Viggo Mortensen: Fox News is ‘so appallingly shallow and manipulative’

FFN_Mort_Viggo_GGFF_091814_51534238

Here are some photos of Viggo Mortensen out and about in NYC this week. He’s been making the rounds to promote The Two Faces of January, that film he did with Kirsten Dunst and Oscar Isaac. It looks like a decent-ish movie, but for me it will be a rental. I’m also pleased to see that Viggo isn’t so Nice ‘N Easy caramel blonde these days – remember these photos?

As I said, he’s been doing the promotional rounds, which included a boring interview on The Colbert Report, a stop by Sirius Radio and a really good interview with HuffPo. You can see the video here. Viggo was asked about the media, his politics and whether he ever listens to Rush Limbaugh.

Viggo Mortensen is all for reading things you don’t agree with to get a broader sense of the world, but he just can’t tolerate Fox News.

The actor dropped by HuffPost Live on Tuesday to discuss his new film “The Two Faces Of January,” and he got to talking with host Ricky Camilleri about media. Specifically, he doesn’t get why people use today’s “constantly evolving means of communicating” to “reinforce their own point of view.” Mortensen said he enjoys indulging in an alternative take, but some of it is particularly troublesome:

“I take an interest. I do listen to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Mike Savage, and I do watch Fox News once in a while. I can only take small doses of it because they’re so appallingly shallow and manipulative. … It’s like watching a really bad movie. It’s like watching an Ed Wood movie and going, ‘Wow.’ Well, now that’s an insult to Ed Wood, actually. But, you know, like a horror movie — just poorly made.”

That’s not to say that left-wing media outlets aren’t guilty of the same thing, but Mortensen feels conservative commentators tend to use an especially egregious method of presenting information.

“You can say that about so-called left-wing radio — it’s generally talking points as well. But I think there’s more of an effort to deal with facts, even if maybe there are sins of omissions and so forth on the left as well. It’s generally not as brazen of a form of lying as you get from Fox,” Mortensen said.

[From HuffPo]

I’m a political leftie and I tend to get most of my news from PBS, NPR, MSNBC and sometimes CNN. I have to admit, I have a love/hate relationship with MSNBC at this point. I love Rachel Maddow and Melissa Harris Perry and I’m developing a nerd-crush on Steve Kornacki, but even then… sometimes I’m like, “OK, I get it, you’re super liberal. Move on, you guys.” Then again, I watch Morning Joe in the mornings and conservative hack Joe Scarborough makes my blood boil. Watching him, I am filled with morning rage. It’s not the best way to wake up.

Anyway, I agree with Viggo – the left-wing media outlets have their faults, but I’d still rather get my news from the lefties than from… Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. Of course, this morning I watched BBC America because that was literally the only news show covering the Scottish independence vote.

FFN_Hader_Viggo_GGFF_091614_51532496

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

126 Responses to “Viggo Mortensen: Fox News is ‘so appallingly shallow and manipulative’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Kiddo says:

    Oh, nevermind, I read that wrong.

  2. Lottie says:

    With you about Morning Joe. Its so…self centered to me. All the photos of him and Mika mugging for the camera. The conversations only gets so far and they’re too soft on questioning guests. And don’t get me started on Mika. I just don’t see her purpose. Every time I think she is going to say something smart profound…she doesn’t.

    • aang says:

      They are both awful.

    • Becky1 says:

      I watch “Morning Joe” because I like to get a variety of perspectives and I like the guest commentators but I agree with you about the show being self-centered. There’s no need to have all of those silly photos plus I dislike it when they talk about/feature their personal lives. One of Mika’s daughters recently started college at Johns Hopkins and they actually showed footage of Mika moving her into the dorm! Ridiculous and completely unnecessary.

      Speaking of mornings on MSNBC, I really like Thomas Roberts and “Way Too Early” although I get up around 5:45 AM-5:50 AM so I only see part of it.

  3. LadyJane says:

    I have no problem with editorial news reporting – so long as the audience knows that they are watching a subjective view of events. That isn’t always the case – left or right.

