Tag Archives: daily-show

Media Use Crazy Weather to Hype Global Warming, Despite Admissions Weather Isn’t Climate

Last winter, as blizzard snowfalls piled up into several feet in the nation’s capital, conservatives mocked global warming alarmists for trying to link weather incidents to global warming. But as summer heat waves, volcanoes and sinkholes have appeared recently, climate alarmists proved they missed the point . A top Obama administration scientist attacked global warming skeptics during the winter by pointing out that “weather is not the same thing as climate.” ABC’s Bill Blakemore argued the same thing in order to defend the existence of manmade global warming on Jan. 8, 2010. But Associated Press, USA Today , The New York Times and The Washington Post have all promoted a connection between the extreme heat and weather around the world this summer and global warming. One CNN host asked if the events were the “apocalypse” or global warming. The Huffington Post proposed naming hurricanes and other disasters after climate change “deniers.” “Floods, fires, melting ice and feverish heat: From smoke-choked Moscow to water-soaked Iowa and the High Arctic, the planet seems to be having a midsummer breakdown. It’s not just a portent of things to come, scientists say, but a sign of troubling climate change already under way,” the AP wrote, sounding more like Al Gore than an objective news agency. AP cited the World Meteorological Organization, NASA and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) saying that “extremes” were expected in a warming scenario. But its report didn’t include any other viewpoints or propose other possible reasons for the weather events. And it failed to point out the scandals connected to IPCC, NASA and the warming movement as a whole. The 2009 ClimateGate scandal and subsequent scandals undermined the very credibility of the climate alarmist movement , but were underreported by the network news media. AP left out meteorologists who explained some of those events based on jet stream activity. According to New Scientist magazine, the jet stream is being blocked right now and has consequently slowed down. Meteorologists say that the jet stream’s slower movements are responsible for the deadly fires in Russia, the floods in Pakistan and other rare weather events. “The unusual weather in the US and Canada last month also has a similar case,” New Scientist wrote. Discover Magazine expounded on the New Scientist article saying “this happens from time to time, and it sets the stage for extreme conditions when weather systems hover over the same area.” Despite other explanations and viewpoints, The New York Times also linked weather to climate saying, “the collective answer of the scientific community [whether global warming is causing more weather extremes]” is “probably.” Like the Times, many news outlets promoted the connection between warming and weather, but were careful to briefly note that individual weather events cannot be proven to have been caused by global warming. Out of the Times’ 1,302 word article, only 113 words were used to offer a caveat saying it is difficult to link “specific weather events” to climate change and to quote a NASA scientist who admitted he hasn’t “proved it” yet. Semantics aside, those mainstream stories were nearly as biased in their coverage as blatantly left-wing websites like the Huffington Post. Huffington Post argued that ” global weirding ” incidents such as landslides, sinkholes and volcanoes are “consistent” with global warming. The site interviewed David Orr, a professor of environmental studies and politics at Oberlin College, who said, “you ask is this evidence of climate destabilization, the only scientific answer you can give is: It is consistent with what we can expect.” The complete list of “weird” stuff was heat waves, floods, landslides, wildfires, ice islands, sinkholes, volcanoes, dead fish and oyster herpes. Dead fish and oyster herpes? Huffington Post said, “These are certainly stories to be filed under weird: Although climate change can’t necessarily be held responsible, some scientists are suggesting it as the instigator of strange ocean occurrences.” The fact is that the alarmists and the news media will find someone to support claims that just about everything is correlated to man-made global warming. MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan even claimed that Snowpocalypse (the nickname for the blizzard activity on parts of the East Coast) was consistent with global warming. Media Says Warming Predictions ‘Supported’ by Weather Events, Push Government Action It has been a summer of wild weather and related disasters from fires in Russia, to giant sinkholes, to floods in Pakistan and Europe. All of this has sparked the news media’s desire to reignite the climate alarmist movement after a scandal-filled winter. The headlines said it all: “In Weather Chaos, a Case for Global Warming,” proclaimed one Times header. The USA Today warned, “Think this summer is hot? Get used to it.” The AP story hyping weather disasters’ correlation to warming was called, “Climate Change Predictions Supported By Summer of Fires, Floods And Heat Waves: IPCC.” “The weather-related cataclysms of July and August fit patterns predicted by climate scientists,” AP declared. The story criticized the U.S. unwillingness to cap carbon emissions. “The U.S. remains the only major industrialized nation not to have legislated caps on carbon emissions, after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid last week withdrew climate legislation in the face of resistance from Republicans and some Democrats,” AP said. A bit later, they quoted a UN “specialist” who argued “much more needs to be done.” Perhaps under the strain of working at CNN, meteorologist Chad Myers actually switched views since 2008, when he said “to think that we could affect weather all that much is pretty arrogant.” But on Aug. 10, Myers said “Yes,” when asked if the weather phenomena were manmade. Myers, however, offered this qualification: “Is it 100 percent caused by man? No. There are other things involved. We are now in the sunspot cycle. We are now in a very hot sun cycle. We are, we are – many other things going on …” CNN host Fareed Zakaria also used the crazy weather to promote legislative action on emissions – pushing Cato Institute’s senior fellow Pat Michaels to accept the idea of a carbon tax. After another guest warned of devastation if we fail to act on the issue of global warming, Zakaria turned to Michaels and said: “You hear all this. Doesn’t it worry you? I mean, I understand your position, which is, you know, we don’t have a substitute for fossil fuels right now. But surely that isn’t an argument for stand pattism?” MICHAELS: No. ZAKARIA: Don’t you want to do something about this? MICHAELS: What I worry about more is the concept of opportunity