|
My Q-Face posted:What? You're substituting your own viewpoint on them, projecting or something, because the clear message of that episode was "shame on the people making this private event a public and political spectacle. " yes, shame on them 
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
beatlegs posted:"That's My Bush" was made pre-9/11, I believe. After that they were totally hands off. For what it's worth this is because of their boiling hatred towards actors in general. It's the same reason they used puppets / make cartoons
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
My Q-Face posted:What? You're substituting your own viewpoint on them, projecting or something, because the clear message of that episode was "shame on the people making this private event a public and political spectacle. " That's still "both sides are bad", because it's blaming one side for RESPONDING to the other side making it a spectacle. It reminds me of those schools that suspend anyone "involved" in a fight, even if one kid was sitting there eating lunch and another kid comes up and suckerpunches him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
South Park is garbage why are we talking about garbage? Are we garbage men?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 14:49
|
|
beatlegs posted:"That's My Bush" was made pre-9/11, I believe. After that they were totally hands off. Bush appears as an incompetent idiot several times on South Park. http://southpark.wikia.com/wiki/George_Bush
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
ShortStack posted:South Park is garbage why are we talking about garbage? Are we garbage men? Well based on the thread you're in... sleepingbuddha posted:Bush appears as an incompetent idiot several times on South Park. He's only really an idiot in one of them. In the conspiracy one he's literally a mastermind and delivers a monologue at the end about how it was obviously arabs in planes that destroyed the WTC.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
sleepingbuddha posted:A new challenger to The Daily Show has arrived, fair and balanced! I dunno if anybody else read the article referenced in the bottom of the piece re: criticizing jon Stewart from the left but hoo boy was that a bunch of no true Scotsman laden bullshit.  Stewart is being paid by Viacom and that's why he doesn't call condoleeza rice a lying neocon oval office
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/373428/b-word-katherine-connell Conservatives vs. Figurative Language
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
computer parts posted:He's only really an idiot in one of them. In the conspiracy one he's literally a mastermind and delivers a monologue at the end about how it was obviously arabs in planes that destroyed the WTC. There was also an episode where Sarah Palin was a well spoken high class british cat burglar/spy. At some point you just need to let go.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
When I think of 1) South Park 2) The Simpsons 3) The Daily Show, I envision a one-legged dog with a massive pus-filled cyst growing on its face. Out of the purity of its longing for the sweet release of death, it gains human language. "Ruff, ruff, please put an end to me."
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
Axe Master posted:I dunno if anybody else read the article referenced in the bottom of the piece re: criticizing jon Stewart from the left but hoo boy was that a bunch of no true Scotsman laden bullshit. To hell with the ancillary articles, I thought the original Atlantic article was poo poo actually. I mean, look at this leap: quote:"What’s more, skepticism of authority is a conservative tenet itself. It was the great conservative philosopher was Edmund Burke who said, “The greater the power, the more dangerous the abuse.” In the Obama era, there are plenty of liberal institutions ripe for mockery. South Park has brilliantly lampooned many of the left’s excesses, from PETA, to race, environmentalism, Al Gore, San Francisco smugness, abortion, tolerance, anti-smoking activists and celebrities, lots of celebrities. "Hey, remember that philosopher from the 1700's which has gently caress-all to do with conservatism in the last 50-100 years and a cartoon by libertarians that occasionally delves into politics with both-sides-are-equal approach? Philosophy argument trumped."  