUGHTER)
STEWART: You know, because we need what you do. This is such a great opportunity you have here to actually get politicians off of their marketing and strategy.
And when they come back from a break?CARLSON: Is this really Jon Stewart? What is this, anyway?
STEWART: Yes, it's someone who watches your show and cannot take it anymore....I just can't.
CARLSON: What's it like to have dinner with you? It must be excruciating. Do you like lecture people like this or do you come over to their house and sit and lecture them; they're not doing the right thing, that they're missing their opportunities, evading their responsibilities?
STEWART: If I think they are.
And later on Stewart takes up SPIN:CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. We're talking to Jon Stewart, who was just lecturing us on our moral inferiority. Jon, you're bumming us out. Tell us, what do you think about the Bill O'Reilly vibrator story?
STEWART: I'm sorry. I don't.
Afterwards there was this from MTV: "In what could well be the strangest and most refreshing media moment of the election season, 'The Daily Show' host Jon Stewart turned up on a live broadcast of CNN's 'Crossfire' Friday and accused the mainstream media — and his hosts in particular — of being soft and failing to do their duty as journalists to keep politicians and the political process honest." And TVNewser had this item:STEWART: But let me ask you guys, again, a question, because we talked a little bit about, you're actually doing honest debate and all that. But, after the debates, where do you guys head to right afterwards?
CARLSON: The men's room.
STEWART: Right after that?
BEGALA: Home.
STEWART: Spin alley.
BEGALA: Home.
STEWART: No, spin alley.
BEGALA: What are you talking about? You mean at these debates?
STEWART: Yes. You go to spin alley, the place called spin alley. Now, don't you think that, for people watching at home, that's kind of a drag, that you're literally walking to a place called deception lane? Like, it's spin alley. It's — don't you see, that's the issue I'm trying to talk to you guys...
BEGALA: No, I actually believe — I have a lot of friends who work for President Bush. I went to college with some of them.
CARLSON: Neither of us was ever in the spin room, actually.
BEGALA: No, I did — I went to do the Larry King show. They actually believe what they're saying. They want to persuade you. That's what they're trying to do by spinning. But I don't doubt for a minute these people who work for President Bush, who I disagree with on everything, they believe that stuff, Jon. This is not a lie or a deception at all. They believe in him, just like I believe in my guy.
STEWART: I think they believe President Bush would do a better job. And I believe the Kerry guys believe President Kerry would do a better job. But what I believe is, they're not making honest arguments. So what they're doing is, in their mind, the ends justify the means.
CNN Crossfire host Tucker Carlson was taken aback by Jon Stewart's rant on the debate show today. "I've never seen a more sanctimonious comedian," he says in an e-mail to TVNewser. "What a boor." I asked Carlson if Stewart had "slammed" the two hosts. "Slammed us? The transcript may read that way," he said. "But I think the tape makes it clear he humiliated himself."Dear Tucker: Humiliation is in the eye of the bolder...
But Jon Stewart himself is no better. Indeed, in many ways he's worse in my view.
Jon Stewart is to news as the WWF is to real wrestling. Its only entertainment and Jon Stewart knows that. He does not try to be a real journalist. In fact, he makes regular jabs at himself and the show in regards to its lack of journalistic gravitas.
I think that Mr Stewart should make the rounds of all the talking heads shows and deliver the same spanking.
I agree with his assesment of the "media". They wouldn't know real journalism if it came up and gave them a Pulitzer. They use kid gloves too, but for WHAT reason? They supposedly ask the 'hard questions', but I've yet to see one ask a good question. At least Stewart admits he's NOT asking the 'hard questions'. He's a commedian, and a damn funny one too.
I only hope his diatribe will wake some 'media' outlets up to the fact they're failing their viewers and readers.
And I HATE how they have everyone constantly talk over each other.
And I'm still not certain I know who Jon Stewart is. (Maybe I should spend some time fast-forwarding to 2004 TV culture.)