  4. tifzlan says:

    I loathe Fox News. I hate their shows, i hate their anchors, i hate everything about them. And yes, they are insanely manipulative and RUDE. Sean Hannity, for example, is probably the worst anchor/human being i have ever seen in my life. He constantly talks over his guests, yells at them, and sometimes, he even insults them. His guests are never allowed to speak unless it’s an opinion that falls in line with his world views. Watching clips of his interviews (i don’t have a tv) seriously makes my blood pressure rise because it stresses me out so much. I’d guess that almost every other hack on that network behaves in the same appalling manner.

    I don’t really watch news networks or programs (again, no tv) but when i do, it’s usually Al-Jazeera. Most of the time, i just read the news on my computer. I really like Jon Stewart’s show but i don’t know if that counts as a news program or not.

    • Kas says:

      How are Ed Schultz or Al Sharpton any better? They aren’t . It’s a different side of the same coin.

      • tifzlan says:

        I don’t know who Ed Schultz is and i don’t know if Al Sharpton has his own show or not but i don’t remember watching any programs with him as a co host so i can’t say. Like i said, i don’t own a tv so i don’t know how anchors on liberal news shows are. Like Rachel Maddow. I know who she is but i’ve never watched her program so i’m not really familiar with her anchoring. I usually just read the news and form my own opinions.

        Someone further below commented on US news being too shouty and manic. I completely agree with that assessment, whether it’s Sean Hannity or CNN. I’m not American (but i live here) but the reason i absolutely loathe Fox is because they regularly report falsely and aren’t concerned with the lies they are spreading.

        Also, Sean Hannity shouted at his guest, who was the head of a Palestinian advocacy group, and called him an idiot. I just find this very unacceptable, sorry.

      • Brionne says:

        Kas it now incumbent upon you to explain how anything Ed Schultz or Al Sharpton have said on their MSNBC shows has been as remotely vile and manipulative as Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh?

      • wolfpup says:

        High land Fashionista – you got my attention – the button thing sounds yummy!

        Your post is two lines down – whoops!

    • Justaposter says:

      You don’t know if Jon Stewart is a a news program or not? For real?

      • tifzlan says:

        Okay, i know he is an entertainer and his program isn’t traditionally thought of as a news program like CNN or Fox but a lot of people take him seriously and i know quite a few people in my age group who follow him for news so that’s what i meant by that statement.

      • Esmom says:

        Of course Jon Stewart is a comedian but the scary thing is he and his “fake news” team often get the facts correct while Fox, a supposedly legit news source, clearly does not. Sadly, though, his commentary tends to fall on deaf ears in the Fox crowd. Mention his name and the knee jerk reaction is he’s a “libtard” who’s spinning things himself. Sigh.

      • A “news program” like CNN or fox……erm……yeaaaah. But, no.

        Really there’re are very few remaining actual news outlets left that aren’t Murdoch or Clearchannel droids. I can think of BBC, AlJezeera, and a handful of NPR stations that have yet to succumb, although depending on who you ask, they would be considered part of the “liberal media”. I completely agree with his assessment of the situation, and would happily discuss it further with him while I used my teeth to undo the buttons of his shirt.

        Oh, did I say that out loud?

  5. Pager90 says:

    Amen.
    Preach brother. Faux News is the worst!
    Sarah Palin WTF!?!

    But I must add that MSNBC ,which use to be my favorite place for political news coverage has become a AWFUL too. Al Sharpton, WTF!?

    • FingerBinger says:

      Al Sharpton is a lot better than Ronan Farrow. I follow Ronan F. on twitter and he’s very witty and smart as hell,but it does not translate well on TV.

      • Pager90 says:

        Al Sharpton sounds almost illiterate. I was embarrassed a Democratic news channel put him on air.
        Sorry I haven’t seen Ronan Farrow yet. I stopped watching those channels. They just got too slanted and bitter.

      • Brionne says:

        Al Sharpton is far from illiterate. He is great at rebuffing rightwing rhetoric. Having southern preacher vocal inflection does not make you illiterate.