The gently caress it is. The article is basically falling into this usual lazy trap of this approach; that there's "liberal" comedy like Daily Show/Colbert, and "conservative" comedy, and it's just a matter of conservative comedy finding the market/funding for it to be successful - it's basically a question of economics, not something inherently flawed in approaching comedy from a rigid ideological perspective that prevents it from establishing a wider audience. A glaring difference which the writer fails to mention is that the supposed liberal comedy/comedians routinely also mock what some would presuppose would be their "base". Part of being a non-lovely comedian is to have few sacred cows, but also how the joke is constructed when you attempt to slay them. The old adage of satire more often than not being most effective when it's punching upwards generally holds true. To that end, The Daily Show and Colbert routinely and often go after these same "liberal excesses" that he bizarrely lists as sole attributes of South Park and conservative comedy - clueless liberal celebrities (really, mocking "lots of celebrities" is a South Park conservative trademark now?), PETA, liberal politicians (how many "Kerry is a droning useless bore" jokes does Colbert/DS do whenever he's involved in a story?), environmentalism (Stewart ran with the "useless nanny-state" approach to mocking Bloomberg's initiative to restrict soda cup sizes for *weeks*), etc. If you view DS/CR as "liberal" sources of humour then your premise is flawed from the start. As with most effective satire, The Daily Show and Colbert primarily target existing structures of power, and a solid foundation of that power in a capitalist democracy is how information is largely disseminated to the populace - in this case, the free-market media. Their comedic approaches would only seem liberal to a true kool-aid drinking conservative who actually believes the majority of media has a "liberal bias", despite the inherent near-impossibility of a media that relies on private funds to exist to consistently present a leftist perspective. The media does indeed have biases as does almost every source of information, but for the most part those biases are increasingly shaped primarily via conservative economic concerns, and more often than not those concerns will lead to media that reflects the status quo because it's the cheapest option (and gently caress, I'm being extremely generous in that that's just for media that isn't obviously ideologically based, such as Fox). Finding actual truth with investigative journalism is time-consuming and expensive. This inherent laziness is the primary target of DS/CR, which will naturally lead to more conservative-oriented positions being mocked. I think the inherent problem with the question of "Why isn't their a market for conservative comedy?" is that it's being asked in the first place. You approach comedy from a marketing perspective, chances are your brand of comedy is going to suck. Happy_Misanthrope fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Mar 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
You should read the article in the bottom then. Or not. You might burst a blood vessel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
sleepingbuddha posted:A new challenger to The Daily Show has arrived, fair and balanced! The biggest problem was all their jokes were ones "lefty" comedians already make about themselves or other liberals in a funnier way than "lol liberals and starbucks amirite?!" The preview was more tedious than anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
Happy_Misanthrope posted:
What annoys me about so much of the acts of humorists or comedians that are conservative is that it is never self deprecating humor. Their humor never looks inward, it always depends on the flaws of others or the ignorance or miscalculations of others to act as the punchline. It seems to go along with their philosophy that conservatism is never wrong. This guy Michael Loftus, Steven Crowder, you're never going to hear any serious introspective comedy from them. I think there are conservative comedians that greatly rely on self deprecating humor like the Blue Collar guys; regardless of what you may think of their humor. And, in the past, talking early days of TV, the 50s and 60s, there were comedians that undoubtedly were conservative and deftly handled the art of self deprecating humor. Red Skelton, Bob Hope for example. But the current crop of self labeling conservative comedians either can't do it or won't do it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:For what it's worth this is because of their boiling hatred towards actors in general. It's the same reason they used puppets / make cartoons Matt and Trey aren't wrong in their hatred of actors. They're generally the most obnoxious people to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
radical meme posted:What annoys me about so much of the acts of humorists or comedians that are conservative is that it is never self deprecating humor. Their humor never looks inward, it always depends on the flaws of others or the ignorance or miscalculations of others to act as the punchline. It seems to go along with their philosophy that conservatism is never wrong. This guy Michael Loftus, Steven Crowder, you're never going to hear any serious introspective comedy from them. Very true, self deprecation is basically required to an extent, especially if you're going to be critiquing other people/groups for the majority of your act. To do so then not have any ability to look inward, you'll eventually just come off as obnoxious and insular and people will tire of it quickly. The Blue Collar guys are successful because they're comedians who happen to be conservative and play in front of largely conservative audiences, not because they set out to be "conservative comedians".
