Jon Stewart puts Chris Matthews through “a book interview from Hell”
|
Posted by Jennifer L Pozner October 3rd, 2007 |
One of my pet peeves in the buddy-buddy world of cable (and, hell, network) news is the boys-in-blue-suits propping up boys-in-blue-suits shill-parade that happens seemingly every time a TV newsman (or, perhaps, his ghostwriter) writes a book about, say, how great men fought wars in decades past, or how America is really nifty. Instantly, all his pundit pals and anchor buds bring him on to plug his tome.
Like late night talk show hosts who mindlessly promote some actor’s latest craptacular flick or some It-girl’s latest photo spread for some cosmetics megacorp, these media-men-hyping-media-men interviews are always softballs, with the guy selling the book being told on-air by a collegial show host how important and insightful he and his pages are, regardless of whether or not the book would stand on its own literary merits if its author didn’t work for, say, NBC or ABC… granting an instant Amazon spike. (Note: I’m not making any judgments about the two books linked to above — which may well have had some merit — I’m simply commenting on the overwhelmingly positive reception books news guys receive regardless of their content, at a time when newspapers are cutting their book review sections, independent bookstores and publications are folding, and it’s becoming harder and harder to get any attention to, and therefore publication of, truly hard-hitting, provocative, challenging, entertaining, expansive literary and intellectual prose.)
Which is why I laughed out loud while watching Jon Stewart voice his distaste for NBC’s and MSNBC’s Chris Matthews’ new book, Life’s a Campaign: What Politics Has Taught Me About Friendship, Rivalry, Reputation, and Success on The Daily Show last night. Stewart read the book, and found it to be a catalog of “artifice.” The comedian challenged Matthews’ position that “everything in life” is a campaign “to sell products” and get ahead via packaging yourself, just like politicians do — that life is one massive PR campaign in which you get ahead by pretending to listen, and by saying whatever people want to hear, even if you’re lying. The reason he disagreed, Stewart said, is that campaigns are about slick packaging and not truth, and that Matthews’ readers will find “nothing in this book about ‘be good, be competent.” Matthews was unconcerned. Why should he give advice about living a good or competent life, he asked, when “It’s called The Bible. It’s been written.”
Definitely check out the video below (if YouTube is forced to take it down, the just go to the Daily Show website), reminiscent of Stewart’s infamous Crossfire appearance, where he skewered CNN’s Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala for producing the sort of shoddy journalism that is “hurting America.”) My favorite (read: most contradictory to the knee-jerk, sausage parade hawking that usually happens when someone like Matthews goes on a PR tour to sell a book) snippets are the following exchanges:
Chris Matthews: You’re trashing my book.
Jon Stewart: I’m not trashing your book, I’m trashing your philosophy of life.
and
Chris Matthews: You are unbelievable! This is the worst! This is a book interview from Hell! This is the worst interview I have ever had in my life! This is the worst! You are the worst! I thought you were so big - I thought you were so big you weren’t afraid of me. You’re so big, and you’re afraid of this book. This book scares you. There’s something in here that you fear.
Jon Stewart: There is something in there that I fear. Like fascism. I fear fascism!
Thoughts? Sound off below in the comments.
October 3rd, 2007 17:10
As good as his take down of Matthews was, earlier in the show he talked about Clarence Thomas’ book–why didn’t he invite Anita Hill on the show?
October 3rd, 2007 18:09
Lucinda, I do agree with you that Anita Hill would be an excellent Daily Show guest, especially in relation to Thomas’s self promotion. But the Daily Show’s ridiculous marginalization of female guests/voices — much discussed on WIMN’s Voices by you, by me and every once in a while by others — doesn’t take away from the excellent work they do on certain subjects. Unfortunately, the show is flawed. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t give props when they do well… while we give them jeers for doing poorly in other ways.
October 3rd, 2007 20:14
If life is really a campaign, then I’m fucked–I apparently have Carville and Brazile as my advisors.
But seriously, that’s the stupidest goddamned, shallow bullshit ever. Hardly unexpected from Mister I Love A Codpiece, though. To him and The Political Class, it’s all a game. It has no real impact on real people any more than the game of Life has on those little pink and blue plastic pins you put in those boxy cars. Spin the wheel, move ahead a few squares, have the board tell you how many kids you have, count the money at the end of the game. Fun!
October 4th, 2007 02:16
Here are my favorite two exchanges from the interview.
After Matthews got off what he thought was a witty comment “It’s called The Bible. It’s been written” Stewart came right back with (paraphrase) “So has this, it was called The Prince.” Matthews was then left sputtering that his book was better than the Machiavelli classic. (Stupid much Chris?)
