Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040927/ap_en_tv/tv_stewart_o_reilly_2

Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

Mon Sep 27, 7:14 PM ET

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer

NEW YORK - The folks at Comedy Central were annoyed when Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly kept referring to "The Daily Show" audience as "stoned slackers." So they did a little research. And guess whose audience is more educated?

Viewers of Jon Stewart's show are more likely to have completed four years of college than people who watch "The O'Reilly Factor," according to Nielsen Media Research.

O'Reilly's teasing came when Stewart appeared on his show earlier this month.

"You know what's really frightening?" O'Reilly said. "You actually have an influence on this presidential election. That is scary, but it's true. You've got stoned slackers watching your dopey show every night and they can vote."

Comedy Central executives realized, and O'Reilly acknowledged, that he was poking fun. But they said they didn't want a misconception to persist.

"If the head of General Motors was watching O'Reilly's show, that could be very important to us," said Doug Herzog, Comedy Central president.

"If you listen to O'Reilly, you get the sense that it was crazy longhairs behind the show," he said. "And it's not. It's great, smart television that attracts a well-compensated audience, most of whom are voting age."

Relax, said Fox News Channel spokesman Rob Zimmerman.

"Comedy Central must have lost their sense of humor," Zimmerman said. "Without Jon Stewart, Comedy Central would turn into the Great American Country Channel."

Comedy Central also touted a recent study by the University of Pennsylvania's National Annenberg Election Survey, which said young viewers of "The Daily Show" were more likely to answer questions about politics correctly than those who don't.

Comedy Central had no statistics on how many people watch "The Daily Show" stoned.

Although seemingly taken aback by repeated "stoned slackers" references while talking with O'Reilly, Stewart was ready with a joke.

"This election is going to rely on the undecided," he said. "And who is more undecided than stoned slackers? Ice cream or pretzels? Ice cream or pretzels? What's it going to be?

Whether it's the slacker or no-slacker zone, O'Reilly is entering it Oct. 7, when he's scheduled to appear on "The Daily Show."

So if Stewart's audience is comprised of stoned slackers, how would Herzog describe O'Reilly's audience?

"I'm not getting into that game," he said.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

Little tiffs like that only serve to increase the ratings of both shows.

And a lot of stoned slackers end up watching the history channel, because it's listed as "THC" in the TV guide.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
Little tiffs like that only serve to increase the ratings of both shows.And a lot of stoned slackers end up watching the history channel, because it's listed as "THC" in the TV guide.
[/div]


Hahahaha. It's not surprising that O'Reilly's audience is uneducated. You'd have to be a complete idiot not to take any "News" from Faux with a grain of salt. I mean, c'mon, Rupert Murdoch??? That channel is so blatantly biased that it may as well be complete fiction. Propaganda.

For all I hear about the "Liberal" media, I can't see how, with the state this country and world are in, Bush can be ahead in the polls. It's the "Liberal" media distracting 75% of the nation from the issues at hand.

The media is corporate owned, and it is biased towards whomever will keep lining their pockets. That's why our candidates are Bush and Kerry, but trust me, they prefer Bush. Remember how the "Liberal" media made sure that Dean wouldn't gain the nomination? Why? Dean was and is vocally anti-war. Why wouldn't a "Liberal" media put Dean on a pedestal and ensure his victory? Kerry was the media's candidate all the way.

The media isn't Liberal folks, it's Conservative. They just try to hide it with constant stories on Peterson, Jackson, and the latest hurricane.

Just vote Badnarick for crying out loud. Look at where he stands and vote for him. He won't win, but the other candidates are gonna keep this country headed straight to you know where.

