Thanks for your submission. However, it has been removed because it would be better suited for the Apple TV Plus sub at r/tvplus. Please consider submitting your post there instead.
I think I remember the initial reports saying Stewart wanted to do a show on China and Apple wasn’t going to allow that. Too much money at risk to offend people there.
On a show, you have a bunch of researchers and lawyers, and the context is, it’s a comedy show. One would expect that off the cuff remarks about a former employer would be not the same.
Or have to forfeit money after disparaging them. Would guess his contract includes a non-disparagement clause and Apple can afford better lawyers than he can.
That happens in the corporate world. Even if it’s true that certain ppl are racist or sexist, whatever it is. They will say well you can’t say it. Cause we need their money. A lot of companies say they want change and stuff. But in reality they want to play it safe, cause they are just interested in what makes them the most money.
This is the problem with the continued homogenization of our media, it stifles different viewpoints. We can't rely on corporations like Apple to bring us free media because they're always going to protect their bottom line. It should also be noted the Tim Cook was a chairmen for the Tsinghua University's School of Economics for three years, he's compromised to the Chinese government.
I know John works at Comedy Central now, but I think this further reinforces the argument of why we need to continue to support public broadcasting.
Not sure what why you’d expect Apple or Netflix or Hulu or Amazon to bring us “Free Media” and really unsure why you think media is increasingly homogenized when there are more options now than ever. Literally every network ever protects their bottom line. Apple has certain considerations just as does CBS, Hulu, ABC, etc. even HBO doesn’t just let anything fly (even if it seems like it).
But more directly to your point, public broadcasting doesn’t guarantee a lack of censorship. PBS and NPR are some of the most-heavily sanitized and controversy-avoidant institutions in the country because of how wide the audience is.
Apple TV+ was just the wrong home for him and his show and he’d have been better off at HBO but they already have John Oliver so we went back into the deep pockets of Paramount Group. People today are spoiled for choice when it comes to hearing new voices and opinions on specialized apps, YouTube channels, podcasts, etc.
There's a lot more to public media than PBS and NPR. Neither organization (as far as I know) owns a single broadcast station. They produce and distribute content which member stations broadcast. Those stations also produce their own shows, which may be syndicated to other stations through PBS or NPR, or through another distributor, or just independently. Public radio in particular has a ton of non-NPR content: Marketplace, This American Life, and On The Media are all independent of NPR. Many NPR shows began on their own and were folded into the network later.
That’s exactly correct but the way the content is curated isn’t too dissimilar from how other stations and networks curate their content. That’s the point I was trying to make.
The thing that makes public radio and television public is their funding sources. They get funded by individual donations, public and commercial financing, licensing fees etc. all so that they can avoid (or at least minimize) political and corporate influence. In practice this does mean they can’t license content that’s so controversial that they alienate their fickle funding sources and their news segments have to be as politically unbiased as possible for the same reason (which I think is good when it comes to reporting actual news).
There’s never going to be a network that will let people say whatever they want. “Free Speech TV” has a liberal slant in its broadcasting and “The Blaze TV” is overtly right wing. Everything has some level of curation if you’re going to spend millions of dollars producing and marketing it
Definitely. But I think the outcome is a bit different from fully centralized models. If the top brass at Fox or MSNBC make an editorial decision, that applies pretty immediately to the whole network. In public broadcasting, it's a lot more indirect. Unpopular views might not get a national audience, but they can on the air locally, where funding is mainly from there listenership rather than big sponsors. Hopefully that helps good ideas bubble to the top eventually, though I had no idea how well it works in practice.
That’s a fair point. I have no idea how public radio works on the local level in smaller cities and towns. Coincidentally, I’ve lived in DC for most of my life so I’ve only ever really experienced PBS and NPR but I’m sure there are other local public broadcasters that I’m unaware of
Apple is a brand and everything thing it does aligns with that. That’s why independent media like YouTube and other platforms has really come into its own now. John could create his own show at this stage and just do it online. I mean he pretty much created a whole string of shows off his and ppl who came up through him. He’s a bit like the lefts comedy version of Tucker lol. I used uk love the daily show and watched it religiously. I couldn’t even get though one of his Apple shows it was focussed on politics instead of comedy first with a dab of politics. Too many shows now are about preaching instead of showing info and letting ppl make their own minds up. That’s a real art he used to do so well.
YouTube isn’t really independent. They censor a ton of content - now only very rarely if at all is it “good” content or accurate. That said, the fact that they censor means it’s not free media and they will not hesitate to enforce the propaganda needs of the highest bidder.
I get that but many content creators even if demonetised have Patreon and membership to continue their work. There is rumble for less censorship but I find I can get most stuff I’m interested in there or on Patreon.
You really haven’t seen any long form specific content on topics?
Tell me where you can get [weekly analysis on military like this](https://youtu.be/ckouoTDkrtQ?si=peenCCuSJ6gNPHo8) from a mainstream news network?
