This is quite saddening for me, as Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert hosted shows I enjoyed in my youth growing up. Jon Stewart's salient points always struck me, and his humor, while not as prevalent as Colbert, was enjoyable all the same. Life is a constant state of change, and he has been doing his show since shortly after my birth, so I can see why he may want to end it. I hope he achieves the greatest success in future endeavors.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Jon Stewart is leaving The Daily Show "later this year"
- Thread starter Nibel
- Start date
- Status
Fully agree, and it's a bit scary to be honest. Yes we have Jon Oliver calling out bullshit as he sees it, but like you said the show is limited in it's format/channel, etc. It also has a wider scope and he doesn't seem to dig into politicians as much as Stewart does.
The kind of commentary Stewart gives on the state of the country is unique and refreshing in a media that has become so bloated with bullshit.
BertramCooper
Banned
It's gotta be Bee.
I am in agreement with your point entirely.
Dominican Power
Member
What's Jon' reason for leaving? He wants to direct movies full time?
ginger ninja
Banned
The worst part about this is that there will be no one out there anymore to call out the crazy antics that go down on 24 hour news channels on all sides of the spectrum. Remember those CNN graphics segment, fuckin comedy gold mine everytime 
Right, gotcha.
I feel it's less that he is purposely being left out over any sort of bad blood and more to do with him having zero impact on the history and legacy of the current show.
I agree it would be funny to have a quick joke with him (probably at his expense) but there must be a reason they've never done it in the 16 years the show's been on.
I think he's just burnt out from it. He more than hinted as much on his episode of Comedians in Cars.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
This Spider-Man shit is ruining everything!
BertramCooper
Banned
If it's not someone on the current staff, it would be wild if they went after someone like Tina Fey or Amy Poehler. Can't see either of them doing it, but it's interesting to think about.
It just can't be another man. It's gotta be a woman. Chelsea Handler was the most prominent woman in American late-night comedy and now she's not even TV anymore.
It just can't be another man. It's gotta be a woman. Chelsea Handler was the most prominent woman in American late-night comedy and now she's not even TV anymore.
Jon Armdog
Member
I would watch the shit out of that. But, I think the entire audience would be me and like 50 other people.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Dammit, I knew that interview last week talking about how Stewart had been there too long was a bad omen. The guy must've already known then
Ugh.
I can't agree with that. If the best candidate is a woman, go for it. If not, I don't want to see a woman take his spot just for the sake of choosing a woman. And Chelsea Handler sucked.
The only woman mentioned so far, at least whom I know, that I would be interested in seeing taking his spot is Tina Fey. I don't know how politcally savvy she is though.
That said, I can't think of many people off the top of my head who would be a good replacement. I've never been a fan of most of the DS correspondents to be honest.
My vote goes to Colbert. He doesn't have anything big lined up does he?
BertramCooper
Banned
It's funny how men are always the best candidates for late-night hosting gigs.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Actually, if they wanted to, they could wait out Jon Oliver since his contract is up in April 2016.
Yeah it's hysterical. My point still stands.
From earlier:
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=365222419
Also, replacement is easy:
Parks and Rec is ending, she has Weekend Update experience, easy easy decision.
First guest Joe Biden
BertramCooper
Banned
HBO is going to sign him for forever.
And I don't know why anyone at a one-ep-a-week show would want to go back to a four-ep-a-week show.
Or go back to basic cable from premium cable. Oliver can do whatever the fuck he wants at HBO. It's a perfect gig and he'd be nuts to leave it.
I don't think she is all that political. John was successful at being the host because he was funny and knew his shit.
Dominican Power
Member
Jason Jones?
BertramCooper
Banned
There are currently no female hosts in late-night comedy (at least at any major network) and an abundance of capable female comedians and commentators. It's fucking disgraceful.
When we're anywhere close to seeing gender equality in this particular sphere, then we can talk about a purely merit-based selection process for late-night hosts.
Stewart's replacement needs to be a woman.
