The Nightly Show With Larry Wilmore

[Locutus of Bored]

Exactly. The south-up world map is there to address traditional cartographic biases because studies have shown that designating one side up and one down --which is completely arbitrary from a geographical standpoint since there's no up and down in space and what we call the south pole can be the "top of the world" just as easily as the north pole-- can lead to perceiving the upper side as better than the lower side, or to dismiss the lower side altogether. This is seen when discussing hemispheres or sometimes even discussing whether you live in the north or south side of town. If you present one side as being above the other, sometimes the assumption will be made that that extends to their quality in all aspects of life.

The West Wing addressed this on Big Block of Cheese Day, as well as the badly misrepresented area projections on the Mercator map (although the Gall-Peters projection Phlox presents as an alternative comes with its own set of issues of a different sort).

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVX-PrBRtTY[/yt]

 

[The Nth Doctor]

The West Wing addressed this on Big Block of Cheese Day, as well as the badly misrepresented area projections on the Mercator map (although the Gall-Peters projection Phlox presents as an alternative comes with its own set of issues of a different sort).

I always think of that episode whenever I see an "upside-down" map.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

Gotta say, the show's been getting better, having more guests who can actually say something on the topic of the episode.

There are annoying parts though, mostly when Wilmore talks with a staffer one-on-one before the panel, it's not informative, and, sadly, it's not even funny most of the time.

One thing I thought of, even Wilmore basically said he could use more time for the panel the other night. So, how about using the extended web-content option, like the Daily Show uses quite often, the Colbert Report used occasionally, and even @midnight uses it.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

@Midnight's a fun show but it doesn't even try to cover up its hasty editing. Occasionally you can actually see points go down between edits.

Wilmore's panel format would probably work better in an hour long weekly show than a half hour long daily show. You could give a lot of time to the panel without it having absorb the majority of the screen time.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

There are annoying parts though, mostly when Wilmore talks with a staffer one-on-one before the panel, it's not informative, and, sadly, it's not even funny most of the time.

Yeah, I agree, that's my least favorite part of the show. It sucks away time from the much better panel conversation and usually adds nothing of value either informationally or comedically to the subject at hand.

 

[Jax]

I can't imagine trying to watch every episode of a show that airs 168 a year anyway. I loved Colbert and I didn't care if I missed an episode.

I dunno, I watch every episode of The Daily Show.

I've watched every ep of Daily & Colbert for past 5 years if not longer.

 

[Chilli]

Last night's ep - vaccinations - showed some potential problems I see with the panel format. Obviously, if you're going to have a meaningful panel, you've got to have all the sides represented with some sort of balance, or you're not going to have much of a debate. If you're dealing with an issue, though, where the facts are really quite clear-cut ... this means you're going to give a stage to people that don't know what the fuck they're talking about. As was the case yesterday: as many medical doctors on the panel as there were utter nutcases. Hm.

I much preferred John Oliver's approach to such matters:

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg[/yt]

[Regarding one in four Americans being sceptical about climate change]

Who gives a shit? That doesn't matter. You don't need people's opinion on a fact. You might as well have a poll asking: "Which number is bigger, 15 or 5?" or "Do owls exist?" or "Are there hats?"

[...]

The only accurate way to report that one out of four Americans are skeptical of global warming is to say, "A poll finds that one in four Americans are wrong about something." Because a survey of thousands of scientific papers that took a position on climate change found that 97 percent endorsed the positions that humans are causing global warming.

And I think I know why people still think this issue is open to debate, because on TV, it is. And it's always one person for, and one person against. And it's usually the same person for.

[...]

Yeah, that's right. More often than not, it's Bill Nye versus ... some dude. And when you look at the screen, it's fifty-fifty, which is inherently misleading.

All this means, though, is that the format doesn't really lend itself to certain topics, IMO. Within the constraints of the format, Wilmore handled the topic of vaccinations - and the crazy person - fantastically, so there's that.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I really wish people would stop bowing to the altar of Colbert. I found him funny, but, man, not immensely god-like funny.

The thing that impressed me most about Colbert was the speed and quality of his ad-libs during interviews. He could devastate an unqualified "opponent" while staying in character.

 

[shivkala]

Last night's ep - vaccinations - showed some potential problems I see with the panel format. Obviously, if you're going to have a meaningful panel, you've got to have all the sides represented with some sort of balance, or you're not going to have much of a debate. If you're dealing with an issue, though, where the facts are really quite clear-cut ... this means you're going to give a stage to people that don't know what the fuck they're talking about. As was the case yesterday: as many medical doctors on the panel as there were utter nutcases. Hm.

That Zoe woman really came off looking bad. Her "whistle blower" story about vaccinations deserved "weak tea." For her "Keep it 100" question, Larry should have asked her, "If your kid could either have measles or autism, which would you pick?"