cost. We had legislation, again, that went through the House last summer which would have cost a lot and been futile. And when you, when you take that away, or when the government favors certain technologies and politicizes technologies, you’re doing worse than nothing. You’re actually impairing your ability to respond in the long run, and that’s my major concern along this issue. ZAKARIA: But if you were to have a carbon tax, if you were to have a gas tax – MICHAELS: YOU, can put in the carbon tax… Zakaria pushed Michaels further, arguing that it is a “simple” law of economics to tax a behavior if you want less of it. But Michaels stressed that the problem is how high the tax would have to be to reduce carbon dioxide enough to make a difference, and the “political acceptability” of such a tax.” The CNN host’s biased segment, which included three panelists (Michaels included), used the apocalyptic weather as a set up: “It has been a scorcher of a summer. Record high temperatures all over the United States, huge chunks of glacier the size of four Manhattan islands breaking off Greenland. One-third of Pakistan is now under water. Fires burning out of control in Russia. Floods in Europe,” Zakaria said on Aug. 15. “So is this just another summer on planet Earth? Or is it the apocalypse? Or is it global warming?” His panel of guests was stacked 2-to-1 (3-to-1 if Zakaria is counted) in favor of legislative action to stop global warming and failed to consider that weather is not climate. NASA’s Gavin Schmidt and Jeffrey Sachs , director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University, were on the panel with Michaels. Zakaria accepted Schmidt’s views unquestioningingly, but then challenged and argued with Michaels’ points, going so far as to ask about his research funding. Schmidt is a favorite climate change expert for many news outlets, including the Times. He told the paper, “If you ask me as a person, do I think the Russian heat wave has to do with climate change, the answer is yes. If you ask me as a scientist whether I have proved it, the answer is no – at least not yet.” Environmental studies professor Roger Pielke, Jr. responded to that on his blog saying: “This neatly sums up the first of two reasons why I think that the current debate over whether greenhouse gas emissions caused/exacerbated/influenced recent disasters around the world is a fruitless debate.  It is not a debate that can be resolved empirically, but rather depends upon hunches, speculation and beliefs. Debates that cannot be resolved empirically necessarily involve extra-scientific factors.” In another post, Pielke criticized the World Meteorological Organization (which was cited by AP) for issuing a statement saying that the severe weather events “matches IPCC projections.” ” The WMO statement is (yet) another example of scientifically unsupportable nonsense in the climate debate. Such nonsense is of course not going away anytime soon,” Pielke said, noting that the IPCC didn’t make any projections for 2010. MSNBC Snows Viewers, Along with the rest of the Media During the winter, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., poked fun at alarmists when his grandchildren built an igloo on the National Mall and called it “Al Gore’s New Home.” Fox News host Glenn Beck sarcastically made fun of an Al Gore “disappearance” (implying that since the snow started falling Gore wasn’t publicly warning about climate change) and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Kennedy wrote in 2008 that global warming had resulted in “anemic winters” in Washington, D.C. The 2009-2010 winter and its multiple blizzards contradicted Kennedy’s claims, Beck noted. Despite media and lefty claims , conservatives weren’t trying to say that the snowy winter disproved global warming. Rather they were arguing that strange weather should not be used as evidence to support climate change (summer or winter). But that was exactly what the left and the news media had been doing, and it is what they are doing again this summer. Alarmists like Al Gore, Bill Nye “The Science Guy,” and MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan had claimed the severe weather was “consistent” with global warming. Gore blamed three straight days of rain on warming saying, “Just look at what has been happening for the last three days,” Gore said. “The so-called skeptics haven’t noted it because it’s not snow. But the downpours and heavy winds are consistent with what the scientists have long warned about.” Ratigan claimed that “these ‘ snowpocalypses ‘ that have been going through DC and other extreme weather events are precisely what climate scientists have been predicting, fearing and anticipating because of global warming.” His rant continued: “Why is that? The thinking that warmer air temperatures on the earth – a higher air temperature – has a greater capacity to hold moisture at any temperature,” Ratigan said. “And then as winter comes in, that warm air cools full of water, and you get heavier precipitation on a more regular basis. In fact, you could argue these storms are not evidence of a lack of global warming, but are evidence of global warming – thus the 26 inches of snowfall in the DC area and the second giant storm this year.” [Emphasis added] Ratigan also criticized a TV spot by Virginia Republicans designed to ridicule proposed climate change policies that could hurt the state’s job situation. Global warming alarmists in the media and academia proved last winter that they want it both ways: weather can “support” their opinions about global warming, but weather cannot disprove or discredit those same opinions. So they continue to link everything, even seemingly contradictory weather events like droughts and floods, to the problem of climate change. UN Climate Conference May Have Trouble in Mexico The recent media hype over unusual weather events may be designed to counter declining public fears over global warming. After all, unless the public thinks global warming is a threat they are unlikely to support costly government intervention or make drastic changes in their lives. After the flop at Copenhagen, proponents of global warming alarmism wanted the next UN Climate Change Conference, coming up this November/December, to move forward toward curbing emissions. But recent news reports indicate the Mexico meeting may not be as successful as they’d hoped . According to The Christian Science Monitor, the Cancun meeting scheduled to begin Nov. 29 and run through Dec. 10 seems “to have been thrown into reverse – at least for now.” “Unfortunately, what we have seen over and over this week is that some countries are walking back from the progress made in Copenhagen and what was agreed there,” Jonathan Pershing, leader of the U.S. negotiating team, said according to the Monitor. Like this article? Then sign up for our newsletter, The Balance Sheet .

