Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

What is it about failed artists and violent anti-semitism?Follow

#27 Jun 12 2009 at 5:39 AM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Allegory wrote:
baelnic wrote:
Yes, Stewart is a satirist.

Mostly. The difference is that the individual who portrays Ali G is always a satirist, whereas Jon Stewart is only often a satirist. Stewart has given serious interviews--though yes still with a few jokes, interviews which could have easily been broadcasted on any conventional news network without seeming out of place.

The Daily Show does mostly news comedy, but occasionally it crosses into the territory of comedic news. There is comedy for the sake of comedy and there is comedy as merely a delivery method for actual news. Ali G is entirely for the sake of comedy, if there is any to be had there.

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 4:07am by Allegory


I don't know. Satire is often primarily used to drive home a more serious point. This **** isn't new. It's like you never read Alexander Pope.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#28 Jun 12 2009 at 5:58 AM Rating: Good
*****
12,049 posts
Warchief Annabella wrote:
Allegory wrote:
baelnic wrote:
Yes, Stewart is a satirist.

Mostly. The difference is that the individual who portrays Ali G is always a satirist, whereas Jon Stewart is only often a satirist. Stewart has given serious interviews--though yes still with a few jokes, interviews which could have easily been broadcasted on any conventional news network without seeming out of place.

The Daily Show does mostly news comedy, but occasionally it crosses into the territory of comedic news. There is comedy for the sake of comedy and there is comedy as merely a delivery method for actual news. Ali G is entirely for the sake of comedy, if there is any to be had there.

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 4:07am by Allegory


I don't know. Satire is often primarily used to drive home a more serious point. This sh*t isn't new. It's like you never read Alexander Pope.


Wasn't he mentioned in Angels and Demons? Or was it the Di Vinci Code?
#29 Jun 12 2009 at 6:13 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts

gbaji wrote:
Exactly.

A whole lot of people certainly do seem to form their political and current event opinions based on things they heard on TDS.
Name me one.

The Daily Show is no more opinion forming than SNL's Weekend Update. If you are NOT already informed, most of the content will be meaningless.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#30 Jun 12 2009 at 6:22 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Elinda wrote:
The Daily Show is no more opinion forming than SNL's Weekend Update. If you are NOT already informed, most of the content will be meaningless.

Are you going to qualify a required degree at all? Because if not then you are very easily incorrect. Well, technically your intended implication is incorrect and not necessarily the literal interpretation of the first sentence.
#31 Jun 12 2009 at 6:25 AM Rating: Good
I'm surprised no one has mentionned Mel Gibson yet.
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#32 Jun 12 2009 at 6:34 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
I'm surprised no one has mentionned Mel Gibson yet.


Or John Wayne, or a host of other right-wing stars who have had no qualms about pushing what they obviously considered to be the correct point of view as part and parcel of the entertainment they offered.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#33 Jun 12 2009 at 6:35 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Allegory wrote:
Elinda wrote:
The Daily Show is no more opinion forming than SNL's Weekend Update. If you are NOT already informed, most of the content will be meaningless.

Are you going to qualify a required degree at all? Because if not then you are very easily incorrect. Well, technically your intended implication is incorrect and not necessarily the literal interpretation of the first sentence.
Come again?

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#34 Jun 12 2009 at 6:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Elinda wrote:
If you are NOT already informed, most of the content will be meaningless.
Ironically, given the cries of "OMG Liberal Media!", a good appreciation for The Daily Show requires a healthy amount of skepticism regarding the cable networks and the overblown, hyped and semi-hysterical news segments that result from having to maintain a 24 hour news cycle.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#35 Jun 12 2009 at 6:55 AM Rating: Good
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
If you are NOT already informed, most of the content will be meaningless.
Ironically, given the cries of "OMG Liberal Media!", a good appreciation for The Daily Show requires a healthy amount of skepticism regarding the cable networks and the overblown, hyped and semi-hysterical news segments that result from having to maintain a 24 hour news cycle.


I watch TDS almost every day (although a day late, stupid More4), and the main impression I get from it is that 24hour news networks in the US must be incredibly irritating.
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#36 Jun 12 2009 at 6:59 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Did you see that Colbert, under order of the President, got a crew cut. I <3 his camo business suit.

edit - errr, I guess this is old news.

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 5:01pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#37 Jun 12 2009 at 7:05 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Elinda wrote:
Come again?

