err, sorry.. got a lot of rage boiling through my veins and I'm taking it out on everyone. Sorry about that guys.
OK, just to conclude some things here.
godix wrote:WTF are you on? That has happened exactly once that I know of.
I won't agree with you here. I see he lets guests talk even the right wing. Though I haven't watched the show in a while.
He doesn't run a debate show, he'd be the first to tell you it's a liberal leaning political parody show
Yes it's not but they have some debates at the end of a lot of shows.
and if you're getting your facts solely from him then you're pretty fucking stupid.
I'd agree that if a person does do that then they are pretty fucking stupid.
As a total side note, it's JON Stewart.
Thanks for making your point more valid.
dwchang wrote:I'd have to agree. Anybody who gets their facts from COMEDY CENTRAL and think they're 'fair and balanced' is retarded, misinformed and biased. They've stated that they're liberal-leaning multiple times...
Studies suggest that they are more informed than fox news, some studies also suggest that fox news isn't fair and balanced. I use to watch new clips that came out everyday from The O'Reilly Factor and to me it was outfoxed everyday. And I think those who think Fox is fair in balanced are retarded to be fair. And if you think O'reilly is more fare and balanced than a lot of the debates had at the end of the daily show then I think you are even more retarded(just saying if someone does, not saying you do).
Also it's not a debate. One thing that irks me about the Daily Show (and I do watch and enjoy it) is that Jon (and Colbert) interrupt their interviewees way too often. They'll ask a question and the guy gets two words out and then BAM interruption or counter-point.
I respect that opinion.
dwchang wrote:I don't think Godix or I actually said anything about Fox being fair and balanced. In fact, I despise them and Bill O'Reilly. I'm not entirely sure why you've turned the discussion into a FOX vs. Comedy Central argument since that's irrelevant and was never inferred (at least by me) so that ends that part of the discussion fairly succinctly.
I may have said it wrong but what I was trying to point out is I find The Daily Show better than The O'Reilly factor when it comes to information(remember back to my misinformation link), and even more fair and balanced then you make it sound like I'm a whack job for thinking so.. or maybe you just didn't get what I was trying to say
As for interruptions, if you say so buddy. Like I said, I like the show and watch it, but it still irks me. Maybe you have a larger threshold for it than I, but citing a few examples here and there is hardly 'good research.
I know it's not a fair amount of info for a conclusions to be made but I did watch the show for years and what I got from it is he does give people a chance, again take that as bs but that's what I believe and I think they have better discussions on it than the BillO show.
I should know since I'm a Ph. D. student doing *wait for it*...research for a living. What you're doing would hardly be considered a concrete and irrefutable argument.
Yeah again I would agree with you that without enough examples and not doing a long independent study, you couldn't make a concrete and irrefutable argument. I preach against that type of research and that way of thinking.
This is simply a taste, preferences and perception thing and you can't really argue against those things since they differ person to person. It's like me saying the sky is blue and you saying it's a light blue.
I can see your point here.
And again I wasn't trying to say you don't look at countering evidence, I suggested you might not because it seems rare that people do that but I didn't say for sure that you do.
______________________
And that ends that. These are my closing statements on how I feel about the posts. I wanted to make things clearer.. so whatever mess I wrote before I think isn't important. I addressed things in this one post. Thanks.