See original here:
Media Use Crazy Weather to Hype Global Warming, Despite Admissions Weather Isn’t Climate

Stewart Rips Fox’s GOP Contribution, Ignores Viacom’s Dem Donations

Comedian Jon Stewart on Wednesday bashed Fox News for parent company News Corporation’s $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association. Unfortunately, Stewart failed to inform his viewers that Viacom, the parent company of Comedy Central, has so far given disproportionately to Democrats this year. Also missing in the “Daily Show” host’s attack of FNC and Glenn Beck was that News Corp. prior to this contribution had historically given more to Democrats than Republicans. Such facts were unimportant Wednesday evening, for Stewart was on another in a long line of Fox News is the devil incarnate rants (video follows with commentary): The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c News Corp. Gives Money to Republicans www.thedailyshow.com Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party JON STEWART: I really think if anything the Republicans should be paying Fox News millions and millions of dollars.  If Stewart is indeed concerned with “following the money,” maybe he should look at the contributions by his own company. After all, according to Open Secrets, Viacom’s Political Action Committee has so far this year contributed 62 percent of its money to Democrats and only 38 percent to Republicans (h/t Lachlan Markay): In 2008, this ratio was 58 percent Democrats, 42 percent Republicans: Beyond this, as NewsBusters reported hours before Stewart made his comments, prior to this $1 million donation, News Corp. had actually given 54 percent of its donations to Democrats and 46 percent to Republicans. The “Daily Show” host didn’t mention this inconvenient truth Wednesday evening. More importantly, since for his part Stewart has historically bashed Republicans and Fox News far more than he’s attacked liberal politicians and their shills at MSNBC, maybe the Democrats should be paying Comedy Central millions and million of dollars. 