Edit: If your state is a close race, vote Kerry. We can't afford for Bush to win this time. Otherwise, Badnarick is the best candidate.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

::roll::

If it's a dead heat i'm voting for Bush... otherwise it's Badnarik. I mean come on, Kerry is running on a platform of raising taxes and socializing medicine! He doesn't know what the hell to do with Iraq, and that's not an issue to be swaying in the breeze on. Everyone i've met who says they'll vote for Kerry is doing so simply because they don't like Bush. Furthermore, when the conversation swings to actual issues, they are incredibly ignorant! I'm not saying all democrats are ignorant, just those people whom i've encountered who say they're voting for Kerry. Bush is no gem either but Kerry would be a freaking disaster.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
::roll:: If it's a dead heat i'm voting for Bush... otherwise it's Badnarik. I mean come on, Kerry is running on a platform of raising taxes and socializing medicine! He doesn't know what the hell to do with Iraq, and that's not an issue to be swaying in the breeze on. Everyone i've met who says they'll vote for Kerry is doing so simply because they don't like Bush. Furthermore, when the conversation swings to actual issues, they are incredibly ignorant! I'm not saying all democrats are ignorant, just those people whom i've encountered who say they're voting for Kerry. Bush is no gem either but Kerry would be a freaking disaster.
[/div]

Bush has already proven to be a disaster. The ship is so-far sinking slowly under his watch, but if he's re-elected, it'll be ten times worse before we know what hit us.

Sorry, Dave, but the incredibly rich need to pay more taxes if spending is going to remain at this level, or any level comparable to how we are spending today. How long can we keep letting the deficit increase? Bush will kill this country. Do you want your kids and grandkids to be picking up Bush's tab?

Remember if Kerry is elected, whatever proposals he comes up with have to pass through the legislative branch of government. He's not going to socialize medicine. The Republicans, and many Democrats wouldn't allow it to happen.

Did you ever hear the parable that says, if you put a frog in really hot water, he will jump out, but if you put him in warm water and increase the temperature slowly, he will eventually die and be cooked. That's what's happening under Bush. People see that we aren't stable, but without looking at different sources, we don't know how "hot" it is just yet. If Bush get's elected, my feeling is that we might get "cooked".

Of course people will tell me that Bush will do well, and Kerry will "cook" us. Maybe it's too late already. I don't see us out of Iraq until at least 2010-2015, if ever. The longer we stay, the more anti-American sentiment, and terrorism in general will increase. We need a drastic change in foreign policy. Dean would have done it. At least Kerry is indicating that he will bring some troops home.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

"Furthermore, when the conversation swings to actual issues, they are incredibly ignorant!"


Why are they so ignorant? Could it be that they get their news from TV and local papers? I think our media owes it to us to present us the issues, but that's not how it is, they are failing us. It takes an incredible amount of time to be truly informed. I'd say that 75% of the US is under-informed/ignorant, Democrat or Republican.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

No, most of the people i talk to on this issue don't get their news at all, they just hate bush for some unknown reason. Just following the crowd.

What do you consider incredibly rich? I'm sorry, but i plan to be in the top tax bracket someday. But if the top tax rate was at 70%, like it once was, i wouldn't even bother. That's why that idea of "tax the rich" is ignorant. The rich are already overtaxed (as are everybody else, but they're taxed more).

If you look back at history, lowering taxes increases federal revenue through increased economic activity. So if we were to keep federal spending at this level, the only way to sustain it would be to maintain low taxes to stimulate economic growth. However, it would be wise to reduce spending, and neither candidate is advocating that. Both have advocated more federal medical benefits, but Kerry has advocated much more, a national health care system. Which has proven to be a disaster in Canada. A costly one.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

Looking at how much taxes have been taken out of my check thsi year makes baby Jesus cry.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

I agree, Dave, but cutting taxes while increasing spending is ludicrous.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
I agree, Dave, but cutting taxes while increasing spending is ludicrous.
[/div]

Cutting taxes and increasing spending is a classic way to bring a country out of a recession. And if you hadn't noticed, that's what's happening.

RE: Comedy Central Refutes O'Reilly's Claim

[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]
[div class="dcquote"][strong]Quote[/strong]I agree, Dave, but cutting taxes while increasing spending is ludicrous.[/div]Cutting taxes and increasing spending is a classic way to bring a country out of a recession. And if you hadn't noticed, that's what's happening.
[/div]

For whom??? Stockholders?