Poehler is actually very outspoken on political issues and and a passionate feminist. She'd be fucking amazing at The Daily Show. If she's even remotely interested CC should throw everything they can at her to land her.
Giant Panda
Member
Though I preferred Oliver and Colbert over Stewart, I still tip my hat to him for his influence in leading to those 2 other shows.
I mean Oliver really does go in deep, relatively speaking for a thirty minute show. Oliver's approach is to usually take a single subject or two and then go in depth in analyzing why he thinks X or Y whilst being as funny as he can, instead of shotgunning a whole bunch of topics like Daily Show. He often jokes about the sort of lecture-esque nature of his approach.
And I really do think he's surprisingly effective. I did not expect the show to be a fixture of mine, because before I found him occasionally funny but not actually all that unusually insightful. Maybe I just didn't know enough about him before, but I do think some of his analysis is at times better than anything Jon Stewart or Colbert has done. But I don't think he's quite as funny as those guys can be at their best, so I think that's the exchange right there. And I think since humour is the hook that can get past the politically hardened mindsets of entrenched people, it is a big loss on top of the reasons mentioned (viewership, etc).
I would love to get a show that does this sort of thing from a conservative perspective, but when we get it it's usually extremely vapid shit masquerading as more intellectual than it is. Just look at Dennis Miller. He's not a stupid guy, but he's just not that funny. And he lacks the self-aware candor that allows Jon Stewart to viciously attack both sides when necessary. There are genuinely funny Libertarians like Doug Stanhope (I've been to a few of his shows, he's hilarious), but he doesn't give half enough of a fuck to actually focus on politics for a show and frankly being intellectual is not his thing. And yes conservatives, you do need to be intellectual to be able to properly tackle a subject, no matter where you stand politically.
The notion that they should "choose the best candidate" is such a bullshit truism.
There's no possible way to objectively determine the "best candidate". There's no magical objective scale that can somehow put every single candidate in perfect order and "oh hey I guess the best candidate is another dude!".
Intentionally, deliberately choosing a woman to replace Jon Stewart is the right thing to do. There are so many incredibly capable women out there who would do an amazing job in Jon's former chair. Otherwise those doing the hiring will just be left with unconscious bias that will likely lead to them choosing another guy to fill the role.
It's the right thing to do from a fairness perspective. It's the right thing to do from a monetary perspective because it might appeal to a different (and possibly bigger!) audience. And it's the right thing to do from a creative perspective since people from different backgrounds naturally have different interests and different things to talk about. And it would be an effective way to differentiate it from Jon's show instead of making it seem like a pale imitation.
One thing I noticed amongst most attempts at conservative humor shows is they're hardly ever willing to dog on themselves or fire on their own army. Stewart takes the piss out of Dems, himself, liberals, what have you, but conservative shows just try to act as another arm of the eternal political campaign and preach to the choir instead of throwing a cup of water in their face.
Permanently A
Junior Member
Oh god why. Why right after Colbert. Why this double gut 1-2 KO punch you guys. Fuck
Goldenmoney
Member
Wowzers. Another huge blow to comedy central. What's next? South Park?
It's not like he was the best candidate to take over for Kilborn 16 years ago, and look how that turned out.
brianmcdoogle
Member
Still the most sincere and heartfelt words after 9/11 by anyone in the media...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SXcmc2AZ6ZE&spfreload=10
He ain't replacable, and certainly not by some of the comedian and liberal pundit hacks being suggested.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SXcmc2AZ6ZE&spfreload=10
He ain't replacable, and certainly not by some of the comedian and liberal pundit hacks being suggested.
I would agree that a woman should really be considered. Though after being floored by John Oliver's ability to take the helm, I don't think filling his shoes is an impossible task and could ultimately see a situation where it could go either way.
Its an extremely fair point that going with a woman might make the shift an easier.
No matter what its going to be tough.