Go here to read the rest:
Stewart Rips Fox’s GOP Contribution, Ignores Viacom’s Dem Donations

Late Night Highlights: Emma Thompson Disses Mary Poppins, Colbert Argues Against Gay Marriage

While most of the network late night players were on vacation last night, Nanny McPhee star and scribe Emma Thompson charmed Jon Stewart at the Daily Show while badmouthing her country’s most beloved fictional nanny. Meanwhile, Stephen Colbert voiced his (character’s) anti-gay views, Stewart got to the bottom of the nation’s mosque-mania and Aubrey Plaza recalled her days getting drunk on the job.

Visit link:
Late Night Highlights: Emma Thompson Disses Mary Poppins, Colbert Argues Against Gay Marriage

Jon Stewart Vulgarly Attacks GOP Concerns for Rising Taxes and Deficits

Comedian Jon Stewart on Wednesday joined the growing liberal chorus attacking Republicans for their concerns about rising taxes and exploding budget deficits. The only thing different about the “Daily Show” host’s approach was that he needed vulgarity to make his point. Potentially even worse, Stewart in his opening segment Wednesday actually used CNN’s Fareed Zakaria to support his view that letting the Bush tax cuts expire would be a good thing for the nation. Ironically, that was the only thing remotely funny about this sketch (video follows with partial transcript and commentary, extreme vulgarity warning, see BMI’s coverage as well ): The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c Deductible Me www.thedailyshow.com Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party “Let’s begin tonight in D.C.,” Stewart said. “It’s our nation’s capital. For the last 18 or so months Barack Obama’s been the President and Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress. Purely by coincidence, that’s the exact same amount of time that Republicans have expressed a newfound concern for our nation’s financial stability.” To set-up this “Republicans are hypocrites skit,” Stewart played clips of Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio and former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich warning against the budget deficit. At that point, Stewart said, “The deficit wants to skullf–k your mother. It wants to eat your children after it shows your wife a level of physical passion you’ve never been able to provide.” But here was the real punchline: Stewart played a clip from the August 1 installment of CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS” when the host of that show told his viewers that letting the Bush tax cuts expire would instantly shrink our nation’s deficit by 30 percent. After the clip ended, Stewart said Zakaria was right. That would have elicited uproarious laughter from a well-informed audience, for as NewsBusters reported shortly after Zakaria made this pathetic claim, nothing could be further from the truth. Supporting our view, the Heritage Foundation’s Brian Riedl has research that indicates these tax cuts were just a drop in the bucket of the overall federal budget deficit, and the real culprit is the explosion in spending – not the trotted out liberal misnomer that these tax cuts are responsible. Riedl explains the budget surplus forecasted at the end of the Clinton presidency was set to shift to a $6.1 trillion deficit and that the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts were responsible for a mere 14 percent of this shift. The true culprit: the liberal sacred cow of entitlement spending. “Instead of closing the long-term deficit by splitting the difference between tax hikes and spending cuts, lawmakers should address the source-rising entitlement costs,” Riedl wrote. Indeed. In fact, even if the tax cuts were extended, revenues are projected to rise above the historical average by 2017. Contrary to Zakaria and Stewart’s view, this leaves surging spending responsible for the entire increase in long-term deficits. Business & Media Institute adviser and Cato Institute fellow Daniel Mitchell agrees, and refuted Zakaria’s claim on his Aug. 4 podcast . “Our real problem isn’t that deficits are large,” he said. “It is that the government is far, far too big. That’s what we should focus on, so he’s looking at a symptom rather than the underlying disease and then if we have to look at the issue of federal spending and federal revenue – even under the Obama budget projections – while low now because of the economic downturn – are going to climb to their historical post-World War average. We do not have, in other words, a shortage of revenue in the United States or in Washington, D.C. We have too much government spending.” On top of this, as NewsBusters reported a few hours before Stewart made his foolish comments, a new study published by the liberal Brookings Institution found the savings associated with just letting the Bush tax cuts expire on upper-income wage earners – what President Obama is advocating – to be minimal when compared to the current deficit totals. But facts weren’t getting in the way of Stewart’s populist rant as he next asked a truly absurd question: “How exactly can you be for deficit reduction and extending tax cuts? How do those two diametrically opposed thoughts exist in the same Party platform?” Well, Jon, here’s how: the last time Republicans cut taxes while controlling spending in the mid-1990s, the nation produced budget surpluses for four straight years while adding 12 million jobs to non-farm payrolls. Alas, this is an inconvenient truth Stewart and his ilk have chosen to ignore for over ten years, and Wednesday was no exception as the “Daily Show” host then played a clip of Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) saying the following on “Meet the Press” Sunday: REP. MIKE PENCE (R-INDIANA): They talk about tax cuts the same way they talk about spending increases as though the government owned all of the money. They say, “Are they paid for?” Well, I think, I think deciding on a government spending increase is very different on whether or not we allow the American people to keep more of their hard-earned tax dollars. Makes sense, right? After all, it is OUR money! Obviously not according to Stewart, for he not only seemed totally perplexed by Pence’s logic, he mocked it by asking, “So, you’re saying money the government gets is different than money the government spends?” Well YEAH, Jon! When the government is spending $1.5 trillion MORE than what it takes in, there is a difference! A HUGE difference! Clearly missing this indisputable fact, Stewart said the deficit’s opinion on this matter can be summed up with a clip from the movie “Goodfellas”: ACTOR RAY LIOTTA: Business is bad? F–k you, pay me! Oh, you had a fire? F–k you, pay me! Place got hit by lightning, huh? F–k you, pay me!” In reality, although he clearly didn’t know it, Stewart was making the conservative point about the current administration and Party in power: regardless of how the economy and the American citizens are doing financially, today’s government acts like a Mafioso thug demanding to be paid. Thank you, Jon – we couldn’t have said it any better.

