|
Well that was a frustrating episode, why did he end it by telling everyone to protest live at Wrestlemania, while omitting any actual way they could identify themselves as being part of that? No specific chant like "pay your workers" to do in unison? Not even a hash tag to write on the signs? He just told a bunch of fans to make confusing mismatched noises to ineffectually voice anger in ways that will not be obvious live on air
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2019 04:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 19:10 |
|
|
EugeneJ posted:When has Daily Show/Last Week Tonight ever advocated for boycotts of anything Yeah sadly this is the problem with this show. CSPAM pointed it out to me and now I can't unsee it. Feelings are *not* nice towards John Oliver there for this reason, and last month they wouldn't let my attempted thread about the show stand. From now on I'll be watching all episodes of this show through that lens. "It's great that he's brought an unheard of leftist cause into the public awareness, and his research team dug up some great stuff, but is he proposing a solution?" Does he seem to believe that lack of "awareness" alone is the problem, therefore putting the blame on individual voters for being ignorant, and not the system at large for being willfully callous and exploitative? Does he have nothing at all to say about what to do to the system? At the end of the day it's HBO's fault really, not his. As much as the show makes him the center of attention, that's more an entertainment choice than anything. The fact is hundreds or more people work on this show and a handful of executives have a say in its messaging. If word comes down to HBO from on high that: 1. Bernie Sanders is not to be mentioned as a serious candidate (due to an organized media blackout), or that 2. Venezuela is not to be described as a coup, or that 3. No direct activism can be called for, or that 4. (This week) the media's Russiagate failure is not to be discussed, Then we can't blame John much for not doing otherwise. At the end of the day he is just one man who happens to be employed as a funnyman in this multi-person effort, in a vast company that has its own capitalistic goals. This show might be helping the left, but it is also part of the problem by spreading the centrist lies that nothing is worth fighting for, that nothing can be different systemwide, and that any attempts to change it are not only a waste of time, but in fact cause disharmony that is the only true problem in society must stamp out. That the true onus lies on voters, not rulers, to learn better and to fix things or else get out of the way. SlothfulCobra posted:but I bet John Oliver's dead-set against physical comedy. Um... did you see how many times he played the McMachon face getting pushed into an rear end clip Tiggum posted:That, and the people who picked it up online, annoyed me so much. It was the latter's fault. This was an unfortunate bit to do because the public ran with it in a way that missed its message, which was just "let's use Trump's rhetorical weapons against him more". Instead the public was too dumb for the message ("Trump says anyone whose family name changed is dishonest, what a dick") and simplified the message themselves into "Trump's real name is DRUMPF! It sounds foreign and stupid, good reasons to gang up on him. Team Hillary!" Leftists who do not watch the show saw this on social media and decided the show is trash. It's not, but it's part of the problem for other reasons. Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Apr 7, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2019 18:18
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:You are very wrong: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Oliver#Influence_and_the_%22John_Oliver_effect%22 Snowglobe of Doom posted:What the heck are you talking about, he proposes solutions pretty darn frequently. This episode he was pushing for "first right of refusal" laws in more states to give resident groups the chance to buy their parks if they come up for sale, last episode he was asking fans to pressure the WWE to take care of their performers because that's the only kind of pressure that's ever made the WWE change anything ever, in previous episodes he's informed people about important but relatively unknown polls on important issues and urged them to turn up and cast their vote, he's raised money for specific charities, he bought his own mobile clinic truck, etc etc.. A few weeks ago you would have been preaching to the choir but I've come around. So should you. If you think I'm just saying these things out of the blue and am totally alone, try going into CSPAM and saying what you just did and see how well it goes over. I did, this month, and look at the aftermath: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3884874 Seriously, read it. The posters ITT fancy themselves representative of the left, but there is *vitriol* on the left about John Oliver. It's not just a matter of them not knowing about the show or only having heard "Drumpf". People really disrespect him for the list of ways he's hung the left out to try, in spite of the good he's done. I notice you left that part (the most damning part) out of your quote, and I can see why, because there are no excuses to be made for: Dumb Lowtax posted:1. Bernie Sanders is not to be mentioned as a serious candidate (due to an organized media blackout), or that While LWT is better than any other show on television for current issues, the point the left is making is that *no* televised news show is doing what would really be morally right, which is to admit that our institutions are beyond redemption, will never allow themselves to be fixed, and need to be thrown out. HBO also put The Wire on which does have this message, but it is not a news show and is therefore "allowed" to say that. Snowglobe of Doom posted:The true onus DOES lie on voters, and learning more and being better informed (which is what this show is all about) is an essential element of that. That's how democracy is supposed to work, and that's the only way that actual solutions have any chance of being enacted. Our system is functionally not a democracy and most votes do not count. What you're expressing is a belief that the system works, which is central to the thesis of this show (that voting better can make everything better) and antithetical to leftist revolution. If people vote differently, the people at the top of our institutions will just go to farther and farther lengths to protect their hegemony, and their actions alone can keep things the way they are; economic and political power are currently monopolized in the hands of the few, which is the whole problem. Blaming the voters is exactly what keeps attention off of the policy-based manipulations of the ruling class that holds the voters down. Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Apr 8, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2019 19:44
