Cramer vs Stewart (not Martha) and other Unpleasantness

I hate it when two people I admire fight. This has occurred twice recently-- though I am ignoring the free-for-all-slugfest that occurs every fours years on my flist.

The first instance is so awful that I only peeked at it and then ran away. Dangerous and stinky. I find it wrong that most of the trouble arose from a refusal to respect the opinions of others. You cannot say, "You are wrong," with regard to an opinion. "I disagree," is fine; even, "Your facts are wrong," is all right-- but you better have more proof than a Wiki link.

As I said to a friend: what would have been a fascinating conversation in a con suite or over dinner just exploded into a conflagration on the net. And these were smart, interesting people!

*****

The second recent disappointment was the "feud" between Jon Stewart (Daily Show) and Jim Cramer (Mad Money). I consider Jon Stewart to be a witty, entertaining guy-- very smart. Jim Cramer is also smart and means well: if you can get past the gimmicks and props and over-acting (his show educates average viewers about a dry topic in an entertaining way), his knowledge of finance and stocks is solid.

Apparently Stewart took offense to a sound-bite from another CNBC reporter (a brilliant commodities man) that made a lot of people mad. That person canceled an appearance on the Daily Show and the feud (between Stewart and CNBC) began. For whatever reason, Cramer agreed to appear on The Daily Show.

Here is where I lost a great deal of respect for Jon Stewart: Cramer agrees to appear on Stewart's show-- a place where Stewart is in total control and has a fanatically devoted audience. From all appearances-- even at the beginning of the show-- it appeared to be a typical Stewart romp: he mugged for the camera, made corny jokes and references, etc. Cramer clearly expected the usual treatment: humor, witty-but-gentle slaps on the wrist and a generally agreeable time. Instead, Stewart sucker-punched Cramer. Stewart got deadly-serious and angry and played clip after clip of an interview Cramer did where he was (unwisely) honest about how he (legally) manipulated the market (he was showing how easy it is to move a stock).

Now Cramer looks the fool for having the guts to show up and Stewart is looking like a hero for his hard-hitting journalism. I have problems with this. You don't invite a guest into your house and then mug him. Stewart operates under no journalistic restraints: if he was like this all the time, he'd be just another nutcase cable news commentator. I'm incredibly bothered by this.

Cramer vs Stewart (not Martha) and other Unpleasantness

I hate it when two people I admire fight. This has occurred twice recently-- though I am ignoring the free-for-all-slugfest that occurs every fours years on my flist.

The first instance is so awful that I only peeked at it and then ran away. Dangerous and stinky. I find it wrong that most of the trouble arose from a refusal to respect the opinions of others. You cannot say, "You are wrong," with regard to an opinion. "I disagree," is fine; even, "Your facts are wrong," is all right-- but you better have more proof than a Wiki link.

As I said to a friend: what would have been a fascinating conversation in a con suite or over dinner just exploded into a conflagration on the net. And these were smart, interesting people!

*****

The second recent disappointment was the "feud" between Jon Stewart (Daily Show) and Jim Cramer (Mad Money). I consider Jon Stewart to be a witty, entertaining guy-- very smart. Jim Cramer is also smart and means well: if you can get past the gimmicks and props and over-acting (his show educates average viewers about a dry topic in an entertaining way), his knowledge of finance and stocks is solid.

Apparently Stewart took offense to a sound-bite from another CNBC reporter (a brilliant commodities man) that made a lot of people mad. That person canceled an appearance on the Daily Show and the feud (between Stewart and CNBC) began. For whatever reason, Cramer agreed to appear on The Daily Show.

Here is where I lost a great deal of respect for Jon Stewart: Cramer agrees to appear on Stewart's show-- a place where Stewart is in total control and has a fanatically devoted audience. From all appearances-- even at the beginning of the show-- it appeared to be a typical Stewart romp: he mugged for the camera, made corny jokes and references, etc. Cramer clearly expected the usual treatment: humor, witty-but-gentle slaps on the wrist and a generally agreeable time. Instead, Stewart sucker-punched Cramer. Stewart got deadly-serious and angry and played clip after clip of an interview Cramer did where he was (unwisely) honest about how he (legally) manipulated the market (he was showing how easy it is to move a stock).

Now Cramer looks the fool for having the guts to show up and Stewart is looking like a hero for his hard-hitting journalism. I have problems with this. You don't invite a guest into your house and then mug him. Stewart operates under no journalistic restraints: if he was like this all the time, he'd be just another nutcase cable news commentator. I'm incredibly bothered by this.

Cramer vs Stewart (not Martha) and other Unpleasantness

I hate it when two people I admire fight. This has occurred twice recently-- though I am ignoring the free-for-all-slugfest that occurs every fours years on my flist.

The first instance is so awful that I only peeked at it and then ran away. Dangerous and stinky. I find it wrong that most of the trouble arose from a refusal to respect the opinions of others. You cannot say, "You are wrong," with regard to an opinion. "I disagree," is fine; even, "Your facts are wrong," is all right-- but you better have more proof than a Wiki link.

As I said to a friend: what would have been a fascinating conversation in a con suite or over dinner just exploded into a conflagration on the net. And these were smart, interesting people!

*****

The second recent disappointment was the "feud" between Jon Stewart (Daily Show) and Jim Cramer (Mad Money). I consider Jon Stewart to be a witty, entertaining guy-- very smart. Jim Cramer is also smart and means well: if you can get past the gimmicks and props and over-acting (his show educates average viewers about a dry topic in an entertaining way), his knowledge of finance and stocks is solid.

Apparently Stewart took offense to a sound-bite from another CNBC reporter (a brilliant commodities man) that made a lot of people mad. That person canceled an appearance on the Daily Show and the feud (between Stewart and CNBC) began. For whatever reason, Cramer agreed to appear on The Daily Show.

Here is where I lost a great deal of respect for Jon Stewart: Cramer agrees to appear on Stewart's show-- a place where Stewart is in total control and has a fanatically devoted audience. From all appearances-- even at the beginning of the show-- it appeared to be a typical Stewart romp: he mugged for the camera, made corny jokes and references, etc. Cramer clearly expected the usual treatment: humor, witty-but-gentle slaps on the wrist and a generally agreeable time. Instead, Stewart sucker-punched Cramer. Stewart got deadly-serious and angry and played clip after clip of an interview Cramer did where he was (unwisely) honest about how he (legally) manipulated the market (he was showing how easy it is to move a stock).

Now Cramer looks the fool for having the guts to show up and Stewart is looking like a hero for his hard-hitting journalism. I have problems with this. You don't invite a guest into your house and then mug him. Stewart operates under no journalistic restraints: if he was like this all the time, he'd be just another nutcase cable news commentator. I'm incredibly bothered by this.

Taxes and Television

There aren't many silver linings to doing taxes, but one of them (for me) is all the Tivo I catch up on. I've been disappointed with what's on cable, generally, but until Mad Men comes back on, I've still got a lot of shows I am marginally interested in that I can't bring myself to just sit down and watch.

One exception is Cartoon Network's new show, "Batman: the Brave and the Bold". This show is kind of a throwback to the old DC comics version of Batman (circa 1950-70). Not as goofy as the Adam West show, not nearly as dark as Batman became in the 80's). The format has Batman teaming up with different superheros from the DC universe-- some of which are pretty obscure. Plus he demonstrates a refreshing sense of humor and human-ness.

Good old superhero fare-- lots of punching bad guys and monsters, not so much psychoanalysis.



I'm also still enjoying Chowder, warming to Flapjack (though this cartoon would have given me nightmares as a kid) and checking out "How Things Are Made" (Discovery).

Tonight I watched "The Celebrity Apprentice" while logging in checks. Normally I'm not big on reality shows (I hate them), but the task this week was for them to create a superhero character and comic. Now, the idea of a room full of celebrity egos has potential (and they got a -great- mix of egos), but to watch them (none of them comic fans) try to create a superhero? Gold.

Over the last week or so there was a good Clint Eastwood festival on A&E, werewolf films on SciFi Channel and not a lot else. The news and business channels (even/especially CNBC) are depressing mis-moshes of people arguing (talking over each other-- ack!) about the financial rescue; Octomom getting rewarded for her idiocy; another golden child gone missing from suspicious father/girlfriend. Avoid.

Taxes and Television

There aren't many silver linings to doing taxes, but one of them (for me) is all the Tivo I catch up on. I've been disappointed with what's on cable, generally, but until Mad Men comes back on, I've still got a lot of shows I am marginally interested in that I can't bring myself to just sit down and watch.

One exception is Cartoon Network's new show, "Batman: the Brave and the Bold". This show is kind of a throwback to the old DC comics version of Batman (circa 1950-70). Not as goofy as the Adam West show, not nearly as dark as Batman became in the 80's). The format has Batman teaming up with different superheros from the DC universe-- some of which are pretty obscure. Plus he demonstrates a refreshing sense of humor and human-ness.

Good old superhero fare-- lots of punching bad guys and monsters, not so much psychoanalysis.



I'm also still enjoying Chowder, warming to Flapjack (though this cartoon would have given me nightmares as a kid) and checking out "How Things Are Made" (Discovery).

Tonight I watched "The Celebrity Apprentice" while logging in checks. Normally I'm not big on reality shows (I hate them), but the task this week was for them to create a superhero character and comic. Now, the idea of a room full of celebrity egos has potential (and they got a -great- mix of egos), but to watch them (none of them comic fans) try to create a superhero? Gold.

Over the last week or so there was a good Clint Eastwood festival on A&E, werewolf films on SciFi Channel and not a lot else. The news and business channels (even/especially CNBC) are depressing mis-moshes of people arguing (talking over each other-- ack!) about the financial rescue; Octomom getting rewarded for her idiocy; another golden child gone missing from suspicious father/girlfriend. Avoid.

Taxes and Television

There aren't many silver linings to doing taxes, but one of them (for me) is all the Tivo I catch up on. I've been disappointed with what's on cable, generally, but until Mad Men comes back on, I've still got a lot of shows I am marginally interested in that I can't bring myself to just sit down and watch.

One exception is Cartoon Network's new show, "Batman: the Brave and the Bold". This show is kind of a throwback to the old DC comics version of Batman (circa 1950-70). Not as goofy as the Adam West show, not nearly as dark as Batman became in the 80's). The format has Batman teaming up with different superheros from the DC universe-- some of which are pretty obscure. Plus he demonstrates a refreshing sense of humor and human-ness.

Good old superhero fare-- lots of punching bad guys and monsters, not so much psychoanalysis.



I'm also still enjoying Chowder, warming to Flapjack (though this cartoon would have given me nightmares as a kid) and checking out "How Things Are Made" (Discovery).

Tonight I watched "The Celebrity Apprentice" while logging in checks. Normally I'm not big on reality shows (I hate them), but the task this week was for them to create a superhero character and comic. Now, the idea of a room full of celebrity egos has potential (and they got a -great- mix of egos), but to watch them (none of them comic fans) try to create a superhero? Gold.

Over the last week or so there was a good Clint Eastwood festival on A&E, werewolf films on SciFi Channel and not a lot else. The news and business channels (even/especially CNBC) are depressing mis-moshes of people arguing (talking over each other-- ack!) about the financial rescue; Octomom getting rewarded for her idiocy; another golden child gone missing from suspicious father/girlfriend. Avoid.