On Wednesday, I praised Jon Stewart for his criticism of the Obama administration about the VA insurance debacle. On Thursday, seemingly stemming from the Jim Cramer interview, but perhaps spurred by my own article, Jason pointed out an (perhaps to liberals) inconvenient truth: Jon Stewart plays two games.
In brief, Stewart takes up the persona of a journalist when he thinks it’s convenient but when it’s not he shoves it aside and gives excuses. While I think praise should be given where it’s due, I think Jason has a good point. I certainly have no delusions about Jon Stewart, and I’ve said as much. I have noticed that when Stewart has a point to make, particularly when it’s about the media, to him the media seems to flock. And he does bring up some good points from time to time. Whatever his biases, everyone has to hit a hole in one from every so often, and he does.
Still, when caught in a corner, Stewart can’t just go and adopt a different persona as a reason to get out of answering some tough questions himself. He either has to incur accountability for when he’s wrong, or perhaps just stick with the satire and not go for the serious stuff. He can’t have it both ways.
Or rather, he can have it both ways, but he needs to realize the responsibility that comes with having it so.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