      • mayamae says:

        Al Sharpton is a truly unique person. An Evangelical who doesn’t knee-jerk rant against abortion, birth control, voter’s rights, women’s rights, etc. That’s very rare these days, when religious leaders preach Conservative politics from the pulpit. He was talking about Trayvon Martin way before most television news outlets.

      • Frida_K says:

        I respect Al Sharpton for, among other things, just what Pager90, Brionne, and mayamae wrote. He has been speaking truth to power for a long time and he’s had a long, long uphill slog to do it.

        He seems like a good guy, too. I’d love to meet him, to be honest. He’s an interesting man with a fascinating background. He deserves a spot on the same pantheon as Martin Luther King, Jr., I think.

      • Dena says:

        That’s why it’s insulting to call him a race hustler IMO. It’s an attempt to diminish him and the people for whom he advocates. To do so is downright insulting I think.

  6. Nicole says:

    So true. I remember there was a study done about how people who watch Fox News are actually LESS informed about facts than people who watch no news. And considering the blatant lies coming from them on a daily basis where they halfheartedly take back is egregious. Actually my friend just turned them down for a job after the crap job of misrepresenting facts they did in Ferguson.

    • doofus says:

      “I remember there was a study done about how people who watch Fox News are actually LESS informed about facts than people who watch no news.”

      I remember hearing that too. Staggering.

    • JM says:

      My mother fell into the Fox News Kool-Aide barrel and never resurfaced. I have shown her political articles, reports, etc… that prove what FOX is putting out are lies, but she believes the several different written sources are nothing more than propaganda. Yet Fox News is “fair and balanced.” This from a woman who was a progressive democratic feminist in the 70’s. WTF happened? Who kidnapped my mother’s brain and can I get it back?

      • Pager90 says:

        Oh my gawwwd! That’s so funny, but also sad. It happened to my brother in law too. He doesn’t miss it. Me and my sister just shake our heads in disbelief. He believes everything they feed him on a Fox News.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Yeah I have some relatives that are full-on Faux newsies.
        One of them is incredibly anti-immigration, but pays an illegal $20/day to clean his house. Sigh 🙁

      • Amelia says:

        The same deal with my mom. I can’t believe she’s watching this nonsense. She has it on 24/7. She was very liberal and progressive minded, but now she’s turned into a a Fox News groupie. Maybe that’s what happens to people after they turn a certain age!

      • jane16 says:

        My Mom is 84 and more liberal than ever and watches MSNBC. Her sister watches Fox now, although she used to be liberal. I don’t know why it hits some people and not others. In my aunts case, maybe its that her husband dominates her and she changed so that she could (subconsciously) keep the peace in her house? Its sad to all of us.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        My grandparents and father are Fox News-ers. I tried to talk to my grandparents about Obama once, and they were like “but what about his birth certificate???” I whipped out my smart phone and showed them photos of his birth certificate, the raised seal, etc. but they still didn’t get it.

        Fox News has been prevalent for so long, there are some Americans that are dealing with a totally separate set of what they consider “facts”. My dad, for instance, STILL thinks that WMDs were found in Iraq!

      • delorb says:

        There will come a day when they’ll be sorry for planting that seed. Something will happen and they won’t be able to walk their people back from it. They have taught their viewers to be suspicious and paranoid of their government and its going to backfire on them one day.

      • From North of Boston says:

        The yelling and the lies are horrible, but I think the fear mongering and polarizing is just as bad.

        People on there, I don’t know whether they are news reporters or commentators (it’s really impossible to tell most of the time) constantly yelling over each other about all the horrible things that have happened or are going to happen because of one Democratic thing or another. Usually incredibly misinformed, and certainly not “balanced”.

        I’m not 100% for what the Obama administration has done, but I can’t for the life of me see how any sane person could think that he’s more dangerous than the McCain/Palin combination could have been.

  7. Singtress says:

    They all have their issues, but it is not as if his comment about FOX news is shockingly perceptive. They make more for the stupid things their anchors say, than any other channel I have ever seen.