The golden moment of the interview came when an on the ropes Matthews tried to condescend to Stewart by asking the comic if he wanted to be successful. Stewart responded “I am successful,” - leaving Matthews to realize that, of the two them, Stewart was the younger, more popular and richer celebrity. (Apparently you stupid regularly Chris.)
We can deduce Stewart had given Matthews a heads up before the interview about what was coming. Did you notice that Matthews came out to wild applause and walked across the television studio stage to his seat with his arms folded across his chest?
October 4th, 2007 08:01
CMike, I loved those bits, too — I also enjoyed that Stewart assumed his audience was smart enough to know who wrote “The Prince” and why (most TV people sorely underestimate the intelligence of the audience - even Stewart does that at times, but never so much as most others). And, yeah, I was wondering if anyone else noticed that Matthews’ body language included walking with his arms folded. Who does that?
October 4th, 2007 11:11
My favorite part was the follow-up on last night’s show, when Jon Stewart apologized for his bizarrely antagonistic interview with Jeremy Scahill, the author of the book “Blackwater” and a great independent journalist with Democracy Now! and The Nation.
My only criticism: Stewart didn’t mention Scahill or his book by name. Amy Goodman today mentioned the segment, and issued her own challenged to Stewart: “Jon, it takes a man to admit a mistake; it takes a mensch to invite Jeremy Scahill back on the show and do it right.”
I hope Stewart proves himself a mensch.
October 4th, 2007 11:34
It was memorable, and will probably be remembered alongside Stewart’s appearance on Crossfire in 2004. I think Chris had it coming, like many others. Jon Stewart really has his moments of courageous genius, that interview was one of them.
Now a question, where do I go to trash Bill Maher latest sexist comment? Is there a forum for that?
October 4th, 2007 13:41
Unfortunately, Bill Maher’s comments never made it to YouTube.
But in last week’s show (I watch him religiously, because I think he is quite smart), while talking to Maria Bartiromo
he compared Nasdaq to a woman, saying:
When I think of Nasdaq and the fluctuations of the stock market, it reminds me of a woman: Illogical, moody, unpredictable.
HBO archives only the “New Rules”, and the opening monologue.
I think Bill Maher is sexist, but I usually let it slide, because I
think he contributes immensely to the media. But this last comment made me uncomfortable.
Colette
October 4th, 2007 17:28
“Stewart read the book, and found it to be a catalog of “artifice.” The comedian challenged Matthews’ position that “everything in life” is a campaign “to sell products” and get ahead via packaging yourself, just like politicians do — that life is one massive PR campaign in which you get ahead by pretending to listen, and by saying whatever people want to hear, even if you’re lying. The reason he disagreed, Stewart said, is that campaigns are about slick packaging and not truth, and that Matthews’ readers will find “nothing in this book about ‘be good, be competent.” ”
I havent been able to hear the audio of the interview… but this small byte above concerning Matthews’ view on life is exactly what a shockingly large number of young American men (in particular) also seem to think life and getting ahead, and getting women to have sex with them(!) is about.
As a newcomer to the US and in trying to get some understanding of American culture, I have spent quite a lot of time on various web forums over the past three weeks or so, with my ear to the keyhole, so to speak and sometimes participating in what is undeservedly and inaccurately termed ‘debate’ on many different subjects.
And I have been horrified by the materialism, the shallowness, the self-centredness, the racism, sexism (misogyny), bigotry, anger and cynicism. Men on these forums, when talking about relationships and partnerships with women, do talk about marketing themselves, about what language they use to promote themselves and what language they use to ’seal the deal’ with a woman, sealing the deal meaning getting her to have sex. And these men state that a male’s only agenda, ever, in having any interaction with a woman, is to have sex, preferably on tap.
Maybe the anonymous forums are a magnet for this kind of mentality and hopefully its confined to these venues… I would certainly hope so, but maybe Matthews’ views are more the norm than we would like to think…
Namaste
Sahila
October 4th, 2007 21:51
Jon Stewart’s interview should be shown to Michael Josephson of the Josephson institute of ethics. I am certain he would love what Jon Stewart did. Mr. Josephson like to quote Lilly Tomlin who said, “The thing about winning the rat race is that even though you win you are still a rat”. How true.
November 7th, 2007 02:52
Sahila - How right you are. I think Matthews’ views do unfortunately reflect the glutton game in our culture. Be aware, however, that like so much else it is a bit of a “market-driven” attitude. Meaning, lots of women see themselves as the buyers in a market for men and those guys do what they think the competitive is doing to get what they want - the girl. In the dating game, neither men or women function in a vaccum. Each pushes the other genders’ buttons in ways that are “market-driven” or at least what is propogated and sold as being the market by larger forces - with interests of their own (cars, makeup, weight-loss, rogaine, etc.)