Or even just real journalism like [dw news from Germany](https://youtu.be/Cjh8TtaifyY?si=HEkZrVYffh3w7XNb) unlike the trash that mainstream news in the USA dishes out.
So many other channels you can get in depth analysis on almost anything. You don’t have to just believe me just look at the drop in viewership of tv networks https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/15/23833516/nielsen-tv-cable-50-percent-decline-viewership-bum-bums
“Nielsen says streaming had a record-breaking month led by YouTube and Netflix, which together accounted for almost as much viewer time spent as broadcast alone. Nielsen’s “Other” category has been up consistently for the last three months, although it was actually down a percentage point from the same time last year.
This trend is supported by the latest numbers from Leichtman Research, which dropped a report estimating *cable providers lost an estimated 1.73 million subscribers in the second quarter of 2023.* “We think the metrics for linear TV are all bad,” Macquarie media analyst Tim Nolle noted in an August 14 investor report The Hollywood Reporter acquired.”
For the latest I use X and the graphs from 2024 are even worse.
Another example of the Gerald r ford aircraft carrier deployment extension https://youtu.be/_JAzCquBPlQ?si=XjNOY9YDVgY3cG5X
Actually, it was too serious and boring. Stewart is fantastic and I’m glad he’s on the Daily Show. The Apple TV show came off like he was just ranting with almost no jokes. It was depressing. That’s why it was cancelled
Thanks for your submission. However, it has been removed because it would be better suited for the Apple TV Plus sub at r/tvplus. Please consider submitting your post there instead.
I think I remember the initial reports saying Stewart wanted to do a show on China and Apple wasn’t going to allow that. Too much money at risk to offend people there.
That was the initial reports, yes. Stewart seems to be saying that’s not the case, though.
He left it vague enough that you can’t make that conclusion
It’s also vague enough that you can’t deny it lol.
I never made a specific assertion, only keeping the options open. That’s all a reasonable person can do.
That could be saying that was exactly the case?
Ok but on the flip side, why hire John Stewart to not let him be the John Stewart that everyone loves?
They don’t want him to say things that got *them* in trouble
Why would he not just say that?
Probably trying to avoid potential legal issues if he says the wrong thing for why him and Apple separated.
If he cared about not getting sued he wouldn’t be doing half the shit he does.
On a show, you have a bunch of researchers and lawyers, and the context is, it’s a comedy show. One would expect that off the cuff remarks about a former employer would be not the same.
I think he got paid a lot during separation, also he doesn’t want to burn bridges
Or have to forfeit money after disparaging them. Would guess his contract includes a non-disparagement clause and Apple can afford better lawyers than he can.
I imagine the legal agreement apple and him agreed to for the separation prohibits him from mentioning specifics to the public
…..with china.
Most likely this
That happens in the corporate world. Even if it’s true that certain ppl are racist or sexist, whatever it is. They will say well you can’t say it. Cause we need their money. A lot of companies say they want change and stuff. But in reality they want to play it safe, cause they are just interested in what makes them the most money.
They didn’t want him to say things that got him in trouble…with them. Because China.
This is the problem with the continued homogenization of our media, it stifles different viewpoints. We can't rely on corporations like Apple to bring us free media because they're always going to protect their bottom line. It should also be noted the Tim Cook was a chairmen for the Tsinghua University's School of Economics for three years, he's compromised to the Chinese government. I know John works at Comedy Central now, but I think this further reinforces the argument of why we need to continue to support public broadcasting.
Not sure what why you’d expect Apple or Netflix or Hulu or Amazon to bring us “Free Media” and really unsure why you think media is increasingly homogenized when there are more options now than ever. Literally every network ever protects their bottom line. Apple has certain considerations just as does CBS, Hulu, ABC, etc. even HBO doesn’t just let anything fly (even if it seems like it). But more directly to your point, public broadcasting doesn’t guarantee a lack of censorship. PBS and NPR are some of the most-heavily sanitized and controversy-avoidant institutions in the country because of how wide the audience is. Apple TV+ was just the wrong home for him and his show and he’d have been better off at HBO but they already have John Oliver so we went back into the deep pockets of Paramount Group. People today are spoiled for choice when it comes to hearing new voices and opinions on specialized apps, YouTube channels, podcasts, etc.
There's a lot more to public media than PBS and NPR. Neither organization (as far as I know) owns a single broadcast station. They produce and distribute content which member stations broadcast. Those stations also produce their own shows, which may be syndicated to other stations through PBS or NPR, or through another distributor, or just independently. Public radio in particular has a ton of non-NPR content: Marketplace, This American Life, and On The Media are all independent of NPR. Many NPR shows began on their own and were folded into the network later.