  8. Jules says:

    Kaiser, I could not agree with you more. Thank you.

  9. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I rarely watch Fox News, but about two weeks ago, I was flipping channels and saw President Obama speaking about the riots in Ferguson, so I stopped to watch. It turned out to be Fox. My husband and I listened to the comments, which seemed very neutral to me – there’s no excuse for looting, everybody stay calm, including police – that was the gist I got. Then this woman (blonde and pretty of course) started in on how Obama was trashing the police and encouraging looting and my husband and I just stared at each other and said, “whaaaat??” She was just making stuff up. I swear, it was not even just a conservative interpretation of what he said. It simply wasn’t true.

    I listen to NPR for news, and I think they lean towards liberal, but they don’t just make stuff up.

    • FingerBinger says:

      I watch Fox on a regular basis and sometimes it is difficult to stomach some of the comments. Even the so called liberals on the network, like Bob Beckel and Juan Williams say some really outrageous things.

      • TheOneandOnlyOnly says:

        Juan Williams is quite good read his columns in the Wall Street Journal; He doesn’t parrot the standard party line on race etc., He’s a lot better than race-baiting shakedown frauds like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

      • Dena says:

        The problem with the Juan Williams and the Al Sharptons of the world is also reflective of the problem in America. Their opinions do not reflect the nuances found within and across black America. Unfortunately, the portrait given is one of shiftless lazy bums who want free stuff and who refuse to help themselves or that of perpetual victims. In that, Juan is as much as a race hustler (which is so insulting on so many levels for so many reasons) as Al Sharpton. Perhaps even worse.

        *******
        I used to really enjoy reading the WSJ before Rupert Murdoch got ahold of it. Now, IMO, it’s just outright propaganda. There is nothing subtle about it.

      • Brionne says:

        Can you guys come up with something more creative and original than the standard “race hustler” rhetoric ? It’s really quite boring and right-wing extremisty

    • doofus says:

      yeah, that’s my issue with them too. I realize that most news outlets have a bias one way or the other, but you can editorialize WHILE presenting factual news.

      Fox outright lies and reports falsehoods or things that have been debunked as ABSOLUTE TRUTH.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Exactly…it isn’t even just that they favor one thing or another, they report completely fiction as if they were real!

        The thing I love about NPR, is that they always refer to some kind of concrete event or document. You can look at their reporting and also investigate the source (legislation, speeches, reports, etc.) for yourself. It is always rooted in reality.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      NPR does a good job. People accuse them of being left-leaning but I don’t see it. Then again, I lean left so…

      Here is their statement : Can Journalism Be Bias-Free?
      “Bias cannot, in my experience, be entirely eliminated. Only by asking ourselves and each other whether the story is complete in every way, can we feel reasonably confident that the story is as unbiased as possible — under the circumstances of time limitations and available information.

      If journalism could be made bias free or influence free, we would have no need for journalists. We could choose stories based on a pre-determined model for fairness, a computer could be programmed with all the information available and the story would literally, write itself.”

      http://www.npr.org/yourturn/ombudsman/2002/021126.html

      • Wilma says:

        I think one of the problems with tv news is that it involves a lot of pundits and hosts, but very few journalists. You need actual journalists to get more facts and less hyperbole.
        NPR has set journalistic rules and standards for itself and employs mostly journalists for their news.

      • wolfpup says:

        TheOriginalKitten – What a thoughtful idea!

  10. Esmom says:

    I completely agree. I get rage-y too when people parrot their talking points, it’s always so obvious. Their mentality — no surprise, I guess — goes hand in hand with the Saran Palin effect that we discussed recently, where facts and critical analysis, not to mention common decency, don’t matter.

