There’s Hope Yet

Jon Stewart is god. Note the capitalization: not the God, in the typical sense of an omnipotent, omniscient, vengeful creator of all. Lord knows (again, not that Lord – this guy sells ponchos in Berkeley) I don’t want to incur the wrath of any possible-but-not-probable all-seeing creator who lives in the sky, on the off chance that I’m wrong and he actually does exist. Nevertheless, blasphemy aside, Jon Stewart is a god.

“But Brendon,” I hear you, my entirely fictitious readership, asking, “Why is Jon Stewart a god?”

Simple – his is the only news show, ironically, not willing to follow the mainstream press’ script, choosing instead to ask the tough questions. Well, the only one in the US at least – those Irish reporters have been spoiling for a fight. The Irish never submit, never answer to anybody. Apparently their reporters aren’t too fond of submitting questions in advance either.

Nobody gets their news from “news” programs anymore – they never seem break the important stories first, if at all, anymore. No wonder people are turning to comedy shows for their political coverage. How weird is this? The quality of news programs has been deteriorating for years into entertainment disguised as news – but it appears to work both ways? While the press may sneer at the “reporters” on Entertainment Tonight, at least Kojo has the balls to come up with his own questions rather than letting his interviewees’ handlers suggest fashion questions.

To the rest of press, I can only offer this suggestion: start studying your notes – you might learn something.

Jarvis On NewsNight

The following is the text of a comment I posted to Jeff Jarvis’ blog, Buzzmachine, on his recent appearance on CNN NewsNight to discuss the recent Michael Moore film. His viewpoint has received quite a bit of criticism – unfairly, I believe.

Though I am a fan of Moore, if only for his attempt to try to change something (I do believe he is genuinely interested in having a positive impact on society), I do have to agree with Jeff’s assessment of the film and Moore’s style of film-making. Moore’s films do appear to resort to the same selective use of facts on their issues as the targets of their scrutiny (the NRA, big business, Bush and the Republicans).

However, I would argue that without resorting to an extreme viewpoint (not only in this film, but also in Bowling for Columbine), Moore would never be heard. Period. I’m not saying that’s a good thing – just the way it appears to work with US media audiences.

Speaking as a Canadian who only recently moved to the US, I have found the news and the viewpoints presented in the US media to be very insular, internally-focused. I didn’t have access to the CBC for four months and basically didn’t hear about anything except for local news, Washington news, or Iraq news. I’m pretty sure there was other stuff going on in the world that was just as bad, just as important, just as worthy of my attention.

The viewpoints being presented in the media are extreme, and complex issues are often distilled to sound-bites that depict difficult issues in black-and-white terms with no room for thoughtful consideration or analysis. They are not conversations. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone in the media present their viewpoint in a fashion that suggests they are interested in creating solutions or negotiating – no one has the guts to say “You know what, I’ve reconsidered what you’re saying, and I think you might have a point. Maybe I’m wrong on X.”

I am reminded of Moore’s segment in Bowling for Columbine, where he interviewed one of the producers of Cops. The producer said he couldn’t produce a similar show focusing on white-collar crime, because no one would watch it – it wouldn’t be interesting enough for the audience. Perhaps Moore came to a similar conclusion early in his film-making career – he freely admitted to putting his own spin on the facts on The Daily Show earlier this week. There is no doubt he is intelligent and creative, but perhaps providing a fair and balanced examination of the issues would win him no audience at all, no opportunity to shock us into thinking, to perform a cerebral resuscitation. Without resorting to extreme views, we would be left with only one point of view to consider.

That leaves the responsibility for thoughtful consideration up to us, the public. We have two extreme viewpoints – I believe the truth lies somewhere in between. If we’re going to talk, let’s talk – not just shout at each other.