The Daily Show is back in a brand new studio! Three large screens are behind Jon and he sits behind a lone oval desk on a platform. I already sort of miss the couch. I wonder how the guest will be set up. Stewart looks rather excited by his new futuristic-looking surroundings. He says that the entire show is now owned and run by robots. Stewart himself is a robot, actually. His real self is at home watching Oprah.First up is coverage on the recent attacks in London. It's a terrible tragedy and, of course, it's typical American media behavior to go, "Oh my god, that's terrible -- what about us?!" Way to show concern for the rest of the world, America. But it's no wonder Americans are extremely concerned for their own safety right now... All the big news networks continuously run scary segments with ominous music. The networks aren't taking care of this situation very well, with awkward coverage. FOX News even had a special guest come on to share his views: Walid Shoebat, and under his name -- Former Terrorist. Stewart sympathizes with the guy: nobody's going to be able to get past that 'former terrorist' title no matter how many highways he adopts.
Rob Corddry, TDS's Senior UK and Falkland Islands Correspondent, chimes in. Corddry is happy to report that the London attacks are clearly yet another sign that President Bush's war on terror is working. The whole point, he says, was to get terrorist attacks away from America. We did it! Stewart is a bit confused by Corddry's happiness and reminds him that Great Britain is an American ally. Corddry in turn reminds Stewart that Bush lists his allies not only as supporters but as the "coalition of the bombable". The English are taking this all stoically, carrying on well. "It's disgraceful," Corddry says. "C'mon! Where are the bumper stickers, the Union Jack lapel pins, the wanted dead or alive posters?" He's frustrated about the lack of sudden national pride. "This American likes his sorrow in t-shirt form!"
Meanwhile, in Washington DC, lots of news has settled on the Supreme Court after Sandra Day O'Connor left last week. She was the first woman in the Supreme Court and was known as the "swing justice", often providing the determining vote in important decisions. Many hope that her successor will follow well in her footsteps. There's still much speculation in who Bush will appoint but a current favorite seems to be Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Bush just won't stop gushing over this man. Stewart scoffs and taunts Bush, asking him, if he loves him so much, why doesn't he appoint Gonzales to the Court so that he can make a swing vote on a gay marriage case so that Bush can marry him?
Today's report is by Ed Helms and covers some controversial works of art in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. There's been quite an uproar over Alfred Phillips' painting of President Bush being sodomized by an Arab chief (it's a message of the effect of the Iraq war). Helms doesn't "get it". He tries to get it cleared up. "Da Vinci had his Mona Lisa, Michelangelo had his Sistine Chapel. Is Bush being f***ed in the a** by an Arab, for lack of a better term, your Mona Lisa?" The artist doesn't know how to respond. Funnily enough, the man leading the uproar is a fellow artist who is participating in the same exhibit and has created some extremely controversial pieces as well. Controversial art, eh? Fits perfectly into the name of this exhibit, 'Controversy'. Anyway, the man complaining is Michael Friedman, who has recieved many complaints about his own work, most popular of which is a piece depicting Pope Benedict as a Nazi, surrounded by swastikas. Friedman is outraged by the Bush/Arab painting but doesn't understand why people are upset over his Pope art. Maybe he's a little bit homophobic, Phillips offers. Friedman denies this, stating that "70% to 100% of my friends in Ft. Lauderdale are gay". That's... an unusually high number. Helms also tours the gallery in which the 'Controversy' exhibit is being displayed. Susan Buzzi, the director, has to put up with Helm's overdramatized disgust at every piece. He even plays fashion police when he asks Buzzi if her coat is part of the controversy too.
Tonight's guest is Marci Hamilton, author of God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law. She sits on the other side of the desk and now I really miss the old Daily Show couch. Tsk. Anyway, she and Stewart discuss the limit of religious liberties in the country and how much someone can get away with (or could get away with) legally when protected with religion. Her interview pretty much revolves around the theme of her book: "Americans' right to believe whatever religious doctrines they choose deserves absolute protection; Americans' right to act on religious belief should end whenever such actions harm or endanger others." Hamilton even points out some of the strange religious groups she found during research, including the Church of New Song (aka CONS), a religious group set up by prisoners. A strange quirk is that they believe that they should have steak and sherry every Friday. Some create their own religions because they want to be exempted from law. If you're religious, you get first shot in any litigation. Sort of like, "I am the first amendment... so there!"
Tomorrow's guest is Matt Taibbi. And now, your Moment of Zen: A FOX News' Brit Hume and what he thought after the news of the London attacks. "I mean, my first thought when I heard -- just on a personal basis, when I heard there had been this attack and I saw the futures this morning, which were really in the tank, I thought, 'Hmmm, time to buy.'" True compassion!
Oh, by the way, the show is currently giving away lots of tickets for upcoming tapings (not in the way that they normally call them, they give you a date and you have to plan around it). I suppose it has to do with the studio change. Anyway, if you're in the New York area sometime in the next couple of weeks and want more information on tickets, click here.















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-12-2005 @ 10:59AM
matthew m. barnes said...
is it just me, or is the new studio setup not nearly as cool as the old one? that desk is just plain boring (it's an ugly table really), the couch is sorely missed, and there's reallly not much else going on. after i watched this episode, i watched an episode i had TiVoed from last week and really noticed how lame the new set is in comparison.
Reply
7-12-2005 @ 11:13AM
Mark Johnson said...
The new Daily Show set is horrible! The constantly moving backgrounds are annoying and distracting. I can barely watch it without getting dizzy. I literally had to close my eyes through most of the show. I didn't care for the desk and guest interview set-up, as well. The set designer needs to be fired. I love the Daily Show and watch every night, but for the first time in years I am put off by the show. Remove the moving background at the very least!
Reply
7-12-2005 @ 1:18PM
Bob Sassone said...
I only saw half the show last night, but I agree, that background has got to go. Very distracting. It's like a really bad blue screen special effect in some B monster movie.
If they were going to change the set, they should have just gone all the way and made a typical late night set, with the host at a normal desk and the guest in a chair or couch, instead of this weird hybrid where you have both people at a table and the odd background.
Reply
7-12-2005 @ 9:44PM
Taylor Foster said...
It seems like they have done the entire setup so that Stewart can make pointing references infront of the images over his shoulder. Like he has wanted to for so...many...years. I mean, who doesn't want to be able to point at a specific wet patch. That's the kind of freedom we so love here, in Australia.
Reply
7-14-2005 @ 10:38AM
Mark Johnson said...
Democracy does work in America, at least with the Daily Show. The people have spoken and the set has been changed! No more moving screens and no more "Daily Show" coming out of Jon's head. I even like the New York skyline in the background. Good work!
Reply
7-20-2005 @ 8:01PM
Chris Nickels said...
The new set isn't completely terrible. The moving images on the screens behind Stewart are definitely annoying. I do, however, like the "face to face" interview style that the desk (as opposed to the couch) brings to the show. The Daily Show has become a sort of late night political talk show and having the guest sit at the same table encourages that type of format.
Reply
7-20-2005 @ 8:02PM
Chris Nickels said...
The new set isn't completely terrible. The moving images on the screens behind Stewart are definitely annoying. I do, however, like the "face to face" interview style that the desk (as opposed to the couch) brings to the show. The Daily Show has become a sort of late night political talk show and having the guest sit at the same table encourages that type of format.
Reply
7-20-2005 @ 11:19PM
Andy Rice said...
The problem is that the set takes attention away from the content-- a big problem in radio, but a bigger issue in television.
The dark set and morbid lighting looks like it was stolen from the 1997 sitcom, "Martin." And we all know what happened there. DUCK!
Reply