View post:
Jon Stewart Vulgarly Attacks GOP Concerns for Rising Taxes and Deficits

Mohammed-Phobic Comedy Central Lectures Conservatives About Religious Liberty? Jon Stewart’s That Shameless

Jon Stewart landed both his jokey feet on the Ground Zero Mosque controversy on The Daily Show Tuesday night. He mocked conservatives for having no respect for freedom of religion. This, from Comedy Central ? The network that mocks Jesus and Christians relentlessly, but censors whenever the radical Muslims threaten them ? Yes. Stewart was arguing for the “greatness” of Islam, that it should be accepted with great tolerance as a global religion – regardless of how much tolerance Islam demonstrates for freedom of religion. Stewart mocked conservatives and Republicans. “Haven’t these people ever heard of freedom of religion? Lieutenant Goveror of Tennessee, you wanna take this one?” He ran a hacked-up snippet of GOP Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey: “I’m all about freedom of religion [edit]…you could argue whether being a Muslim is actually a religion, or is it a nationality way of life, or cult whatever you want to call it.” We’ll get to Stewart’s surgical removal of context later. Stewart made a shocked face, narrowed his eyes, and lectured: “I think religion is what they wanna call it. But point taken. I can see being confused with Scientology, or the thing that Madonna does with the red bracelets, of this whole Justin Bieber craze, certain World Warcraft guilds, Harry Potter book clubs. But I think over 1400 years and over a billion Twitter followers, Islam’s kind of an accepted religion now.” Again, this is a rich line of argument coming from Stewart, whose acidulous attacks on the Roman Catholic Church hardly qualifies as treating Catholicism as an “accepted religion.” Instead, it’s a den of perverts and hypocrites. It’s the “villain” that’s “easy to spot.” Stewart insisted that Islam deserved more respect than Harry Potter or Justin Bieber fan clubs, but unlike certain mosques, those groups haven’t been known to nurture terrorist cells.  Then Stewart moved on to mocking Newt Gingrich: “But some people don’t want to be lectured about religious liberty.” He ran a clip of Gingrich saying “I don’t want to be lectued by them about religious liberty when there’s not a single church or a single synaogue in Saudi Arabia.”  Stewart took the easy retort: “Why should we as Americans have higher standard of religious liberty than Saudi Arabia! Makes no sense!” The audience applauded. But it is Stewart and the Comedy Central crowd that are the shameless hypocrites about religious liberty. If they really believed in free expression, they might dare to mock radical Muslims instead of cower before them. Now let’s consider how much Fake-News Stewart edited out from Ramsey’s argument. Mediaite printed a fuller transcript (ks it’s all wonderfully wacko. But there’s certainly more substance in here about the Islamic threat to religious liberty than Stewart wanted to allow. It would ruin his perfectly cocky liberal rant. Ramsey said this (Stewart’s edit in bold) about controversy over permits for a mosque proposal in Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Now, I’m all about freedom of religion. I value the First Amendment as much as I value the Second Amendment as much as I value the Tenth Amendment and on and on and on. But you crossed the line when, when they start trying to bring Sharia law here to the state of Tenn, in the United States. We are a law- we live under our Constitution and they live under our Constitution. But it’s scary if we get there. It’s always arguable- and I’ve been studying this issue, but I’ll be right up front with you, like I say until two weeks ago, three weeks ago, nobody ever asked me about this on a governor’s race. And why do you ask about that? Til this mosque started coming in up there. I’ve been trying to learn about Sharia law, I’ve been trying to learn about what going on-, it is not good if that’s what’s going on. Now, you could argue whether being a Muslim is actually a religion, or is it a nationality way of life, or cult whatever you want to call it . But certainly, we do want to protect our religions, but at the same times, this is something that we are gonna to have to face. Right now, though, the most ironic part of what’s happening in Rutherford County is I’m in the real estate business, you want to get something re-zoned, if you want to get something put in, that’s a three-month process. They approved that in 17 days [“mmm” from audience] in Rutherford County. The least they can do is back up, and say, let’s, let’s see what we’re doing over there, (inaudible) 53,000 square foot mosque in the middle of basically a neighborhood and they did it all almost overnight, 5:16. So that has become an issue, and what an issue. I’ve tried to study up on it. But I’ve read enough about Sharia law to know that it’s crazy. When liberal journalists (think Tom Brokaw) tout Jon Stewart as a precious steward of democracy, please remember how he’ll take video clips wildly out of context for a punchline. Tom Brokaw would think that would give bloggers a bad name, but apparently not fake news anchors.