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Happy_Misanthrope posted:Very true, self deprecation is basically required to an extent, especially if you're going to be critiquing other people/groups for the majority of your act. To do so then not have any ability to look inward, you'll eventually just come off as obnoxious and insular and people will tire of it quickly. Larry the Cable Guy is an interesting comedian. I mean, Larry the Cable Guy is a character, but he's a character that isn't too far removed from Daniel Whitney the person. Whitney was born and raised on a pig farm in Nebraska, went to college in Georgia, and went to the University of Nebraska so it's not like he's some West Coaster or city slicker trying to fool real rural Americans into thinking he's one of them. Of course he wasn't always Larry the Cable Guy, that's who he became to further his comedy career when Daniel Whitney the comedian wasn't cutting it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
radical meme posted:What annoys me about so much of the acts of humorists or comedians that are conservative is that it is never self deprecating humor. Their humor never looks inward, it always depends on the flaws of others or the ignorance or miscalculations of others to act as the punchline. It seems to go along with their philosophy that conservatism is never wrong. This guy Michael Loftus, Steven Crowder, you're never going to hear any serious introspective comedy from them. A major difference between this style of conservative comedy and comedians like the Blue Collar guys is that the Blue Collar Comedy people are comedians first while this politically-motivated humor is political first. A comedian that happens to be conservative will take on some self-deprecating stuff or make fun of conservative values or conservatives in general. Jeff Foxworthy is pretty well known for making fun of rednecks pretty hardcore while standing up there and saying "yup, I'm a redneck, yup I'm dumb, just like other rednecks." Meanwhile Ron White had an entire monologue about how dumb it really is to be homophobic. Larry the Cable Guy won't shut up about how fat and stupid his entire family is. Politically-based conservative humor would never make these jokes. The Blue Collar Comedy guys make the kinds of jokes they do because these are the things they know about. Jeff Foxworthy is from Georgia and grew up a Southern Baptist. The motivation isn't to prove himself right but just to tell jokes. Which is the major difference; a comedian, a real one, isn't motivated by being right or proving himself right. Rather, the end goal is to be funny. It doesn't matter if the comedian is right or wrong or if they've swayed the audience to one opinion or another. Jeff Foxworthy is just being funny. No more, no less. This new wave of conservative humor is focusing on proving itself right about everything by going "liberals are dumb lol." Their primary goal isn't being funny so they ultimately fail. Meanwhile that deliberate lack of introspection is ultimately what the problem is. TO be funny you need to understand that it's about the audience. You need the audience to tell you what is funny; you can't tell them what is funny but that's what this is doing. It's saying "THIS IS FUNNY YOU WILL LAUGH AT IT" without bothering to find out what funny actually means.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
For South Park, there is always the "Fantastic Easter Special" which mocks the absolute hell out of the Catholic Church, and Bill Donohue specifically. Having Donohue claim he is "the voice of God" and then literally order Jesus's death was hilarious. After all, it's not like Donohue could possibly find his depiction positive...Wikipedia posted:Asked about that, Mr. Donohue walked to a frame, prominently displayed on a shelf, containing a still from the 2007 episode of the animated television series “South Park” in which Mr. Donohue was parodied: In the picture, Mr. Donohue is shown wearing the pope’s tall hat, his unmistakable receding hairline and square-framed black glasses captured, uncannily, by the pen of the artist.  For those who don't know/remember:  In addition to the V-for-Vendetta mask, in the background is this infamous Onion article which is terrifying in its prescience, since it was published on Jan 17, 2001.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
Conservatives are notoriously bad at grasping satire. I suppose it comes from their living in a bubble most of their adult lives.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:Matt and Trey aren't wrong in their hatred of actors. They're generally the most obnoxious people to deal with. I would nominate anyone in the Libertarian movement for that honor. Or any FOX News/Limbaugh fan, for that matter. Some actors are pretty cool, some aren't, just like people in general.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:3) The Daily Show That's because for some strange reason when you watch Jon Stewart's interviews with O'Reilly you see a symbiotic relationship between good chums, rather than Stewart milking O'Reilly for every ounce of comedy he can. I understand criticism of South Park, but goon criticism of TDS and Jon Stewart is baffling. Sorry, leftists. Sorry a relatively unknown liberal comedian and his staff managed to take a lovely late night comedy show on a failing network and turn it into a brilliant source of political satire and commentary while spawning a second show that is equally brilliant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:That's because for some strange reason when you watch Jon Stewart's interviews with O'Reilly you see a symbiotic relationship between good chums, rather than Stewart milking O'Reilly for every