    That said, I’m not a fan of the left-wing outlets either, as they makes me feel uncomfortable that they are stooping to Fox’s level. NPR tends to be my main source…I know they get accusations of liberal bias but to me they are fair and reasonable and just aren’t as “noisy” as everyone else.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      +1,000,000

    • Chris says:

      The ABC here in Australia gets accused of being biased to the left. But you have to look at who the accusers are and they’re always people who are unashamedly biased towards the right. These right-wingers justify their hypocrisy by saying that it’s OK for them to be biased because they work for privately owned networks, but they say the ABC has to be unbiased because they’re funded by the tax payer. But what if the evidence in a given situation supports the left-wing view? The man made climate change debate is a good example. You can’t say that the right-wing denier position is as valid as the view held by many on the left, because it clearly isn’t supported by the evidence. Yet if you don’t those on the right scream bias.

  11. zan says:

    He is yummy in those pictures 🙂

  12. Jaderu says:

    No matter the conversation or issue being discussed, whenever anybody says something like “Well, I heard on Fox news…” I immediately tune them out.

    Also, Viggo is a beautiful, sexy, majestic unicorn. Unfff.

  13. Chris says:

    I’m currently in the middle of Oliver Stone’s The Untold History of the United States. It’s infuriating and depressing. But well worth watching. Anyone else seen it?

    • TheOneandOnlyOnly says:

      Oliver Stone is a leftwing hack. That has been known about America for a century. Even if it’s true, it hasn’t stopped stone from taking full advantage of the system to become a millionaire denizen of that most egalitarian of places, multi-national money loving Hollywood. He comes under George Orwell’s famous description of faux leftists as people that attack something they really don’t want to destroy, and Stone is a well paid member of the professional adversarial class, I respect Karl Marx a lot more; he didn’t rail against injustices while living in luxury.
      Btw, there is more to Orwell than 1984 and animal farm – both overrated. Try Homage to catalonia, the road to wigan pier and Down and Out in Paris and London.

    • Pager90 says:

      Some of the series by Oliver Stone was ok, but I found some of it almost Anti American. I didn’t care for it.

      • Chris says:

        Is it anti American or does it point out facts that cast America in a bad light? Anyway at the end of the day does it really matter? The government and big business seem to do whatever they want because the know the public aren’t going to do anything about it.

    • Wilma says:

      Yes, I have seen it, but as a historian I found a lot of fault with it. I think he has made this the same way Michael Moore makes his films. I don’t mind that Stone’s opinion is what drives the content and presentation of facts (and exclusion of other facts), but it should not be called a documentary.

      • Chris says:

        So what are some of the specific faults you found with it? Do they detract from the film’s overall points that American governments have pursued an expansionist agenda by: ramping up hostilities, derailing peace initiatives and orchestrating the overthrowing of democratically elected governments?

  14. Mom2two says:

    He is not wrong. I cannot even watch Fox News and MSNBC is not much better. I stick to CNN, while they have their bias, I think they are the least biased out of the three. I just want the facts and not spin.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      Fox and MSNBC are commentary, which is not news. At this point, the only TV news commentary I watch is John Olivet.

    • TheOneandOnlyOnly says:

      I kinda like Michael Smerconish on CNN. What about you?

      • Mom2two says:

        I do like Michael Smerconish. He’s from my area and I always find him to be thoughtful in what he has to say and well informed.

  15. Lilacflowers says:

    I prefer news reporting that is simply reporting of the facts. This happened here at this time, delivered in an unsensational manner with no judgment. I do not need anyone telling me what to think about it because I can form my own opinion based on facts . For news on what are government is doing, congressional schedules, proposed legislation, hearing tapes or transcripts, committee votes, floor debates, even documents submitted to congressional committees on pending legislation are all available on the Library of Congress or congressional websites. We pay for this information, more of us should use it.

    • Sixer says:

      You would love the BBC Parliament channel. It’s a 24-hour channel, entirely devoted to the debates in the main British parliament, the devolved parliaments and all the subcommittees.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        I definitely would. Here, we have C-Span but it tends to focus most on floor activities, which is where the final votes occur after things have been hashed out in subcommittees but I still watch it.

  16. Luca26 says:

    Fox makes my blood boil but all American TV news sucks. You can watch CNN and MSNBC for hours and have absolutely no idea about basic current events. Even the classic network broadcasts aren’t very informative about issues because they are so interested in being neutral that they don’t give basic facts. I listen to NPR, BBC radio, and certain podcasts that go in depth like Slate’s political podcast.