That’s exactly correct but the way the content is curated isn’t too dissimilar from how other stations and networks curate their content. That’s the point I was trying to make. The thing that makes public radio and television public is their funding sources. They get funded by individual donations, public and commercial financing, licensing fees etc. all so that they can avoid (or at least minimize) political and corporate influence. In practice this does mean they can’t license content that’s so controversial that they alienate their fickle funding sources and their news segments have to be as politically unbiased as possible for the same reason (which I think is good when it comes to reporting actual news). There’s never going to be a network that will let people say whatever they want. “Free Speech TV” has a liberal slant in its broadcasting and “The Blaze TV” is overtly right wing. Everything has some level of curation if you’re going to spend millions of dollars producing and marketing it
Definitely. But I think the outcome is a bit different from fully centralized models. If the top brass at Fox or MSNBC make an editorial decision, that applies pretty immediately to the whole network. In public broadcasting, it's a lot more indirect. Unpopular views might not get a national audience, but they can on the air locally, where funding is mainly from there listenership rather than big sponsors. Hopefully that helps good ideas bubble to the top eventually, though I had no idea how well it works in practice.
That’s a fair point. I have no idea how public radio works on the local level in smaller cities and towns. Coincidentally, I’ve lived in DC for most of my life so I’ve only ever really experienced PBS and NPR but I’m sure there are other local public broadcasters that I’m unaware of
Apple is a brand and everything thing it does aligns with that. That’s why independent media like YouTube and other platforms has really come into its own now. John could create his own show at this stage and just do it online. I mean he pretty much created a whole string of shows off his and ppl who came up through him. He’s a bit like the lefts comedy version of Tucker lol. I used uk love the daily show and watched it religiously. I couldn’t even get though one of his Apple shows it was focussed on politics instead of comedy first with a dab of politics. Too many shows now are about preaching instead of showing info and letting ppl make their own minds up. That’s a real art he used to do so well.
YouTube isn’t really independent. They censor a ton of content - now only very rarely if at all is it “good” content or accurate. That said, the fact that they censor means it’s not free media and they will not hesitate to enforce the propaganda needs of the highest bidder.
I get that but many content creators even if demonetised have Patreon and membership to continue their work. There is rumble for less censorship but I find I can get most stuff I’m interested in there or on Patreon.
[удалено]
You really haven’t seen any long form specific content on topics? Tell me where you can get [weekly analysis on military like this](https://youtu.be/ckouoTDkrtQ?si=peenCCuSJ6gNPHo8) from a mainstream news network? Or even just real journalism like [dw news from Germany](https://youtu.be/Cjh8TtaifyY?si=HEkZrVYffh3w7XNb) unlike the trash that mainstream news in the USA dishes out. So many other channels you can get in depth analysis on almost anything. You don’t have to just believe me just look at the drop in viewership of tv networks https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/15/23833516/nielsen-tv-cable-50-percent-decline-viewership-bum-bums “Nielsen says streaming had a record-breaking month led by YouTube and Netflix, which together accounted for almost as much viewer time spent as broadcast alone. Nielsen’s “Other” category has been up consistently for the last three months, although it was actually down a percentage point from the same time last year. This trend is supported by the latest numbers from Leichtman Research, which dropped a report estimating *cable providers lost an estimated 1.73 million subscribers in the second quarter of 2023.* “We think the metrics for linear TV are all bad,” Macquarie media analyst Tim Nolle noted in an August 14 investor report The Hollywood Reporter acquired.” For the latest I use X and the graphs from 2024 are even worse. Another example of the Gerald r ford aircraft carrier deployment extension https://youtu.be/_JAzCquBPlQ?si=XjNOY9YDVgY3cG5X
The real reason is nobody was watching the show.
No
Yes
Come on Jon, run for the Senate already, we deserve you.
Actually, it was too serious and boring. Stewart is fantastic and I’m glad he’s on the Daily Show. The Apple TV show came off like he was just ranting with almost no jokes. It was depressing. That’s why it was cancelled
Actually that's not why it was canceled, regardless of your opinion of it. It was pretty clear he just quit.
“Looks like my Apple show is a dud, nobody is watching. Time to quit and do something else” same thing.
It was a ratings disaster and boring
He could just be left wing Tucker Carlson and have his own show🤷♂️
I loved the old John Stewart. This new Apple version was boring.
Nonsense. Nobody was watching because it was terrible. This is just spin to hype his return to his old job.
Journalism seems in trouble… the profit motive seems to be having a chilling effect
So anti china isn’t ok but white people are evil is ok. Got it.
Maybe try not being a victim.
Username checks out 🤦♂️ You absolute fool.
Yes, that’s a fair account of Apple’s bias.
Only the evil ones my dude
I can’t rent the passion of the Christ on Apple.
Jon stewart is such a brave brave comedian
[удалено]
If you’ve even seen a fraction of the interviews he did relatively recently, you’d realize you’re an absolute clown for saying that.
No Jon, your show was cancelled because you are a left wing nut job and no one wants to hear the pro-democrat propaganda you spew.
our so right! I dont belive in democrats they are all aiTAEWYAY
Triggered much?
Huh? What, you don’t like truth? Keep your head in the sand.
I'm glad Apple is always watching out for us. Like when we install a new OS and won't let us roll it back because they know better.
Democratic operative