Stewart, Colbert Save the Day:

[madokie]

Stewart, Colbert Save the Day: Bill O’Reilly and Fox News’ ISIS Insanity Makes Them More Essential than Ever

Stephen Colbert delivers critique CBS was either too afraid, or ill-informed, to use to shut down the Fox blowhard.

As the nation continues airstrikes on ISIS in Syria and Iraq, the U.S. public is bracing for yet another military conflict in the Middle East. And in order to make sense of this new crisis viewers are finding that “fake news” often offers better analysis than the so-called “real news.” While Fox News’s Eric Bolling called the first female UAE pilot that bombed the Islamic State “ boobs on the ground” and coverage on all major news channels mistakenly described ISIS as an imminent threat to the United States, fake news offered the U.S. public a refreshing dose of reality.

Of course, the idea that the fake news is doing it better than the real news should come as no surprise. In recent years we have learned that viewers more and more often perceive “fake” news as “real” news. Viewers trust Jon Stewart more than Brian Williams. And Fox News viewers consistently rank near the bottom of polls on informed viewers, while viewers of shows like “The Colbert Report” know more about contemporary political issues than those consuming mainstream news media.

So why is the “fake” news so good? First of all, in an era when most cable news is overtaken by hype, punditry, and sensationalism, satire news offers viewers a much-needed chance to gain some critical perspective. When the mainstream media droned on that Obama needed to be more aggressive, Stephen Colbert responded by wishing we could have Frank Underwood as president. The gimmick immediately revealed the ridiculous nature of most TV news coverage that uses up airtime bashing the president and avoiding the real issues. Hence satire news often reminds us that the actual topics covered by mainstream news are not helping to inform us.

Secondly, satire news exposes the hypocrisy of political rhetoric on TV news. For example, on the very same news day that Eric Bolling made the outrageous “boobs on the ground” statement, a major portion or TV news time was spent deconstructing Obama’s “latte” salute with Bolling himself calling the salute with coffee in hand disrespectful to the troops. Stewart pointed out the hypocrisy of Bolling’s attacks on Obama by reminding viewers that Bolling had shown no respect for the female UAE pilot. His point is that, if we should respect troops, then we should respect ALL troops. Stewart called out Bolling saying, “You don’t really care. You don’t really care about this. You have no principle about this.” Today’s viewers know that satire news often has more integrity than “real” TV news.

http://www.alternet.org/media/stewart-colbert-save-day-bill-oreilly-and-fox-news-isis-insanity-makes-them-more-essential?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark

[Enthusiast]

1. Stewart and Colbert are the only remaining reliable source on TV news.

I will not watch one minute of network news. It is nothing but propaganda.

[madokie]

2. Same here

I'll watch the local news and that’s it and not a whole lot of it at that

[deutsey]

9. Echoing a post down-thread: John Oliver, too

I don't have HBO, but I watch his segments online when they're available. I think he often hits even harder than Stewart and Colbert, probably because he isn't on commercial TV and has a format that makes deeper critiques possible.

[madokie]

10. I really like John Oliver too

I seen his interview with Charlie Rose and he had me in stitches. He sees things a lot like a lot of us here see things. he's good

[Enthusiast]

11. Oh, yes. John Oliver too!

[Baitball Blogger]

15. They are changing the way that news is delivered.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

3. John Oliver's new show on HBO tells it like it is.

He's quite good. He used to write for The Daily Show and they gave him his own show.

[tblue37]

5. Oliver is great--and he does that long-form rant with one of his stories each time. nt

[bvf]

4. Bookmarked this.

This evening, Stewart had me in hysterics* (and sharing his profound frustration) at the true meaning of, "We must do whatever it takes to save American lives!"

Because that obviously doesn't apply to states yet to expand Medicaid coverage, for example. Only to blocking immigration reform because we're all going to die from ISIS and Ebola before we get around to it.

Colbert and Stewart are treasures.



* is this term still okay?

[rustbeltvoice]

6. The role of the jester is to tell the truth.

http://catholicdemocratfromohio.blogspot.com/2007/08/of-jesters-and-fools.html

O, and then pointing out Fox. Fox is absolute insidious propaganda, its credibility approaches zero, and its faithful viewers are mentally--goons.

[BlueJazz]

7. Good read. Thanks for posting.

[malaise]

8. +1,000

[hootinholler]

12. If they had no integrity

It wouldn't be funny. Fox tried a fake news show and it failed miserably because it was simply mean spirited and not based in truth.

[madokie]

13. Thats the deal for sure

[Gothmog]

14. Stewart and Colbert are both great

Fake news is far better than the real news lately

[rock]

16. "Fake news" on Colbert and Stewart

usually consists of "Real news" + sarcastic remarks (easily detectable). Ironically that means the shows present the news. If only the news shows did. NOT !