    • Steph says:

      And the BBC is not biased? In order to get a balanced worldview,you need to find out who the conservative and progressive thinkers are and then go online and read their columns and opinions,this will give you the best insight to all issues. Watching TV for news is an outdated concept.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        But that isn’t news, it is commentary.

      • Steph says:

        Lilac….the way all news is reported today is opinion. In most cases news outlets will leave out critical pieces to news stories if it does not fall in line with the networks agenda. I just read basic bullets online of major news stories and then for those stories I have an interest in,I will research on conservative and progressive web sites. In that way,I get the COMPLETE story.

  17. ncboudicca says:

    Hot diddly damn. Thanks for fixing your hair Viggo, my crush is back on.

  18. Sixer says:

    I completely agree that we should watch news and politics channels that are outside of both our cultures and our political views. You can’t really hold a view well if you never take in any information that challenges it. As a leftie, I also agree about Fox, predictably enough. Although it is highly amusing to watch the Russell Brand v Sean Hannity wars on YouTube!

    I work from home and tend to have 24-hour news channels on in the background. In an effort to challenge myself, I watch a bit of BBC, a bit of Russia Today, a bit of France 24 and a bit of al-Jazeera. Actually, I really like al-Jazeera because it covers areas and issues that just wouldn’t make it as priority inclusion on UK-centric channels. For example, it had wall-to-wall coverage of a coup attempt in Lesotho the other week and I found out huge amounts about an area and a situation I’d otherwise have been completely ignorant of.

    I have honestly TRIED to find a US news channel to watch sometimes so that I can get a grasp on the US perspective – my choice is CNN, CNBC, Fox, Bloomberg – but I just find them all unwatchable. I like quite sober, factual presentation and US news is all shouty and manic. I do check out Democracy Now online, but that just panders to my own political bias, which kinda defeats the point of it.

    • FingerBinger says:

      Try PBS NewsHour. You’ll get news and not much spin.

      • From North of Boston says:

        That’s true – and when they do have commentators on for analysis, they try to make it somewhat balanced and keep things professional. And there is no yelling, which is a huge plus.

    • Sixer says:

      Ooh! I wonder if that’s on PBS UK. I will look. Merci!

  19. Maria says:

    I really wish the US had other options than SUPER CONSERVATIVE or SUPER LIBERAL news sources. Both Fox and MSNBC just rile people up. Glenn Beck even called his former bosses and himself out for dividing the country with hack pundit journalism. Honestly, I just watch Al Jazeera these days because I just want to hear the news, not some hack pundit’s interpretation of an event or the constant regurgitation of NFL/Kim K drama when real news is out there just waiting for an audience.

    • Brionne says:

      It irks me somewhat that people try to make FOX and MSNBC equal and opposite. That is not true. FOX has a very deliberate agenda to keep people misinformed, fearful of other Americans and riled up. MSNBC defends liberal causes but does not constantly misinformed and provoke the people. Stop equating MSNBC with the evil that is FOX news.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      I read both my local papers, one is liberal and generally well-written with some international news and the other is conservative, poorly written, contains no international news, and is not so secretly controlled by the Murdochs (can’t own it outright for legal reasons), get snippets of major news, weather, commuting issues from morning music radio, check out BBC and Al-Jazeera on-line, (BBC covers US news better than US networks ), then glance at the websites for the NYTimes, CNN, Fox, and MSNBC just to see what the spin for the day is. I do not trust anything in the WSJ because it misquoted me thrice, once attributed my stTement to someone else, and subjected me to an interview with a reporter who was brainless.

    • Esmom says:

      Brionne, I agree but I do tend to lump them together because they’ve got a definite liberal slant. For example I would never cite them if I wanted any credibility with a conservative audience (not that I as a liberal have any credibility anyway with a conservative audience). I think they have consciously positioned themselves to be the anti-Fox — albeit with far more integrity — and I don’t think it’s smart because it’s just stooping to their level.