I'd be more inclined to agree with this if I agreed with the bolded. I can't think of many people at all out there who would be a great replacement for Stewart. Jon Stewart has been stellar as host of what is a huge cultural phenomenon and he has very, very big shoes (metaphorically at least) to fill. I'm all for a woman host if she's a great fit, but only if. The notion that it shouldn't be a man, however, is grade-A bullshit. Going by your train of thought, shouldn't the replacement only be a black woman? How many black late night hosts are there? How far down this rabbit hole do we go?
That said, if you could somehow combine, say, Tina Fey and Rachel Maddow that would be amazing.
True but that was when TDS was still coming into its own and finding its place. It wasn't even the politically oriented show it is now. A replacement would have to be someone with good hosting skills, great comedic talent and delivery, good interviewing skills and great political savvy. I can't think of many people out there who fit the bill.
I don't want to generalize of course, but that seems to be the "problem" (read: it's a good thing, but makes it impossible to function in a modern political context) with many new age Democrats. There's a very distinctive individuality to Democratic voices, which often means they attack each other, they attack the President, they attack policies that sometimes are distinctively 'Democratic' whatever that might mean at the moment. This is why even when the Democrats had a huge majority, the Blue Dog Democrats were readily killing bills that politically were things the party had been trying to achieve for years. But because of their districts being traditionally red, they cowered in fear at being seen as "too liberal."*
Of course the recent Republican congress is feeling their own heat of this sort, although they're being flanked by people who are even more crazily far right than what already constituted the party. Ever since the Tea Party began to infiltrate their ranks, they've had to become increasingly dogmatic, find a way to race even further to the right (legitimate rape bros) and as a result are slowly making the party completely unsustainable in Presidential Politics. Few traditional Republicans can hide their disdain for Ted Cruz these days.
But will that translate into a more self-deprecating brand of conservative humour? I hope so. I like to see how the mind of those I disagree with work, but it is very difficult to sit through an hour show of people being intentionally intellectually dishonest in an attempt to pander to their audience. When Obama made his State of the Union speech this year, I turned to Fox News as is tradition. And there we had a panel that was entirely far right lunatics making such insanely spurious claims such as "the only reason he won a second term is he used the IRS to win it for him." That was spoken because Obama made a biting joking come back at sarcastic applause Republicans gave him when he said he couldn't run a third term. In response, the panel just decided to pull shit out of their ass to justify their attack. Maybe if this was a comedian putting it at the end of a genuinely funny joke I could stomach that, but instead it just came off as frustratingly mean spirited and just the sort of thing that allows the conspiracy nutters in this country to continue building their fucking bonkers "cases" against Obama and his cabal of Muslim Alien Atheist Communists from Kenya.
*
I still want to make note at how much it annoys me to call modern American liberalism "liberal." Obama is a fucking Reagan Democrat, for Christ's sake. Sure, he's got far to the left in terms of Gay Marriage, but substantively his policies are frequently nothing you wouldn't have seen in a Republican White House. And what constitutes far left in this country - at least in terms of who is in actual power - is simply straight up a comedy. It's increasingly making even the most tepid of center right policies seem like fucking HUGO CHAVEZ voting to make Communist the official part of the continent.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Would be amazing, but we don't have the technology!
The reason for these attempts existing was part of the problem too.
They saw the success and influence of the Daily Show, especially amongst coveted demographics, and figured they needed to create a right wing alternative to sort out the imbalance.
Of course the problem was, when the Daily Show started it wasn't a very political show under Kilborn. It was first and foremost a comedy show with a focus on some current affairs, that slowly morphed into itself when Stewart took over during several election cycles. It's lead, writers, producers and correspondents learnt how to work with the content, tone and presentation they were comfortable with, and first and foremost sought to be entertaining before anything else.
So jumping in and attempting to be what the Daily turned into, after it took the Daily Show itself years to get there is almost impossible. And when your first priority, your reason for existing at all, is to inform a political agenda, rather than to be entertaining, you're probably going to struggle anyway.
Wait, Jon Stewart is Jewish?
I think with the other two gone, Oliver will open up more on the political front.
BUNTING1243
Banned
Yep, his birth name is Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz
the job did take its toll.
Or time.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked