Colbert vs O'Reilly

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Last week Colbert had O'Reilly on his show, and vice versa.

On the Factor (http://youtube.com/watch?v=WvBd7sCSC78)
On the Report (http://youtube.com/watch?v=WvBd7sCSC78)

I watched the first - Colbert has balls of steel! Gotta go to work...

[LSPoorEeyorick]

We watched both on Thursday-- Not only does Colbert have balls of steel, O'Reilly proved himself a jackass (and an unprepared one. I don't think he saw it coming, and by the time he got to the Report, he was really rather unpleasant, I thought.)

[Alex]

I haven't seen either yet, but most of the reviews I saw of it said that it was pretty lame by both parties.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Well, I thought getting O'Reilly to say that he was an "act" was pretty ingenious.

[NirvanaMan]

Balls of steel? I dunno about that. He simply stayed in character. I was actually dissappointed in both shows. I expected it to be much more amusing.

But I suppose persepective/opinion is always skewed by beliefs.

[3894]

Well, I thought getting O'Reilly to say that he was an "act" was pretty ingenious.

A classic tv moment, as was holding up O'Reilly's book with the 30% off sticker.

I only saw O'Reilly's visit to Colbert. I don't like O'Reilly but bonus points to him for hawking his book to an audience who largely won't buy it.

[Strangler Lewis]

I saw O'Reilly on Colbert. Having now seen both, it clearly was no contest. The sad thing is that there were probably millions of O'Reilly viewers slapping their knees going "Ha, he's a Frenchie." I was puzzled by the commentators who dismissed Stewart and Colbert as cynically criticizing and making fun of others. O'Reilly does the same thing, except without the fun. That said, O'Reilly is hardly the worst thing out there.

[NirvanaMan]

as was holding up O'Reilly's book with the 30% off sticker.

Heh, that part was mildly amusing.

[Alex]

That said, O'Reilly is hardly the worst thing out there.

*cough*Nancy Grace and Glenn Beck*cough*

[Ghoulish Delight]

*cough*Nancy Grace and Glenn Beck*cough*
All that coughing, you sure you don't mean Rita Cosby?

I have no idea if she has anything worthwhile to say because I've never managed to stand listening to her voice long enough to find out. Hearing her makes me want to quit smoking, and I don't even smoke!

[Alex]

I can't hate Rita Crosby. I just end up wondering what horrible thing she did as a child that resulted in her parents having her vocal chords scraped.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

The sad thing is that there were probably millions of O'Reilly viewers slapping their knees going "Ha, he's a Frenchie." I believe that. My family is largely conservative. My middle brother once tried to convince me that Colbert may be doing a double fake, and is actually a conservative at heart. That's some serious wishful thinking there. People always see what they want to see.

[Gemini Cricket]

"I'm doing you, Bill." - Stephen Colbert
Love it.

[wendybeth]

Poor Bill. He is really confused by Colbert, isn't he? Doesn't know quite how to take him but is of course flattered by the whole thing, which shows how stupid he is.

[Gemini Cricket]

Totally stupid. And he is the worst person to watch on TV... even worse than Grace and Beck combined. Hannity is a close second.

[NirvanaMan]

Poor Bill. He is really confused by Colbert, isn't he? Doesn't know quite how to take him but is of course flattered by the whole thing, which shows how stupid he is.


Umm, no I don't think so. It's pretty clear that he "gets" that Colbert is mocking him in the tapes. You may not agree with his POV (I agree with maybe 60% of it, strongly oppose 40%) but he is not a moron.

He is clearly intelligent enough to be enormously wealthy and succesful. He turned his name into a brand (and a strong one at that); not the work of a dimwit.

[Prudence]

So did Paris Hilton, but that doesn't mean she should be admired or emulated.

[tracilicious]

OMG, Pru! I can't mojo you right now, but if I'd have been drinking I'd owe the community college a new monitor. :snap:

[Not Afraid]

That was mojo worthy alright!

[wendybeth]

Umm, no I don't think so. It's pretty clear that he "gets" that Colbert is mocking him in the tapes. You may not agree with his POV (I agree with maybe 60% of it, strongly oppose 40%) but he is not a moron.

He is clearly intelligent enough to be enormously wealthy and succesful. He turned his name into a brand (and a strong one at that); not the work of a dimwit.
A more cynical take on this would be that Bill does know that he is being mocked but does not care, as he really is nothing but an act. Of course, all those followers of his probably wouldn't appreciate this scenario, but if it works for Rush.........

Good one, Pru.:snap:

[Gemini Cricket]

We should not forget that O'Reilly got his big break from being on Inside Edition. A huge tabloid show. I guess he's still shoveling the same smell now...