  20. Green Is Good says:

    Just a drive-by lustful look at Viggo. Damn!

  21. Jess says:

    Looking good, Viggo.

  22. lucy says:

    Beauty/Handsome isn’t so unless there is also intelligence. Viggo has both!

    News reporting, however, leaves much to be desired. Comedian hosts Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert offer better news reporting than (most?) actual American news outlets, even though they make no secret of being the fake news (i.e., comedy entertainment programs.) Somewhere in the past decade and a half the Daily Show and Colbert Report became so much more than entertainment and actual news shows became so much less than actual journalism.

    • tifzlan says:

      Thank you, this is what i meant with my comment on Jon Stewart.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        I got what you meant completely. It might not qualify as “new reporting” but The Daily Show is based entirely on politics and current events. Frankly, I don’t see Stewart’s commentary as any more biased than a lot of the Faux News guys like Hannity etc. The difference is that Stewart presents his show as entertainment, whereas Hannity hides behind the “news” label.

    • jane16 says:

      Well said lucy. My family is so bummed that Colbert is leaving to do the utterly boring and outdated whatever Letterman’s show is called. The Colbert Report is so original. The other late night shows are so cookie cutter-ish.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      If you haven’t seen it, check out John Oliver’s Last Week Tonight

  23. Jenfem says:

    Shallow and manipulative…. Like your new hair?? 😛 I see your fake hair, Viggo! I wonder if he thinks it takes the years off? Still hot, though.

  24. alihar says:

    I generally fall to the right of middle so extremists on both sides get on my nerves. Although I will say that I find most true Liberals live in a fantasy land and I prefer to live in the real world.

    • Brionne says:

      Who do you think of when you say “true liberals”? Surely Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Ann Coulter, Steve King, Bobby Jindal and Sean Hannity don’t represent anything remotely close to reality in conservoworld?

      • Star says:

        Michael Moore, Alan Grayson, Mike Malloy, Ted Rall, Nancy Pelosi, Sean Penn, Ward Churchill, Harry Reid, Cindy Sheehan, Alec Baldwin, Ed Schultz…they all fit the bill.

  25. Mikeyangel says:

    I myself am fiscally conservative while socially liberal. I wish there was a political party that better aligned with my views. I can’t stomach either party. I don’t watch any news though as it is all sensationalized and every channel has their agenda. Ugh.

  26. LilyT says:

    And I thought I couldn’t fall any more in love with him.. <3 swoon*

  27. Cerulean Skygirl says:

    I thought his interview with Colbert was entertaining, plus he looked great. I LOVED when he said “I love books. I love to read.” The accents game they played was hysterical. I wish they could have had another round or two of it. I would have preferred hearing Viggo do some Spanish, Russian or Danish, as opposed to Elvish. Colbert’s pledge of allegiance en espanol had me rolling on the floor!

  28. Bread and Circuses says:

    Dang, Viggo looks HOT here. And I haven’t thought him hot since his greasy Aragorn days.

    Yeah, I’m not even going to touch the political stuff. Appallingly shallow is me!

  29. RobN says:

    Any body who thinks only their political side is the one dealing with issues and the others are all shallow and manipulative, are truly fooling themselves. It’s very easy to dismiss things done by people you agree with that you would demonize if it came from the other side.

    Frankly, the whole system, media and politics, isn’t going to get any better until everybody figures out that both sides lie and refuse to accept it even if it furthers goals they agree with.

  30. qtip says:

    News is big business as well. How much are they not reporting because the company that owns them told them not to.
    I think that to be well rounded, you have to watch CNN, Fox news, MSNBC, BBC, and Al Jazeera.

    • Steph says:

      Exactly! People forget that the news is controlled by large corporations with agendas. They will avoid news stories that will counter their agenda. People always need to question and verify all sources and everything they see in the media.

    • Illyra says:

      All of those, and then some.

  31. Twinkle says:

    Even more reason to <3 Viggo!