ounce of comedy he can. I understand criticism of South Park, but goon criticism of TDS and Jon Stewart is baffling. Sorry, leftists. Sorry a relatively unknown liberal comedian and his staff managed to take a lovely late night comedy show on a failing network and turn it into a brilliant source of political satire and commentary while spawning a second show that is equally brilliant. But all that stuff happened years ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I would nominate anyone in the Libertarian movement for that honor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:That's because for some strange reason when you watch Jon Stewart's interviews with O'Reilly you see a symbiotic relationship between good chums, rather than Stewart milking O'Reilly for every ounce of comedy he can. I understand criticism of South Park, but goon criticism of TDS and Jon Stewart is baffling. Sorry, leftists. Sorry a relatively unknown liberal comedian and his staff managed to take a lovely late night comedy show on a failing network and turn it into a brilliant source of political satire and commentary while spawning a second show that is equally brilliant. Hm, pretty apt username there! Why don't you come back to D&D when you really open your mind, pleb! But no, seriously, Daily Show and Colbert Report are pretty cool. Everybody I know either kinda likes it or believes it's destroying the moral fiber of society. I don't watch it, but see some clips online time to time when people in the office mention a particularly funny bit. It's not brilliant satire (maybe Colbert is? I don't know) but it's the most exposure people I know get of political activity. But their satire is pretty much like South Park's in that it suggests a lot of things are hosed but tacitly approves the status quo. You're not going to see any of them pushing for socialist revolutions or anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
Daily Show is decent but like anything that's gone on for a long time it has both hits and misses. Sometimes it feels like Stewart's routine is too predictable (though other times that itself is part of the joke, which can work,) and sometimes it feels like they're working too hard to reach a certain narrative when the clips they're riffing off of don't support it (I'm thinking of a bit they did re: Obama and the NSA/drones, while the points Stewart brought up were essentially agreeable, it felt like they were ignoring what Obama's speech actually said in what they showed.) I think Colbert used to be brilliant satire, but it's having trouble catching up with what actual conservative media is doing. It's still usually good for a laugh, but at the same time it's kind of spinning its wheels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 06:37
|
|
|
N. Senada posted:But no, seriously, Daily Show and Colbert Report are pretty cool. Everybody I know either kinda likes it or believes it's destroying the moral fiber of society. I don't watch it, but see some clips online time to time when people in the office mention a particularly funny bit. It's not brilliant satire (maybe Colbert is? I don't know) but it's the most exposure people I know get of political activity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 06:48
|
|
|
I have found that Colbert goes farther out on the ledge and says way more inflammatory (hilarious) things than TDS. I suspect it's because he's playing a character and Stewart is basically... not. Some of the things Colbert has said over the last few years have left me breathless, while John and crew just make me laugh at the absurdity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
John Stewart has been handed an enormous amount of power, there are polls showing that most people (specifically young people) trust the Daily Show over any other source of news media. Yet when his responsibility as a journalist is ever brought up, Stewart immediately runs to the "I'm a comedian, I'm an entertainer" defense. He does what this exact same thread was criticizing Rush Limbaugh for doing. Both him and Colbert peddle the same brand of smug liberalism that results in things like that Rally to Restore Sanity idiocy. Like the real problem in America is the lack of civility in discourse, rather than one side being actively evil and the other acquiescing to almost all their opponents' demands.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
rakovsky maybe posted:John Stewart has been handed an enormous amount of power, there are polls showing that most people (specifically young people) trust the Daily Show over any other source of news media. Yet when his responsibility as a journalist is ever brought up, Stewart immediately runs to the "I'm a comedian, I'm an entertainer" defense. He does what this exact same thread was criticizing Rush Limbaugh for doing. That is a false equivalence that is incredibly harsh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
rakovsky maybe posted:He does what this exact same thread was criticizing Rush Limbaugh for doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
rakovsky maybe posted:Both him and Colbert peddle the same brand of smug liberalism that results in things like that Rally to Restore Sanity idiocy. Like the real problem in America is the lack of civility in discourse, rather than one side being actively evil and the other acquiescing to almost all their opponents' demands. On the contrary, I think both Colbert and Stewart have it nailed. They make light of themselves and modern American political discourse because they see it for what it is: a farce.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