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Oops, the other link was messed up.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ECbO6jZRzhs&mode=related&search=

[NirvanaMan]

So did Paris Hilton, but that doesn't mean she should be admired or emulated.

Who said anything about being admired or emulated? Apparently non sequitors are clearly mojo worthy.

Anyway, back to the actual point, which was the comments relating to his lack of intelligence. I still argue that anyone who has achieved such overwhelming success and wealth in life on their own is clearly not lacking in the brains department. If he is stupid then the rest of us merely average folks must be bordering on idiot.

Paris inherited fame and wealth from daddy. Quite a different story.

[JWBear]

Who said anything about being admired or emulated? Apparently non sequitors are clearly mojo worthy.

Anyway, back to the actual point, which was the comments relating to his lack of intelligence. I still argue that anyone who has achieved such overwhelming success and wealth in life on their own is clearly not lacking in the brains department. If he is stupid then the rest of us merely average folks must be bordering on idiot savant.

Paris inherited fame and wealth from daddy. Quite a different story.

I agree, O'Reilly isn't stupid.... Just an a$$hole.

[Not Afraid]

O'Reilly's just another famous person I've never heard of.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Part II of the Factor:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XEdomxMy4VQ&mode=related&search=

You guys HAVE TO watch this. I don't watch Fox News, ever, so I had no clue that this was the type of thing being shown. I mean, they're explaining to the audience what humor is. Are Fox News watchers idiots? Why wouldn't they understand why the Colbert Report and Daily Show are funny to other people? These people I'm watching have words like "News Analyst" under their names on the screen. It's horrifying.

I'm feeling Idiocracy closing in on me.

[wendybeth]

Bernard Goldberg is a doofus.

:D

(Could O'Reilly be any more of a pompous ass?)

[innerSpaceman]

Paris inherited fame and wealth from daddy. Quite a different story.
Um, you can inherit wealth, but I'm pretty sure you can't inherit fame.

[NirvanaMan]

Um, you can inherit wealth, but I'm pretty sure you can't inherit fame.

Hmm, I think I disagree. There are plenty of famous folks out there that are famous simply because they were the son/daughter/wife/husband what-have-you of someone who was accomplished. The aforementioned Hilton sisters, Lisa Marie Presley, most of the Kennedy's, etc, etc....Hell, babies are now famous before they have had a chance to utter a single word. Just look at the children of Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes, Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie and the media frenzies that surrounded them.

I'm sure we could come up with many more examples. Pop culture and trash journalism may be the source of the fame, but it is fame inherited none the less.

[NirvanaMan]

I mean, they're explaining to the audience what humor is.

Hmm, I just watched it and did not take that away at all. Maybe we both need a second viewing. I didn't see them explaining what humor is to the audience. Rather they were analyzing the success of the shows, specifically focusing on what makes them the media darlings that they are.

Looking at the success of Fox News, the data shows that while viewership between Fox and CNN is evenly split amongst independants, conservatives have increasingly fled to FN as an alternative to what is considered by many to be a liberal bias among mass media.

http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2005/narrative_cabletv_audience.asp?cat=3&media=5

That said, while these two comedy central shows are popular among folks our age, the majority of the Fox News viewership may not be familiar...thus necessitating some explanation of what the shows are about. These two shows can be rather polarizing and are clearly left-leaning. I remember a time when the Daily Show was not like that, and personally I found it more amusing. I've gotten bored of the Bush schtick and would welcome something, anything else. Sure Bush provides them with lots of material, but damn, how many times can you tell the same joke? I guess it works with their demo though. I just prefer a bit of balance and variety myself, so I stopped watching.

What also is forgotten by many is that Fox News is more than just opinion shows such as O'Reilly or Hannity and Colmes. The majority of their broadcast day is just regular old news coverage. I think many seem to associate the network with one or two shows and forget about the rest of the programming schedule.

I used to be a huge fan of Fox News back in the day when they first launched...when I was back in college. It was an interesting alternative to the network and CNN news feeds, and tended to show angles or stories that were overlooked by all other media outlets. Over the past few years I have become more and more turned off as the network has become more sensationalistic and downright silly at time with ridiculous promo's and graphics. Seems a bit dumbed down at times. Got to be too much like CNN to me. Oddly enough, I like CNN international. Very different approach.

Anyway I went off on three or seven tangents. Original point - I don't think they were explaining what humor is and didn't see that clip as highly evidenced of the encroachment of stupid as you did, given the strong possibility that the majority of their audience may not be familiar with the Daily show and colbert report.