  32. LaurieH says:

    Viggo said (quite rightly) that people get their “news” from sources that reinforce their existing views. Of course, they don’t want to admit that. Everyone thinks they are open-minded and fair – but judging by the comments here, not so much. If you are a liberal thinker, of course you don’t want to watch Fox. It challenges your views and most egos can’t take that kind of discomfort. So then one justifies that close-mindedness by saying Fox new is evil, stupid, lying, etc…. If you are a conservative thinker, of course you don’t want to watch MSNBC. Again, it challenges your point of view, your ego gets offended and you become defensive by saying they are evil, stupid, crazy, etc… It is simply human nature not to go out of one’s own comfort zone. The problem is when we start regarding those with whom we disagree as evil and stupid and horrible. That doesn’t do much to advance one’ insistance that they are open-minded and tolerant. In fact, it’s proof positive of the opposite. Personally, I like to hear all sides then Draw my own conclusions. What I don’t do is disparage those who come to a different conclusion. Every life, every perspective is unique. I’d prefer to celebrate and respect that than sling arrows at it.

  33. wolfpup says:

    I’ve taken the names of many of the new sources listed on this thread. It’s so great to hear a variety of opinions.

    I am being a little bit political here, but I do wish to say that who we elect for president is very, very important. Obama has had his focus on the social needs of the public, as well as getting and keeping us out of the wars, that the Republicans clamour for. The agendas of the candidates shape our lives! This includes those who we elect for Congress, because they can obstruct or further the agenda of our presidents. Voting is such a privilege!

    • Steph says:

      Yeah,you are so right, Obama has been wonderful for the one
      percenters and Wall Street.

      • wolfpup says:

        Steph – It’s sounds like your comment is sarcastic – what do you mean? Tell me, tell me (but not the FOX version).

      • Steph says:

        wolf pup… and you sound like you are the type of guy that believes the Clintons and Bush’s belong to opposition parties. The establishment GOP like the obnoxious Rove and the establishment Dems like the Clintons are one in the same. No, I do not buy into corporate owned media like FOX,NBC,MSNBC,CNN,CBS and ABC.

  34. nemo says:

    well, DUH. ALL news outlets around the world are like that. there’s no such thing as objectivity anymore.
    some journos are too lazy to give you the full picture, in some cases the owners’ shove down their own agenda, etc…
    basically, we’re back in the middle ages in a way. back then, the church had all the info, now days – a few wealthy people.

    • LaurieH says:

      I get exactly what you’re saying, but I wouldn’t say we’re back in the Middle Ages. I would say that history just keeps repeating itself. Every society since the dawn of time has had it’s prevailing orthodoxy and failure to follow it meant oppression, persecution, ostracization and even death. And then some brave souls in the minority would start to speak out against it and public opinion would change and the oppressors would be run out. Unfortunately, the previously oppressed now come into power and themselves become the oppressors and the very thing they fought against. And once again, people will speak out and the pendulum would swing the other way again. Rinse, repeat….for thousands of years.

      • wolfpup says:

        And the civilization of man moves on… I have to hand it to the rabble-rousers, who are usually the young. We also need the older voters for some stability. However, progress made in the last 100 years leave all of us much better off. (It’s war that I would like to do away with).

  35. janetdr says:

    Kaiser, I have your morning remedy. Listen to or watch Stephanie Miller. Informative and funny.

  36. Lauraq says:

    I’m a right leaning libertarian and I watch CNN. It’s also the news station I put on the TVs while I’m bartending. This crotchety old man that’s a regular at the bar (who I adore, don’t get me wrong-Grandpa Paul is a hoot) always gripes that I play ‘communist garbage’ with ‘unimportant BS stories. The day after Robin Williams died, CNN was covering a breaking news story while Fox was covering the wait for his publicist to speak. Just parked in front of the podium. Last Friday, I was waiting tables and the bartender on duty put on Fox News. They were covering the kind of snacks available in the White House vending machine, and how many calories were in them. SNACKS! IN VENDING MACHINES! Oh, that’s relevant.
    Oh, and also I watch CNN even though I’m conservative because I would rather be challenged than pandered to.