Every form of media affects one's opinion. CBS News affects people's opinions. The Daily Show affects people's opinions. An episode of The Simpsons affects people's opinion. Maybe not enough to turn the extreme left wing into the radical right or vice versa, but there is some shifting around.

Without qualifying how much of an affect you deem significant you are easily false. It's akin to saying a feather is weightless. It may not be much weight, maybe not even enough to warrant recognition in certain situations, but it does weigh down.

How significant an effect the Daily Show has on the opinions of its viewers is a tough and speculative argument, but whether it has an effect is simple and obvious.
#38 Jun 12 2009 at 7:08 AM Rating: Good
Allegory wrote:
How significant an effect the Daily Show has on the opinions of its viewers is a tough and speculative argument, but whether it has an effect is simple and obvious.


Yes, but if everything has an effect, then the fact that the TDS has an effect is pretty irrelevant. The only poignant question is "how much of an effect" comapred to other programmes, and since it's ridiculously hard to quantify, it seems the answer would be "no more so than any other similar programme", which I guess goes back to the point Elinda was making.


Edited, Jun 12th 2009 3:09pm by RedPhoenixxx
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#39 Jun 12 2009 at 7:13 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
and since it's ridiculously hard to quantify, it seems the answer would be "no more so than any other similar programme", which I guess goes back to the point Elinda was making.

Yes, but it's equally hard to quantify how both TDS and SNL compare to CBS news or CNN, which is the point I was making.
#40 Jun 12 2009 at 7:17 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Allegory wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Come again?

Every form of media affects one's opinion. CBS News affects people's opinions. The Daily Show affects people's opinions. An episode of The Simpsons affects people's opinion. Maybe not enough to turn the extreme left wing into the radical right or vice versa, but there is some shifting around.

Without qualifying how much of an affect you deem significant you are easily false. It's akin to saying a feather is weightless. It may not be much weight, maybe not even enough to warrant recognition in certain situations, but it does weigh down.

How significant an effect the Daily Show has on the opinions of its viewers is a tough and speculative argument, but whether it has an effect is simple and obvious.
I did qualify it. I said it's no more opinion forming than SNL's Weekend Update. But yeah, perhaps you could prove me wrong. Feel free.








Edited, Jun 12th 2009 5:18pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#41 Jun 12 2009 at 7:26 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Elinda wrote:
I did qualify it. I said it's no more opinion forming than SNL's Weekend Update.

That's great, but all you've said is that Tim and Mary are the same height. We don't know how tall they are, or whether they are shorter or taller than Jon and Sue. That's the problem.

TDS may be as significant as SNL in influencing viewer opinions, but but that make it rank on par with major news networks, above them, below them? And how far above or below? All of this matters... greatly.
Elinda wrote:
But yeah, perhaps you could prove me wrong. Feel free.

You've yet to really clarify anything, but honestly there are only two options here. Either what you're saying is relevant but incorrect or what you're saying is correct but irrelevant. However, you do get to pick.

Either you're saying TDS has a specific, quantifiable, affect on people's opinions, which is relevant but mostly unprovable or you're saying TDS has a similar affect on opinion to a show which has a similar affect on opinions when compared to TDS, which is correct but irrelevant.

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 10:31am by Allegory
#42 Jun 12 2009 at 7:29 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Allegory wrote:
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
and since it's ridiculously hard to quantify, it seems the answer would be "no more so than any other similar programme", which I guess goes back to the point Elinda was making.

Yes, but it's equally hard to quantify how both TDS and SNL compare to CBS news or CNN, which is the point I was making.
They don't. This is the point I was making.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#43 Jun 12 2009 at 7:33 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Elinda wrote:
They don't. This is the point I was making.

That's not a complete thought. They don't compare how? They are too far above it in influence? Too far below? Part of a seperate category that should not be group with CBS, and if so why? Are they somehow a different dimension of show? Have the frames of referenced changed? Don't compare how?

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 10:33am by Allegory
#44 Jun 12 2009 at 7:34 AM Rating: Good
Allegory wrote:
Elinda wrote:
They don't. This is the point I was making.

That's not a complete thought. They don't compare how? They are too far above it in influence? Too far below? Part of a seperate category that should not be group with CBS, and if so why? Are they somehow a different dimension of show? Have the frames of referenced changed? Don't compare how?

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 10:33am by Allegory


ROBOT WANTS TO KNOW!!

Sorry, that was a bit harsh. I should've said "cyborg".
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#45 Jun 12 2009 at 7:35 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Allegory wrote:
Elinda wrote:
I did qualify it. I said it's no more opinion forming than SNL's Weekend Update.