See more here:
Mohammed-Phobic Comedy Central Lectures Conservatives About Religious Liberty? Jon Stewart’s That Shameless

Late Night Highlights: Eli Roth Burns Martin Brest, Jason Bateman Teases Arrested Shooting Date

Jason Bateman returned to the late night circuit last night to continue hawking The Switch , even if that meant criticizing the odd marketing choices made by the studio. Meanwhile, Eli “Bear Jew” Roth outed Martin Brest as an insensitive director to his stand-ins, Anna Paquin introduced George Lopez to the “sn*tch patch,” David Duchovny celebrated an Ecuadorian holiday and Stephen Colbert celebrated an airline hero.

See the original post:
Late Night Highlights: Eli Roth Burns Martin Brest, Jason Bateman Teases Arrested Shooting Date

Can This New Thor Picture Turn the Buzz Around?

After a few uninspiring and overlit stills left Thor with a reputation as the movie that has the most to prove going into Comic-Con , Marvel has finally released a piece of art for the film that looks pretty freakin’ kick-ass. Is there a catch? Well, maybe.

The rest is here:
Can This New Thor Picture Turn the Buzz Around?

Olivia Munn to Get Chuck-ed

Call it synergy at work. Olivia Munn — who appears on the NBC mid-season comedy Perfect Couples — is set to guest star on the season premiere of NBC’ s Chuck on Sept. 20. Jezebel’s favorite Daily Show correspondent will reportedly play a CIA agent who intimidates Chuck and his sidekick, Morgan. Look out for many gratuitous shots of hair-tossing in slow motion. [ EW ]

See the original post:
Olivia Munn to Get Chuck-ed

Daniel Tosh vs. Jon Stewart vs. Stephen Colbert: Who Would You Rather… Watch?

Jon Stewart makes the most headlines. Stephen Colbert puts the most people and things On Notice . But you might be surprised to learn than neither of these Comedy Central hosts bring in the most viewers. As of last week, that distinction officially belongs to Daniel Tosh , host of Tosh.0 . The show is as simple, and hilarious, as it gets. Tosh stands in front of a green screen and makes fun of clips/videos on the Internet. Such material has earned Tosh.0 an average of 2.4 million viewers, about 400,000 more than tune in for The Daily Show . Comedy Central has already renewed the series for a third season, while it’s also producing a nationwide stand-up tour for Tosh. So, you tell us: Who would you rather… watch?