Yes I would like to exapand on my previous point a little, please. Stewart is an actual comedian. When he says that's what he is, he isn't lying. As mentioned by beatlegs, TDS makes fun of both sides by pointing out the absurdity of modern politics and sometimes takes on larger issues. This is nothing like what Rush does, because Rush makes up arguments and premises from whole cloth to influence the GOP and its voters to obey him. Stewart and Colbert are certainly attempting to persuade on their shows, but not in anything like the disgusting, dogwhistle or downright racist way that Rush employs all the time. Seriously, this your argument shows a similarity on the surface that is only skin-deep. The Rally may not have been The Tea Party or Occupy, but it was a call for reason and it was accepted well and demonstrated that many people sympathized with the idea. It wasn't a failure in that sense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
I found Stewart's call for "both sides" to tone it down during the the "Rally" to be a horrible misstep, but he does that kind of thing rarely and the good he does outweighs the bad, so whatever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:32
|
|
|
rakovsky maybe posted:John Stewart has been handed an enormous amount of power, there are polls showing that most people (specifically young people) trust the Daily Show over any other source of news media. Yet when his responsibility as a journalist is ever brought up, Stewart immediately runs to the "I'm a comedian, I'm an entertainer" defense. He does what this exact same thread was criticizing Rush Limbaugh for doing. John Stewart: Comedy Central Rush Limbaugh: Excellence In Broadcasting Network  Its like.. there's are different standards being inferred. Oh man I wish I was smart enough to get the hidden message here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:39
|
|
|
rakovsky maybe posted:John Stewart has been handed an enormous amount of power, there are polls showing that most people (specifically young people) trust the Daily Show over any other source of news media. Yet when his responsibility as a journalist is ever brought up, Stewart immediately runs to the "I'm a comedian, I'm an entertainer" defense. He does what this exact same thread was criticizing Rush Limbaugh for doing. You know those episodes where Jon Stewart will stop everything either at the end of the same show or the very beginning of the next episode and correct himself and apologize and make a big deal of what he said was incorrect? I can recall 4-5 at least and one of them was last week with Jason Bateman. That never happens with anyone else on television and they are suppose to be more respectable, instead PROFIT. Colbert literally takes all the frustration everyone gets at seeing Fox News, including conservatives who hate it just as much, and turns it into a living human being who happens to donate poo poo tons of money to charity and stunts that bring attention to bullshit. The fact that any of you would characterize what they do as "left" don't realize you are making the problem worse by branding what Fox and anyone else who is a moron on national television as the "right" instead of "lazy" or "changing the presentation of facts to make you more comfortable with ignorance". FADEtoBLACK fucked around with this message at 07:47 on Mar 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:44
|
|
Job Truniht posted:On the contrary, I think both Colbert and Stewart have it nailed. They make light of themselves and modern American political discourse because they see it for what it is: a farce. American political discourse is a farce only for rich whites whose lives are largely unaffected by whose President except that maybe their wealthy upper-class gay friends might be a little more comfortable. For people killed by drones at weddings or having their food stamps taken away, American political discourse is deadly serious. Jon Stewart (and Colbert) sell disaffected irony to a generation who are willing to lap it up because every major Millenial political project (Obama, Occupy) turned into a massive disaster. Spaceman Future! posted:John Stewart: Comedy Central You're an idiot who doesn't understand context, congrats. Jon Stewart is literally the most trusted man in news: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/22/time-magazine-poll-jon-st_n_242933.html He uses that privilege to make goofy faces at the camera and give softball interviews despite the unprecedented amount of access he has to politicians - specifically Dems. Alse there is definitely some hyperbolic irony in EIB's name.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:44
|
|
|
I think Rak has a good point in that Stewart tries to distance himself from how important his show is. But alsoDr. Faustus posted:That is a false equivalence that is incredibly harsh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
rakovsky maybe posted:American political discourse is a farce only for rich whites whose lives are largely unaffected by whose President except that maybe their wealthy upper-class gay friends might be a little more comfortable. For people killed by drones at weddings or having their food stamps taken away, American political discourse is deadly serious. You know what the difference is today between political movements that succeed and those that don't? Money. You are basically blaming them for being not perfect while completely ignoring the travesty that is journalism on television. VVVV Very true. FADEtoBLACK fucked around with this message at 08:56 on Mar 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
I don't know FADEtoBLACK, he seems pretty pissed that Stewart is the most trusted man in journalism. That might speak to some sort of frustration with journalism on tv.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:51
|
|