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Stuff like "there's an organized media blackout to not mention Bernie Sanders as a serious candidate" sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory (that doesn't super reflect my experienced reality) and maybe doesn't belong in this thread? How much did you hear about Kamala Harris's campaign right when she announced? Biden's? Now can you remember which day it was exactly that Bernie announced? edit: Would you guess from current TV coverage that Sanders is ahead, or not ahead, of the other candidates in fundraising? Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Apr 8, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2019 20:18
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:But again... a topic of CSPAM, not the Last Week Tonight thread. No? I think it's relevant to the thread, not because of this discussion of current coverage of 2020 candidates, but because of the show's coverage of the 2016 election. It is not too early to talk about that, we saw how it played it to the end and it was lacking. For John Oliver to be the leftmost cable news show and still have almost entirely omitted Bernie Sanders back as the 2016 primary unfolded is pretty revealing of something. There are some lines this show mysteriously does not cross and others it is fine with crossing. We should explore why. And think of Oliver as a transient ally, not as a perfect spokesman for the left because HBO will never call for burning down all current institutions including HBO quite like the left would prefer. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
Meanwhile the Bernie thread had this to say about calling it a conspiracy theory:basic hitler posted:bernie erasure is absolutely happening and unfortunately the kind of person who refuses to see it, probably wont even when you point out flagrant examples Soap Scum posted:Do either of these help? Still looking for more btw Shear Modulus posted:this lovely horserace article's headline says bernie and biden slipped in this weekly poll despite the actual text of the article saying his percentage stayed even at 25% while biden's fell 2 percentage points to 33% (also says harris and butt "surged" when in actuality harris stayed flat at 8% and butt went up 1 point from 2 to 3) John Oliver is absolutely a part of this, and was in 2016 as well
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I feel like if Oliver starts championing Harris or Biden or Beto then, yeah, maybe it will be worth discussing why he's not giving Bernie and others equal time. But is he doing that? Does he do that? Isn't the key criticism of the guy that he just makes jokes about problems and doesn't advocate political solutions? Is it not a solution he could call for, for any of the myraid of issues he highlights, to propose voting in the one single presidential candidate offering to enact policy far left enough to redistribute sufficient resources to address those issues? Seems like not just "a" solution, seems like "the" solution Instead he frequently mentioned Hillary throughout the primaries and only mentioned Sanders' name once or twice edit: Christ, he just did a whole episode on Monica Lewenski, frequently mentioning the Clintons.... while failing to even mention that Bill is caught up in #metoo with tons of accusers and how that should have taken the focus off of Monica, yet here we are in the modern day where Bill's legacy is mostly intact. Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Apr 8, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2019 21:04
|
|
|
I didn't say he's not funny, or that he's not a net good. I'm pointing out that he's part of the problem when it comes to a few different problems. That is fair. I will not "stick to CSPAM", you cannot discuss this show there. edit: STAC Goat posted:You know what, I don't want to get in a protracted argument with people you're cross posting to. I'm sorry. I'm blind and the sort of person who can't see the truth just as that wonderful CSPAM poster said. I'm wrong, you're right. We good? What a graceful way to react to being brought compelling numerical evidence that you explicitly asked to see in order to change your mind Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Apr 8, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2019 21:12
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:But... I included that guy's quote just to show you what the reaction to that idea is among leftists. Don't read too much into it. The myriad of numerical examples that thread is currently digging up are the point. The point is that the problem is real, it is one of many problems that pretty much all centrist-produced media (read: all televised media) shares (such as watering down class-based issues), and that shows like John Oliver's are not exempt from it as much as we like the show and its campaigns. And the complaint from the other poster, which was that LWT is lacking in calling for political solutions (such as last week with the lost opportunity to call for a clearly identifiable WWE boycott/protest). Highlighting institutions' problems without directly calling the institution irredeemable and promoting drastic political action is a centrist thing to do and a weakness of the show. And standing above all in this otherwise good show is his omission of this potential solution right here: Dumb Lowtax posted:Is it not a solution he could call for, for any of the myraid of issues he highlights, to propose voting in the one single presidential candidate offering to enact policy far left enough to redistribute sufficient resources to address those issues? Seems like not just "a" solution, seems like "the" solution Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Apr 8, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2019 21:33
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:The way the audience reacted to the joke while not reacting to the content, yes. It worried me. As far as I know "the audience" in shows like this is almost entirely a fake concept; they are a group of people being ordered to do things on cue. If the signal says applause they applaud, if it says laugh they laugh. If they make incorrect noise out of turn they get yelled at as one group between takes. They're only allowed to be there because they perform a job. In this case the signal given to the studio audience did not thematically match the delivered line very well, which is a pretty common occurrence on talk shows and makes the "audience" seem mentally off but I believe they're a mostly fictional entity anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
