Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Let's recap: Jon Stewart pokes fun at the media who, regarding l'affaire Helen Thomas, focus on who's going to get her seat rather on a more significant/relevant/important topic. I paraphrase Jon, but he was like: "who cares if fox or bloomberg gets the seat, if they don't they'll still be in the 2nd row, inches away from the president. Do they think they're rushing a sorority?"
In steps Phil, with a piece on who would get Helen's seat! And not only that, but in which he links to the Jon Stewart rant. Well, Phil, you watched it, but did you understand it?
Phil, ahem, Jon thinks it's a waste of media to spend it on such minute and silly topic.
It's a darn shame since Phil actually is a Hearst colleague of Helen Thomas, he's met her, he's read his autobiography, he's interviewed her and he's Jewish. So he could present a different perspective, informed from his experience with her, on her statement, on the controversy, on Israel and Palestine.
Instead, he's suggesting a teenage shipwrecked sailor to occupy Helen Thomas' seat, and it does not even begin to make sense. And he suggests Jon Stewart too, because people get their news from him. And why do they get their news from him, Phil? Because they can't get it from you, dummy, you just used your SF Chronicle forum to discuss a teenage sailor in Helen Thomas' seat, where else would they go?
Jon Stewart don't want to be a news person, as he says himself every so often, but Phil the news person doesn't give him any choice.