USA has a problem with Late Night Hosts

And their propaganda masked as comedy youtu.be/mM7L7DNUTcw

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/2xeanX6xnRU
youtu.be/KLao1_JA2uE
youtu.be/VVnOsonF1Fw
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

it's not propaganda user. they're just catering to late night's main demographic, urban lib-tards. it's just about making bucks.

Is Macdonald's "food propaganda"?

No, they sell a product designed for 1) people in a rush that don't have time to invest in getting better food/information, or 2) people that don't care about the content or quality of their food/information and just want it to make them feel good and fill that void.

The easiest/quickest way to get laughs and not confuse simpletons is to just go along with the narrative and reduce complex political issues down to a thirty second bits. If you put any nuance or substance in there, you'd just confuse people. They don't want subtle flavors and novel ideas; they want salt, fat, sugar and easily digested jokes about things they don't understand.

Is that such a conspiracy?

Your position is somewhat correct, but I refuse to think that a comedy show can only deal with political topics. Colbert routine is nowadays 90% bashing Trump

NO, we have a kike problem.

This was the last of the based late-night hosts.
[spoiler];_;[/spoiler]

Bump

Bump also

Good Vid. I got into many arguments over the "Im just a comedian" schtick used by the likes of Jon Stewart. Does anyone have any effective way to counter that argument?

he was great

bumping for awareness

>Does anyone have any effective way to counter that argument?

Being "just a comedian" doesn't mean they are exempt from pushing a narrative.

that's right goy. there is nothing to be worried about. go back to your (((hobbies)))

Bump x2

>listening to people spew their shit opinions on television.

I read enough shit opinions on here, I don't need any more thank you.

Yeah, it's planned in private after all.

Thank god i work overnight at Walmart so that making these shows an impossibility.

I wonder what kind of clientele you have at Walmart's night shift

they are not funny and they are all jewish

1791L is run by kikes

>he was based

He made just as many Bush and GOP jokes as anyone?

I'm not so sure.

Much as he's bitched about here, Jon Stewart, at least his earlier work, managed to put a good amount of nuance into the show. His interviews especially were interesting, because he was often allowed questions actual journalists couldn't ask, because the guest could laugh it off, which was frequently used as proof that they wouldn't answer.

Anything Jon did after the Colbert Report was launched is complete shit, but his stuff 5 years before that is all pretty good. Hell, he even criticized Obama when he was in office, at least in the first term.

These late night shows are lazy, because the writers and hosts are lazy. Not because the medium is inherently lazy.

dude, he had to rope you in first before giving you the hard propaganda. remember, even vice used to be good. that's the plot, it starts off good, hooks some viewers, and then it goes shit. it cant just start off full shit. hell even john oliver and colbert have had their moments, its to rope in viewers, seduce them with a good effort before dropping bluepills. none of its lazy, it's all well planned and scientific in approach.

Doors are closed and we're locked in until 6am. The customers are your typical dregs of society with high-time preference that comes with them.

>food propaganda
Its not impossible user

More food propaganda
youtu.be/2xeanX6xnRU
youtu.be/KLao1_JA2uE
youtu.be/VVnOsonF1Fw

>muh it's just pandering to the market
how many money losing media companies need to be propped up by billionaires before you realize it's fucking propaganda for control?

That's all very colorful and pretty. I'd like the rainbow to return to its former innocence rather than being instantly associated with dangerous sex acts and anal fistulas.

Wasted trips, If you had educated yourself on the matter you would know that the father of modern PR/Advertising techniques, Edward Bernays started out working as a PROPAGANDIST and then invented the term "Public Relations" when he determined people would be more comfortable using his services if he re-branded them.

...

It's okay, Dubya is an idiot, and the GOP are ineffectual tight wads.

I don't understand why there aren't more conservative Atheists, Agnostics, Gnostics, and those who simply believe there exists a deity or deities (Deism and Theism are loaded terms) who are also conservative. It doesn't really make sense to me that there aren't more people like this.

I believe it's because they are sold on the new age dogma of white guilt. Seems like after (((Yahweh))) started to lose it's grip on the west, something needed to fill the void left by the slave morality that Cuckstianity instills. The key point you have to drive home is that because of evolution some animals are smarter than others, humans included, and thus egalitarianism is a false god that they worship.

just because its "about" something, doesn't mean it doesn't have an effect. and that effect might be wanted by certain individuals. and perhaps they influence these shows by keeping the cycle going, no? (((Coincidences?)))

maybe. can't prove you wrong. and media conglomerates are lead by people. and surely they have opinions and oftentimes leak that shit subversively into their media outlets. thats no secret. but in the end it's about money. for example if alex jones weren't that one man shit show that he is, but rather adored by the masses, he'd be running late night on cbs, not colbert (he's not the worst btw). the more people watch, the more money their commercial slots generate. and the main demographic of the late night brand are liberal middle class, pseudo interlectual, white (probably feeling guilty about it), ani lingus indulging self absorbed cunts.
in the end the media bosses are all immoral, nihilistic money whores. and i find it unlikely that all of "media" partake in some mysterious sinister joint mind control program. can't prove it wrong. just find it highly unlikely.

...

so who do you think controlls it? the editor? the media outlet's owner? and to what end?