<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:nemo='http://www.nemohq.com/ns/nemo/'	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Jon Stewart &#8211; Lion Killer &#8211; Epic 8 Minute CNBC Takedown</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.social-cache.com/2009/03/jon-stewart-lion-killer-epic-8-minute-cnbc-takedown/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.social-cache.com/2009/03/jon-stewart-lion-killer-epic-8-minute-cnbc-takedown</link>
	<description>we deal in uncommon cents.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 06:44:14 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dave Allen</title>
		<link>http://www.social-cache.com/2009/03/jon-stewart-lion-killer-epic-8-minute-cnbc-takedown/comment-page-1#comment-5543</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Allen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 03:01:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.social-cache.com/?p=400#comment-5543</guid>
		<description>Hi Mark,

I think the main point here is that Stewart proves a simple point - that access to the powerful, in front of whom journalists often fawn, is no longer required - in the past that access hasn&#039;t always resulted in good journalistic practice. The powerful on Wall St have merely proven that they know nothing about complicated derivatives just like the rest of us! So when journalists go kowtow to these greedy folks they are committing the same sins that Judith Miller of the NY Times did when she was hoodwinked by the Bush administrations in its rush to war in Iraq. Intelligent journalists exposed to this powerful magnet seem to get weak kneed...

At least Jon Stewart has the moxie to expose and confront people in power. He doesn&#039;t need to be liked nor does he need access to those that withhold access on a whim. 

He may be no less of a bloviator than Hannity and Limbaugh as you say, but at least he&#039;s funny. And you&#039;re right, what he does is definitely not a remedy for for the problems confronting journalism but if journalists could stop blaming the web for their newspaper&#039;s travails they might be able to see the trees and the forest (no pun intended.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mark,</p>
<p>I think the main point here is that Stewart proves a simple point &#8211; that access to the powerful, in front of whom journalists often fawn, is no longer required &#8211; in the past that access hasn&#8217;t always resulted in good journalistic practice. The powerful on Wall St have merely proven that they know nothing about complicated derivatives just like the rest of us! So when journalists go kowtow to these greedy folks they are committing the same sins that Judith Miller of the NY Times did when she was hoodwinked by the Bush administrations in its rush to war in Iraq. Intelligent journalists exposed to this powerful magnet seem to get weak kneed&#8230;</p>
<p>At least Jon Stewart has the moxie to expose and confront people in power. He doesn&#8217;t need to be liked nor does he need access to those that withhold access on a whim. </p>
<p>He may be no less of a bloviator than Hannity and Limbaugh as you say, but at least he&#8217;s funny. And you&#8217;re right, what he does is definitely not a remedy for for the problems confronting journalism but if journalists could stop blaming the web for their newspaper&#8217;s travails they might be able to see the trees and the forest (no pun intended.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.social-cache.com/2009/03/jon-stewart-lion-killer-epic-8-minute-cnbc-takedown/comment-page-1#comment-5409</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:29:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.social-cache.com/?p=400#comment-5409</guid>
		<description>Indeed, Stewart&#039;s team juxtaposed imagery and clips to make their point. That&#039;s hardly diligent research. And, you offer no data whatsoever to support your declaration that the piece got &quot;eyeballs&quot; that journalists want. Stewart&#039;s act is a good one and it relies on the real world behavior of plenty of folks up and down the political spectrum. But, it is no different than the right wing bloviators, e.g. Limbaugh, Hannity, that dominate a different part of the political entertainment spectrum.

Stewart did all of us who enjoy the Opinion sections of newspapers a great service by offering us his opinion of the cable show&#039;s weak and skewed attempts to report anything. He did it in a most entertaining way. That younger audiences rely upon him or anyone else whose primary focus is entertainment is hardly comforting and certainly no remedy for the problems confronting journalism.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Indeed, Stewart&#8217;s team juxtaposed imagery and clips to make their point. That&#8217;s hardly diligent research. And, you offer no data whatsoever to support your declaration that the piece got &#8220;eyeballs&#8221; that journalists want. Stewart&#8217;s act is a good one and it relies on the real world behavior of plenty of folks up and down the political spectrum. But, it is no different than the right wing bloviators, e.g. Limbaugh, Hannity, that dominate a different part of the political entertainment spectrum.</p>
<p>Stewart did all of us who enjoy the Opinion sections of newspapers a great service by offering us his opinion of the cable show&#8217;s weak and skewed attempts to report anything. He did it in a most entertaining way. That younger audiences rely upon him or anyone else whose primary focus is entertainment is hardly comforting and certainly no remedy for the problems confronting journalism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
