Hacker News Reader

Comment by voisin | Hacker News Reader

I was a big fan of Stewart’s when he was hosting the Daily Show. I was extremely excited for this new show on Apple. In short, I feel I was the target market.

I watched a few episodes and couldn’t stomach them. His personality seems to have changed since the Daily Show and he just seems so much more self righteous and arrogant. I didn’t enjoy them, even though I am predisposed to be interested in the content.

I also don’t think this is limited to this show. I heard him as a guest on the Strike Force Five podcast and again he came across as just unbearable.

View on HN

What most viewers didn't realize is that what made Jon Stewart's Daily Show so great - was the huge A caliber writing staff & contributors behind it.

All who have gone onto bigger things, like:

- Stephen Colbert (has his own show now)

- Jon Oliver (has his own show now)

- Samatha Bee (has her own show now)

- Larry Wilmore (has his own show now)

- Steve Carell (movies/own show)

- Hasan Minhaj (who had his own show and probably the best "Daily Show" like spin off)

... and many more

So IOW, he wasn't very funny, and his writers mostly gave him his funny segments, like New York vs Chicago Pizza, Bullshit Mountain, etc? Do you have a link to support that claim?

(I'm even more shocked bc I don't enjoy any of his writers' shows you mentioned)

All the quoted talk show hosts you mentioned are terrible. Unfunny, pandering, nonsense that aims for clapter[0] instead of comedy.

[0] https://www.vulture.com/2018/01/the-rise-of-clapter-comedy.h...

Some people write jokes better than delivering them.

Jon Stewart was great on the delivery.

Clearly by his new show, he needs better writers.

The Daily Show was the best thing on TV 2000-2008.

Then Obama became president, and the show tried to be as scathing and funny as they had been with Bush, but I think their hearts just weren't in it.

The colbert report was also freakishly amazing.. now he is not funny..

Jimmy Kimmel and Seth Meyers are currently the funniest on late night, but I think Steven Colbert still has it. He has a lot more space to work now that his persona doesn't require him to pretend to be conservative.

In another timeline, Conan kept the Tonight Show and is still doing it, instead of all of his podcasting stuff.

For me, he’s the funniest one since Letterman and probably actually funnier than Dave was.

Mock conservative is way funnier than pious genuine liberal.

I found mocking blue-haired non-binary gender-fluid moralists way funnier. It would draw a really big audience, but you may not mock them - it's hate speech.

edit: speech not crime

Maybe you're just not as funny as you think you are.

Maybe NPC show is also not as funny, but the alternatives are being cancelled by butt-hurt moralists. This is sure true in Germany where "censored" would be the better word for it. I only know the big ones in the US and they were funny at some point, but the ones I saw all suffer from TDS by now. It's weird how people get so enraged by one person to the point they get silly and the silliness doesn't stop when the (media) presence goes away. It looks like a big hug box with a lot of copium junkies.

That's not funny and I don't need to be funny, but I feel like the people in this hug box should be made fun of.

Wow. TDS? You are a sad little person with sad little hangups about your dear leader.

I am German. If I'd make jokes about my dear leader I could face prison ;)

Your dear leader is the one you suppress speech about by labeling dissent as derangement.

Do you feel suppressed by me? You should also consult Wikipedia about "the leader" of the Germans.

I didn't label dissent as derangement and I even outlined (my) definition of TDS. You could easily apply it to other people than orange-utan and it isn't strictly limited to political affiliation either. However, nobody today embodies the baseless outrage triggering like the guy with the tiny hands. And let's face it, baseless outrage is also more often seen in one political movement today.

Some even say they are suppressed by challenging opinions ;)

Awww. Aren't you delusionally pathetic. I said you were trying to suppress dissent about your dear leader with your pathetic propaganda tactics. I didn't say you were successful. Your dear leader is a tool and you're a fool for parroting his propaganda. Run along now.

I don't like Olaf Scholz either; what's your point?

> I said you were trying to suppress dissent ...

No, you did not.

> No, you did not.

I get that reading comprehension isn't your thing. And living in denial is your thing. But that's just pathetic. Try again.