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
The next step is to reverse some of the decay in TV news "debate" shows like Hannity &Colmes and their like. I would make it a point to tune in to a show where people from each side would actually acknowledge the good points the other side makes and acknowledge the upside of the opposition's position as well as the downside. Maybe even acknowledge the downside of their own position, and then explain why their upside justifies the downside.
When the shows start doing things like that, people like Stewart and me will be happier and I'm betting we compose a viable market segment. I hope they put out a show to test that theory soon.
Isn't The Daily Show's tagline, "where more people get their news than probably should"?
JMG &rmschoon: Well, this is tough, because I agree with Stewart about shows like Crossfire, as well as Hardball and Hannity &Colmes and all those. I truly hate them. I used to sort of enjoy them once in a while but after 9/11 my tolerance for them completely disappeared--and I don't think it will be back.
I think these shows are terrible for our politics, terrible for America. I am entirely on Stewart's side with that. It infuriates me that these shows do what they do. I regularly toss people out of the comments section here on Dean's World for acting like the people on those hideous shows.
All that said? What Jon Stewart does is pretty negative and corrosive too. Because his comedy is steeped in cynicism. He, like too many others, is willing to call someone in politics a liar or to ascribe insidious motives to them simply because he disagrees with him, or worse, because it's an easy, cheap shot to make.
He's also playing games by saying his show is "just a comedy show." When he throws out an assertion, he often persuades his audience, and if he doesn't think that then he's just lying to himself.
Case in point: the Swift Boat Vets. Stewart made fun of them on his show, and claimed that they never actually served with Kerry. He mocked them, and then he was done with them. For the next day or two, I heard people parroting Stewart's line about them. Some still do.
Problem is, of course, that that's not true. But he mocked these men, made a false assertion about them, and then moved on like the cynical twit that he is.
What he is is a corrosive cynic. He's mostly an equal-opportuinity offender (mostly). But he's part of the same problem he complains about. He adds to the sum total of cheap and shallow cynicism in this world, at a time when we could use less.
To be clear, there worse people in his line of work. Bill Maher is far worse, for example, since he's a vicious creep and often painfully unfunny when he thinks he's being clever. He's a dirtbag. I'll take 10 Jon Stewarts over one Bill Maher, but truth to be told, I dislike both of them for what they do to lower the level of discourse in America. And I won't excuse it because they're "just comedians."
All these yelling shows on "respectable" networks purport to be journalism, but are just another face of the Jerry Springer show. They claim to be honest journalism, but instead shill sensationalism.
Stewart has integrity in that he claims to be a joker and jokes.
The "Hardballs" of the world have no integrity because they claim to be one thing, sell something else, then cry foul when someone complains about it.
But I think Stewart was trying to make the same point that some bloggers were trying to make during the Rathergate uproar – journalists aren’t doing their jobs.
Journalism has been suffering through a kind of reverse evolution – they don’t research their stories, they don’t check facts and the notion of objectivity has been abandoned. No one expects them to be objective. No one expects investigative journalism. They’ve devolved to a point where their only purpose is to relay the information they get from their press kits, and to entertain us.
Stewart was speaking for a lot of us when he told them to shape up.
Surprisingly, while some will mock me for this, lately, the few times I've turned on Bill O'Reilly's show I was impressed with the moderate tone and insightfulness of the discussion. Mind you, it may have just been pure luck that I happened upon him on a good night, but if he were always like that I might even be a fan.
TBR: Well yes, Stewart's show mocks the news industry and calls them out on their bullcrap, and I like that. Stewart also certainly made Tucker Carlson look like a talking-point spouting idiot--although that's not much of a challenge. (Fish, barrel, shotgun.)
Still, when I look at The Daily Show, it's pretty clear to me that it's moved from satirizing the TV news industry to satirizing politics itself, and the lines between comedy and commentary have begun to disappear. The audience often now watches it as a primary news source. That may not be what they intended, but it's what they've evolved into. Thus who and what they choose to lampoon or make jokes about becomes part of our political discourse, like it or not.