I recently read a story on NPR about a father who's son is recovering from chemotherapy for lukemia. Until his immune system improves, he cannot get vaccinations. The father is worried that his son, who attends a school in an area where there is a higher number of people who choose not to vaccinate his sons will contract a disease. Previous to this movement, herd immunity would have protected his son. I wish they had referred to this case as it drives home the importance of vaccinations not just for your child, but for everyone else, as well.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Vaccination isn't really a two sided issue. It's a matter of straight up ignorance, putting anybody with a compromised immune system in mortal danger because you read some straight up disinformation and think you're smarter than doctors. I missed that episode though.

With global warming, it may be clear that global warming exists and is man made but there's legitimately been some scientists who faked data in order to nudge people in the right direction, so there's at least some wiggle room for not completely insane people to disagree.

This is the risk I mentioned earlier with Wilmore's formula though. Running out of topics.

 

[Mr Light]

I'm afraid I'm already down to just watching the first act... I do the same thing with Seth Meyers unlike I really like the guest.

 

[J.T.B.]

That Zoe woman really came off looking bad. Her "whistle blower" story about vaccinations deserved "weak tea."

Yeah, I found that an awkward point. She was going into conspiracy nut territory, but it seemed like everyone held back. Maybe because she wasn't a "public" person, nobody wanted to really be seen beating up on her.

With global warming, it may be clear that global warming exists and is man made but there's legitimately been some scientists who faked data in order to nudge people in the right direction, so there's at least some wiggle room for not completely insane people to disagree.

If you're referring to the University of East Anglia email controversy, that's not correct. Numerous organizations and agencies investigating the incident found that no data had been faked, and no scientific standards had been violated. Quotes from the hacked emails were cherry-picked and presented out of context. For instance, a widely-reported quote that said something like "We can't account for lack of warming at this time, and it's a travesty" was referring to a specific energy-flow model, not to the general issue of global warming. Unfortunately, media outlets did not report the results of the investigations as enthusiastically as they did the "scandal."

I am a couple of episodes behind, but it seemed to me like the show is struggling a little to find a groove. But that's only to be expected; Wilmore is a really smart and funny guy, but his background is more writing than performing and he's doing a show where there's more un-written stuff than written. I think he will get better at things like running the panel, but the fundamentals are there for a good show.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I liked the 'Keep It 70' thing with Tom Brady.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I don't agree with Wilmore politically, but I found the show funny and very interesting. Ilile that it's really Wilmore and it a persona like Colbert and I like that he's not narrowly pushing an agenda, he allows differing opinions.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I'm 100% in favor of gay marriage, but I don't know how I feel about this ambush of the guy who's against gay marriage. It doesn't seem that different than the guys on Foxnews who do the same to people who hold liberal positions.

Even though I'm 100% in agreement with Wilmore on this issue, I kept expecting him to yell 'Cut his mic!'

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I'm 100% in favor of gay marriage, but I don't know how I feel about this ambush of the guy who's against gay marriage. It doesn't seem that different than the guys on Foxnews who do the same to people who hold liberal positions.

Even though I'm 100% in agreement with Wilmore on this issue, I kept expecting him to yell 'Cut his mic!'

I read this before watching the episode, so I kept expecting an ambush to happen, and it never did. What are you referring to?

The minister got as much of --if not more of-- an opportunity to speak than any of the guests other than Lance Bass, who got about equal time. During that time, he kept dodging the questions or coming up with BS equivocations in order to avoid considering the scenarios presented.

If you're referring to the fact that it was three pro-same sex marriage guests versus one opposed, that reflects the 36 states where same sex marriage is legal now, the 70% of Americans living where same sex marriage is legal now, and the majority of Americans (though not quite as high a percentage) who support same sex marriage.

It's like the issue mentioned on John Oliver of giving equal time to climate change deniers among scientists booked on news programs when the reality is that a 99 to 1 (denier) split would be more representative.

The guy got a fair shake and was utterly unconvincing in his argument. He didn't keep it 10, much less 100.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

It does seem to me that the guests with the unpopular opinions (like gay marriage guy or vaccine lady) are at a disadvantage. You get the sense that everyone's mind is made up and they're there as more of a punching bag than to actually hear out their arguments. Much like Fox it seems to be 3 (incl. Larry) on 1. I don't know that they're ambushed but they have their work cut out for them to get their points across.

 

[Jax]

It does seem to me that the guests with the unpopular opinions (like gay marriage guy or vaccine lady) are at a disadvantage. You get the sense that everyone's mind is made up and they're there as more of a punching bag than to actually hear out their arguments. Much like Fox it seems to be 3 (incl. Larry) on 1. I don't know that they're ambushed but they have their work cut out for them to get their points across.

unpopular opinions AKA the wrong fucking opinion

 

[137th Gebirg]

In your opinion, yes...

 

[Jax]

In your opinion, yes...

No in the sane world I live in unlike parents who don't vaccinate their child and people who believe their book give them the right to deny others marriage