> Your dear leader is the one you suppress speech about by labeling dissent as derangement.

Where in that sentence is the "trying"? It's not even implied; it's just not there.

TDS really disables any rational thought.

There you go again. What a pathetic tool. I would say nice chatting, but it wasn't remotely. Have a nice day.

Conan

Jimmy Kimmel is extremely funny; Seth Meyers is too nice to be super funny; Colbert is not very funny now, and a little too self-involved -- I think he will eventually end up on the wrong side of some future controversy.

Last I saw him (I don't bother anymore) he can have a few good off-the-cuff moments with guests typical of the usual late-show talking heads, but you just can't make talking to celebrities/actors that interesting on it's own. Unfortunately, that's the show.

CR had more going for it. Writers on a comedy network also have more balls. Maybe Colbert himself changed but I think he just molded into his role, which was inevitable.

They weren't actually interested in being unbiased though, they only like attacking Republicans, and as political power shifted, they ran out of credible targets.

I don't see what this has to do with the issue here. The show was cancelled because he refused to change his views on AI and China to appease Apple, not because of his personality.

That is indeed his side of the story and he broke the news first. Ratings or personality may have been factors, but when fired it is common to lean into PR.

Shows with big ratings get lee-way, shows with poor ratings don't.

I don't know if there's a definitive way to tell, but it sounds like "The Problem" probably had dismal viewership.

Ok, assume the ratings were good for a moment (either Stewart's or another on Apple TV). Could the show have run an investigate segment on China's Uyghur policy on Apple TV?

It could have tried, got cancelled and then picked up by someone who would run it.

We'll see if the show moves on.

Every show on Apple TV+ (except Ted Lasso) has dismal viewership. The amount of money they spend for each viewer is insane, and they don't seem to be growing[1].

If Apple cared that much about viewership, they'd cancel most of their shows, not just Jon Stewart's.

1. https://9to5mac.com/2023/10/11/heres-how-apple-tv-growth-com....

> Every show on Apple TV+ (except Ted Lasso) has dismal viewership.

Source? They don’t publish this info afaik. Your link is about market share, likely via subscriber counts?

> The show was cancelled because

this is an assumption based on an unattributed quote. the assumption could be real, or it could be bad ratings.

I agree. I was engaged while he was on the daily show, but since starting this, he has changed as a host. While all of us needed a break from the edge and toughness in the world, he kept the fire to it and always seemed argumentative and consistently would not see the guests opinion. Exactly the opposite of what we need.

> While all of us needed a break from the edge and toughness in the world

I think that is just an issue with expectations. I also started watching his new show assuming it would be funny and lighthearted and was initially disappointed. The title of the show should have given me a clue about the change in format.

The Problem with Jon Stewart is not comedy. He's trying hard to bring our attention to problems, so we can change our public stance and fix them collectively. I'm sad the show has ended.

> His personality seems to have changed since the Daily Show and he just seems so much more self righteous and arrogant.

The sheer level of selfishness, lies, obstruction and callousness in American politics would change anyone and he's been exposed to it all for too long. He fought tooth and nail against the US government for the healthcare of 9/11 responders - and it was a fight spanning many years. That alone would change most people's outlook on things. He knows he's right about a lot of things and it must be maddening to continuously see how awful elected officials can be while people suffer. Can't blame him for being tired of repeating common sense to people who don't want to listen.

I think that comment is completely OT (the topic being: corporate censorship) but... I quite agree with it ;-)

I noticed this too, reminded me a little bit of Bill Maher's "angry old guy" transformation.

I think JS legitimately is more arrogant and self righteous. I think part of it is the DGAF everyone goes through as they get older, and part of it is pent up frustration from watching the MSM decline. I'd contend that his usual DS bit - mocking the MSM - wouldn't work today because the veneer of rehearsed professionalism is gone, and news openly doubles as media. Lacking his biggest tool in the toolbox, he centers on himself...which makes for a less interesting show, which is probably why they're canning the show (the 'creative differences' is a cop out - those always disappear when ratings are high enough).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com