Visit link:
Daniel Tosh vs. Jon Stewart vs. Stephen Colbert: Who Would You Rather… Watch?

Women of The Daily Show Speak

Dear People Who Don't Work Here, Recently, certain media outlets have attempted to tell us what it's like to be a woman at The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. We must admit it is entertaining to be the subjects of such a vivid and dramatic narrative. However, while rampant sexism at a well-respected show makes for a great story, we want to make something very clear: the place you may have read about is not our office. The Daily Show isn't a place where women quietly suffer on the sidelines as barely tolerated tokens. On the contrary: just like the men here, we're indispensable. We generate a significant portion of the show's creative content and the fact is, it wouldn't be the show that you love without us. So, who are the women of The Daily Show? If you think the only women who help create this show are a couple of female writers and correspondents, you're dismissing the vast majority of us. Actually, we make up 40% of the staff, and we're not all shoved into the party-planning department (although we do run that, and we throw some kick-ass parties). We are co-executive producers, supervising producers, senior producers, segment producers, coordinating field producers, associate producers, editors, writers, correspondents, talent coordinators, production coordinators, researchers, makeup artists, the entire accounting and audience departments, production assistants, crew members, and much more. We were each hired because of our creative ability, our intelligence, and above all, our ability to work our asses off to make a great show. Is it hard to work at The Daily Show? Absolutely. When it comes to what makes it onto the show, competing ideas aren't just hashed out between the faces you see on camera or the names that roll under the “writers” credits. Jokes and concepts come from our studio department, our field department, our graphics department, our production department, our intern department, and our control room. Jon's rule is: the strongest idea and the funniest joke win every single time, no matter who pitches it–woman or man, executive producer or production assistant. And of course none of these jokes and ideas would get to air without the layers of production talent working behind the scenes. The fairness of our workplace makes competition tough and makes the show better. So if it's so challenging, why have we stayed for two, five, ten, fourteen years? Because it's challenging. We feel lucky to work in a meritocracy where someone with talent can join us as an intern and work her way up to wherever her strengths take her. But also because it's an environment that supports our being more than just our jobs. The Daily Show (to an extent few of us have seen elsewhere) allows us the flexibility to care for our families, pursue our own projects, cope with unexpected crises, and have lives outside the show. Also… are you kidding? It's The Daily Show for Christ's sake. You ask some stupid questions, imaginary interlocutor. What's Jon Stewart really like? Jon's not just a guy in a suit reading a prompter. His voice and vision shape every aspect of the show from concept to execution. The idea that he would risk compromising his show's quality by hiring or firing someone based on anything but ability, or by booking guests based on anything but subject matter, is simply ludicrous. But what's he really like? Well, for a sexist prick, he can be quite charming. He's also generous, humble, genuine, compassionate, fair, supportive, exacting, stubborn, goofy, hands-on, driven, occasionally infuriating, ethical, down-to-earth and–a lot of people don't know this–surprisingly funny (for a guy brimming with “joyless rage”). How else to describe him? What's the word that means the opposite of sexist? That one. In any organization, the tone is set from the top. Since taking over the show, Jon has worked hard to create an environment where people feel respected and valued regardless of their gender or position. If that's not your scene, you probably wouldn't like it here. We happen to love it. And so… And so, while it may cause a big stir to seize on the bitter rantings of ex-employees and ignore what current staff say about working at The Daily Show, it's not fair. It's not fair to us, it's not fair to Jon, it's not fair to our wonderful male colleagues, and it's especially not fair to the young women who want to have a career in comedy but are scared they may get swallowed up in what people label as a “boy's club.” The truth is, when it comes down to it, The Daily Show isn't a boy's club or a girl's club, it's a family – a highly functioning if sometimes dysfunctional family. And we're not thinking about how to maximize our gender roles in the workplace on a daily basis. We're thinking about how to punch up a joke about Glenn Beck's latest diatribe, where to find a Michael Steele puppet on an hour's notice, which chocolate looks most like an oil spill, and how to get a gospel choir to sing the immortal words, “Go f@#k yourself!” added by: onemalefla