And now for awesome smilies: :decap: :iSm:

[Strangler Lewis]

Everyone knows that comedy depends somewhat on a rapport between comedian and audience and a shared point of view. Larry the Cable guy says something about a truck, and his audience roars. I don't get it, at least not on a visceral level. A Jewish comic says something culturally relevant to me, and I'm there. Duh. Thus, there was no point to the interview except to give O'Reilly cover to wonder how anyone could dare find criticism of him, the president, etc. funny and to criticize them as wise-asses. If Jon Stewart aired a mock talking head panel about the appeal of the redneck comedians, he'd be criticized for elitism, etc.

By the way, a common theme on The Daily Show, even during interviews is "How will the Democrats blow it?"

[Alex]

I don't see that. Stewart gave Hillary's campaign manager a verbal blow job last night.

[Strangler Lewis]

Didn't see it. Can't call it. But he did not blow Howard Dean or other Democrats that have been on recently. I guess we'll see tonight what, if anything, he says about the Democrat response to the State of the Union address.

[NirvanaMan]

Perhaps they are turning a corner. I used to watch it religiously but over the past 3 years or so I tune in less and less. Catch it now only once a week if even.

Of course they always poked a bit of fun at the left now and then, and yes there is a far less common but none the less reoccurring theme of how will the dems blow it, but it carries a decidedly different tone. As in, "oh these are the good guys, but something silly or stupid always botches things up for them".

Originally, I feel the show was more of a lampoon of politics in general. As their audience has skewed younger and more to the left, it feels like they are pandering to them. Perhaps it is also a good fit for Stewart's personal politics as well?

I think the balance that really made it funny for me years ago is no longer there. It is heavily weighted towards a one-sided funny assault. Someone else at one point stated that perhaps it was because republicans controlled both the executive and legislative branches. Maybe. That is a reasonable explanation. Maybe we'll see a change as the power shifts.

[NirvanaMan]

Didn't see it. Can't call it. But he did not blow Howard Dean or other Democrats that have been on recently. I guess we'll see tonight what, if anything, he says about the Democrat response to the State of the Union address.

Oddly enough, Fox News gave a relative glowing review of the Democratic response last night. At the same time Babette made a comment that he sounded like a robot. Then again, so did John Kerry. Wait a second...are the Democrats robots? Is that how the terminator thing happened?

I knew he smelled like a T-100.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Whoever is in power is who gets mocked. With Bush and a Republican controlled Congress, it was the conservatives that got dissed. Now that the Dems are stepping up, you'll see a lot more blue-bashing.

[Alex]

Yes, but will it be the same kind?

There's a difference between "I love you so I mock you" and "I think you're malignant and so I mock you." And of course, if it is true that "all things are mockable, will be mocked, and are equally mockworthy" then it renders mocking meaningless. Then it is just cynicism.

Thus, there was no point to the interview except to give O'Reilly cover to wonder how anyone could dare find criticism of him, the president, etc. funny and to criticize them as wise-asses.

So what do the many "blue state" examinations of what exactly is funny about Larry the Cable Guy and "Blue Collar Comedy" priovide cover for? People talk about why other people find things funny all of the freaking time.

One thing to keep in mind is that the vast majority of American's have likely never seen an episode of the Daily Show (which I love) or The Colbert Report (which I've grown weary of, it is one joke repeated every night). They don't know what the shows are about, they've only ever seen clips second hand. They don't know how they operate or what their missions are.

[Strangler Lewis]

I agree that funny/not funny is a common topic of discussion, but I don't think this is up there with "Is Chaplin funny?" or "Why do we sometimes laugh at other people's misfortune?" Asking two media critics why Stewart and Colbert are funny is like asking why Weekend Update is (was) funny. The whole conversation was just a pretense for O'Reilly to call them names for laughing at him.

I admire Colbert for keeping up the patter, but I think the show jumped the shark when it introduced Tek Janssen and other bizarre situations. Much the way "The Simpsons" jumped the shark about 20 years ago with Homer's increasingly bizarre escapades.

[Alex]

I guess we'll have to disagree. I don't see any difference between "why/is Chaplin funny" and "why/is Colbert funny."

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I don't need or want some pseudo-analysts to tell me why Blue Collar Comedy would be funny to someone who relates to it. Same goes for sitcom humor, "look how bratty my child is" humor, "hurt defenseless beings" humor, or "I'm a total asshole" humor. I mean, duh. I know why those things are funny to those people - because they're idiots. ;) No, I'm kidding, I mean that I know that different things are funny to different people.

Do we really have to explain what a spoof is? Who wouldn't understand what a send-up is? Or irony, or sarcasm, over-the-top-ness?

Lordy Lou, you gotta be kidding me.

[NirvanaMan]

Agree, but again, I don't think that O'Reilly clip that you liked to did that. Again, the question posed was "Why are these guys such media darlings" not "why are these guys funny".