Of course as I say, I'll take ten Jon Stewarts over even one Bill Maher. Jon Stewart is obviously a good guy. Oh yeah, and unlike Maher, he's actually funny. I just think Stewart's not being honest with himself if he doesn't see what his show does.
"serious people"...yeah right...that's something genetical...seriousness...you're born as a serious person and die as one...and you may never visit a comedy show as a guest in between, because that would prove the host as being dishonest with himself...
"someone i supported, because i felt he was honest"...soooo, you don't like him being honest anymore :-)?
Anybody who confuses these two TV-formats shouldn't be allowed to vote. sheeps. period.
I was wondering what it is about Mr Stewart that could justify a 132" column of type that resembles nothing so much as a court transcription. (If you scroll it from end to end, it is 11 ft long).
In fairness I must say that Joe is notable at least for the erudition of his posts, if not the brevity in which he reports them.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
I was not dividing humanity into serious and not serious. I was referring to the demeanor and attitude of someone, not their nature.
The reason I don't think he's being honest now is because I don't think he's doing the same thing he used to do. I think he's pushing an agenda. That's not the worst thing in the world, but I find it disingenuous that when the fairness of his show is brought up he falls back on the "it's just comedy" thing. It may be comedy, but it's not comedy alone. He has a message but refuses to acknowledge it or be responsible for it. That just bugs me.
I don't think people confuse his show with a news program, nor do I think his viewers are going to sheepishly buy whatever he's selling, but they do listen and his message is heard and it does have an effect.
And did anyone else notice how Paul Begala kept his mouth shut mostly. He knew the rule: "Never try to out-argue a comedian." :)
But I think to dismiss Stewart's show as "only" a comedy show is to dismiss Michael Moore as "only" a documentary film producer. There's a large number of young Americans who only watch Stewart for news. Joe calls them "voters," but I'm not so sure. If the cynical nature of the Daily Show goes too deep, they'll turn into non-voters.
There would have to be something like a special "tv-watcher's-license", if your argument was a vaild one.
"To form opinions on things not personally experienced requires people to listen to others."...yes...so ? If you listen to Stewart to form your opinion on election or politics in general, that's your problem..if it's a problem at all :-)...
Fact is, it does.
He surely doesn't and wouldn't deny that there is a number of people who take his show as a source of information. And there are some facts presented in his show. I think we can agree that there's no problem with that.
He doesn't seduce anybody to do something illegal :-) - i really don't see what your problem is. Is it that he is pro Kerry and you're afraid he "produces" some voters ?
Certainly. Of course, there are things which are false which are presented as facts on his show, and since many people do take the show seriously, that's a problem when it happens. "It's just a comedy show" is not an excuse.
i really don't see what your problem is. Is it that he is pro Kerry and you're afraid he "produces" some voters ?
"Afraid?" He can be pro-Kerry if he wants to be. It would be nice if he were honest about that. It would be easier to respect him that way. In any case, what he does is increase voter cynicism at a time when cynicism is corrosive. That is my real issue with him. But then, I already said that. ;-)
It's not that i don't know what your concern is - it's the same concern i sometimes get while watching german tv. But you have to draw a line between the effect a show has and the responsibility for this effect.
Where is he being dishonest about his political agenda ? He didn't conceal anything. "Afraid" maybe was the wrong word, but you seem to be so hyped up in a negative sense about Stewart.
You're frightening me actually, speaking of "voter cynicism" - is that contagious ;-)? But frankly, cynisims is something very personal and in the end only corrosive to ones own psyche or attitude. I'm trying to cure my own general cynicism by watching comedy shows :-) ( political satire, actually )...
Ok, let's leave it at that. The show often is fun and i hope you still enjoy it.
It may be a very American attitude. I'm not sure I can detail it.
But i also see a thin red line between cynicism on the one hand as a form of humour and on the other as a pessimistic view of the world. The latter is undoubtedly corrosive. I even believe it is unhealthy and causes stomach cancer :-).