I wouldn't say that they're paid, just that they're absolutely given instructions at the beginning and I assume studios actually use the stereotypical light-up "Applause" signs (and probably "Laughter" too since that's the most important interaction on a talk show). As an anecdote my dad's friend was on the studio audience for a filming of Oprah's talk show years ago, and they reported back that she personally viciously tore her whole audience a new one in between takes for not participating correctly.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
That and booze. Well, maybe that's it then. The audience reactions for LWT didn't always seem appropriate because the audience was drunk
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
Against the death penalty, but for carpetbombing the citizens of countries that violate law 
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
When talking about this scandal, one thing that I'm surprised he didn't bring up at all about it is the question of what will happen to Glenn Close's spleen when she dies, and if it will be eaten by a dog e: gently caress
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2019 20:38
|
|
|
There's no way to verify if you're right (coke), no one involved would ever admit it's going on or much less is a problem. Same goes for lots of TV personalities that seemingly are coked up. It's probably a coping mechanism for nervousness e: Or depression from the constant need to live up to what he does on a schedule. Hope he never burns out on us. Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 07:50 on May 23, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 07:45
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:So why is this thread suddenly about a politician who hasn't been covered in the last few episodes? Well clearly Bernie matters to fans of this show, who either love him or have crazy spasms of dismissal about him like happened with the poster above. Here's a different question you could have asked, why hasn't Bernie been covered in the last few episodes, or mentioned ever? That politician seems like a glaring omission from the show for the last four years, don't you think? Seems like Bernie has been an important thing in American politics. He is by far the most popular opposition candidate versus Trump, in terms of number of donors and even total funding right now. Seems important. Isn't it strange that the news show with the leftmost viewerbase seems so intent on keeping its viewers from finding out about the leftmost presidential candidate, the four leftmost congresswomen, the tremendous amount of good they've all done during this administration, and the fact that they are the only voices in government offering to decisively solve all the problems that every single episode of this show is about? The main solution of course being to divert the trillions of dollars that were previously funneled from the poor into corporate and billionaire coffers, back downward again into the average person's economy and safety nets, an idea that HBO corporate obviously would be against, no? Can't you conclude the obvious about HBO's censorship of America's political climate and its current players? If this show is willing to hide proposed solutions placed on the table by elected officials right now, by way of hiding the only individuals championing them, then that other poster is right: LWT is no better than problem porn for comfortable slacktivists. John is great at highlighting those problems, but by being this way he becomes *part* of the problem. Nobody is expecting HBO to host a show that blames corporate America or calls for the end of capitalism, but for them to omit any of the leftmost candidates and officials from weekly discussions about all the leftmost social issues is just.... egregious. Bernie erasure is real, and we're watching it on this show. Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Aug 21, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2019 05:23
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:It used to be fairly normal to not mention campaigning candidates much unless something newsworthy was happening Yeah, no, no it is not actually normal that this show finds five or ten minutes out of every single episode to devote to the ruling party's candidate, yet has never, in the entire run of the show, mentioned the opposition leader's existence in spite of two presidential elections happening. You don't think those are something newsworthy? You don't think the opposition leader has done anything at all newsworthy in years? Azhais posted:I guess the answer to "how long before the idiots that believe communism is a remotely viable economic policy reach critical mass again" is about 60 years. No one has mentioned communism, idiot. Bernie's economic and social program proposals are in place and working in many other countries besides the United States, and are fairly mild when you hear them out compared to what they could be and when compared to what some countries already have. Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 07:18 on Aug 21, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2019 07:04
|
|
|
Y'all ready to hear a lot about a lot of societal problems a Bernie presidency could immediately fix?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2020 03:32
|
|
|
The senate doesn't get a say in huge swaths of possible executive actions
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2020 06:44
|
|
|
Azhais posted:Anything people are clinging to Bernie to solve does. If you could just executive order nationalized healthcare, ubi, free housing, and education debt forgiveness, lol education debt forgiveness can unilaterally be executive ordered by the sec of education, yes Azhais posted:I'm pretty sure Obama would have tried at least some it. do you think Obama would have even wanted to? Biden, the Lehman Bros. choice for VP, was the one who made the law that you can't discharge student debt under bankruptcy Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 08:59 on Feb 10, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2020 08:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 19:10 |
|
|
There's no way he wasn't reading a pre-prepared statement off of a teleprompter. You can tell it in the delivery, and how well it goes when he improvs during his "normal" signoffs.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2020 09:37
|
|