That's great, but all you've said is that Tim and Mary are the same height. We don't know how tall they are, or whether they are shorter or taller than Jon and Sue. That's the problem.

TDS may be as significant as SNL in influencing viewer opinions, but but that make it rank on par with major news networks, above them, below them? And how far above or below? All of this matters... greatly.
Elinda wrote:
But yeah, perhaps you could prove me wrong. Feel free.

You've yet to really clarify anything, but honestly there are only two options here. Either what you're saying is relevant but incorrect or what you're saying is correct but irrelevant. However, you do get to pick.

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 10:27am by Allegory
I really don't think that my original comment was that hard to 'get' if taken with in the context of all them posts above it, including the one I quoted. Was it?

Here let me simplify: IN MY OPINION THE DAILY SHOW DOES NOT FORMULATE POLITICAL OPINION FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT VIEW IT.

It's Friday and I ain't got much to do today. Lemme know if you're still pondering over my correctness and I'll make further clarifications.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#46 Jun 12 2009 at 7:38 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Allegory wrote:
Elinda wrote:
They don't. This is the point I was making.

That's not a complete thought. They don't compare how? They are too far above it in influence? Too far below? Part of a seperate category that should not be group with CBS, and if so why? Are they somehow a different dimension of show? Have the frames of referenced changed? Don't compare how?

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 10:33am by Allegory
Do you always talk like this?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#47 Jun 12 2009 at 7:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Elinda wrote:
Allegory wrote:
Elinda wrote:
They don't. This is the point I was making.

That's not a complete thought. They don't compare how? They are too far above it in influence? Too far below? Part of a seperate category that should not be group with CBS, and if so why? Are they somehow a different dimension of show? Have the frames of referenced changed? Don't compare how?

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 10:33am by Allegory
Do you always talk like this?


Can you define "like this"?

Yes, he does.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#48 Jun 12 2009 at 7:48 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Elinda wrote:
I really don't think that my original comment was that hard to 'get' if taken with in the context of all them posts above it, including the one I quoted. Was it?

It isn't hard to get; it's just incomplete information. There are a number of valid logically distinct interpretations of what you said.
Elinda wrote:
Here let me simplify: IN MY OPINION THE DAILY SHOW DOES NOT FORMULATE POLITICAL OPINION FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT VIEW IT.

You do realize that the retyping your post in caps doesn't do anything right? I already explained to you the problem with this statement.

Taken literally, which I'm almost positive you did not actually intend, this statement is wrong for the reason I HAVE ALREADY EXPLAINED (does that help)?

Every piece of media affects the political opinions of everyone to some degree. Taken literally you have said TDS does not affect political beliefs in the slightest, to any degree at all, no matter how small. That is incorrect.

This next part I don't think you're going to like because it's me telling you what you probably meant to say, and people hate having their speech corrected for them. You probably meant to say "IN MY OPINION THE DAILY SHOW DOES NOT SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECT POLITICAL OPINION FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT VIEW IT." There you have quantified both variables with the word "some." It's a true statement, but meaningless without qualifying the two variables so that we get a better sense of how TDS' influence relates to other programs. However, it's a correct statement.

These are really your only 2 options. The green portion is relevant, because the statement means something, but incorrect. The red portion is correct, because the statement logical follows the premise you have chosen not to refute, but is irrelevant because its meaning tells us nothing.

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 10:57am by Allegory
#49 Jun 12 2009 at 7:50 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Elinda wrote:
Do you always talk like this?

Only in arguments where the source of the disagreement is a skip or flaw of logic. The rest of the time I talk a different sort of weird. When I'm not simply chattering, I try to be technical; it makes it far more difficult to guess at what I mean but far easier to know what I mean. It's a rather interesting dilemma in my opinion.

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 11:05am by Allegory
#50 Jun 12 2009 at 8:46 AM Rating: Good
***
3,909 posts
Faster than speeding minutiae! Able to leap human social interactions entirely! Is it a troll? Is it a bot? It's...Superpedant!

Edited, Jun 12th 2009 4:47pm by zepoodle
#51 Jun 12 2009 at 8:58 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
I often loathe pedantry directed at myself. But I'm so pedantic myself I choke up into silence when I can't answer a phatic question truthfully without turning it into a socially awkward answer. On the other hand, sometimes watching a pedant unleashed on someone else makes me all Smiley: inlove
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 205 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (205)