Hacker News Reader

Comment by partiallypro | Hacker News Reader

> At the end of the day it's a comedy show not a news show and his job is to make people laugh

He and Jon Stewart keep (kept in the case of Jon) using this excuse when they get things wrong, but when they get things right they take all the glory they can get. The show(s) have to have some sort of accountability.

For example Couric was just ripped for adding 6 seconds of dead air on a documentary....but that's literally what The Daily Show had been doing for years, making people look like idiots (so it fits their segment narrative). That's all good fun until you realize young people think people like Stewart and Oliver are trustworthy news sources.

I like what they do in many cases, but I despise this excuse that it's "just" a comedy show. Maybe NBC nightly news should just add an in-studio audience that laughs and suddenly they can get away with every screw up.

View on HN

> He and Jon Stewart keep (kept in the case of Jon) using this excuse when they get things wrong, but when they get things right they take all the glory they can get.

It's not meant to be an excuse, it's meant to be an accusation. If a comedy show is so much better at news than a news show, that's a major failing on the part of actual news shows.

In some cases they are better, in other cases they are immensely worse; especially during their taped interview segments. But when we compare "news" most people are looking at 24/7 cable "news" which is full of commentators that are told to say outrageous things and to argue, for the purpose of ratings. That's usually where The Daily Show, et all get their meat. The irony of the Daily Show is that while critiquing cable news commentary it often does the -exact- same thing, but they cover it as if they are the objective ones. To their credit, on cable news, you already know everyone's bias if you're a regular viewer. The Daily Show et al, on the other hand, do not; which gives the illusion of objectivity.

It's not a major failing, but instead the way it has always worked. The court jester was always the one that was the most accurate because he was able to temper the bad news with comedy such that even the king would approve. The guy that said 'hear-ye' would get his head cut off for the same thing. And no, I don't have sources, this is observation off the cuff and strictly my opinion.

> using this excuse when they get things wrong

That's exactly what it is. It's the equivalent of those people on YouTube who assault someone and then say 'it was just a prank!'

I think making fun of someone and trashing their reputation without being super careful to check all the facts first is really nasty and I don't like watching either of their shows.

That's incorrect, at the Daily Show they have a large fact checking team because they want their jokes to be based in fact. The Daily Show has also done apologies and retractions when they were incorrect. It is a comedy show but they are working hard to be correct, there's a great episode of NPR's Fresh Air where they speak with a Daily Show producer about exactly this issue.

Edit: I have heard Stewart say "we're not the news" in response to questions like "Do you feel a responsibility to cover every important issue?" where "we're not the news" means they only cover issues they can make funny (an example of something perhaps too sad to make funny is the Flint water crisis)

Accountability? What about accountability from FOX news, CNN and all the other programs that do an even worse job and aren't comedy shows? Shouldn't they be accountable first and foremost?

Can you give a specific example of someone who was manipulated to make look bad on the Daily Show? Most of their interviews are with people the host disagrees with but are happy to share their views (gun rights advocates, abortion rights advocates, etc). Typically guests and participants in segments are not being manipulated. I can't say it's never been done but it's certainly not an epidemic at that show.

You're joking right? The entire interview segments are spliced and edited. Pauses are added for comedic effect, they splice different questions with different answers. It's not a single example, it's literally every interview segment.

That doesn't mean I agree with the person they are interviewing, or that that person isn't ignorant...but there is no way you can see their reporting as objective.

Here's a news article about this and how to avoid it if you ever have to go on a program like the Daily Show.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2014-09-23/don-t-eve...

Never gets old: http://www.cc.com/video-clips/6p62fp/the-daily-show-with-jon...

Jason Jones talks to two hunters, a non-fatal hunter and a fatal hunter, to see what method is better. (4:33)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com