Who came up with that title? The Problem with Jon Stewart. Where to start?!
And from the article, insulting what viewers you do have? That's really smart!
Who?
Well, I’ll start...
The first problem is that he is UNFunny... the Opposite of funny.
He needs more canned laughter.
The Problem IS Jon Stewart.
American media worships their own like gods, so everyone acts surprised when they have yet another failure.
I don’t know anyone who subscribes to AppleTV, so I am not surprised his ratings are low. I don’t think they even have much content. They would probably run into antitrust problems if they tried to buy one of the major streaming services or networks so they have to build their own and create their own programming. Sounds like it’s just a video blog site for high priced former celebrities.
I have a TV show idea maybe I should pitch it to them, but I think it won’t fit into their political ideology.
He’s not being woke enough, and he is too pro-white.
Chris Wallace needs to interview Stewart on CNN+.
They may break new ground with negative viewership.
I got a free 3 month subscription to AppleTV+ when I bought an iPad, couldn’t find a single thing worth watching and cancelled it after 3 days, even though I still had 3 months left on the free trial (didn’t want to forget and get billed for the 4 month++)
I like roku.
There are so many free streaming services now that there’s no point in any new ones.
I hate that guy.
Every time one of these media types crashes and burns an angel gets its wings.
Is that the Leibowitz guy that is ashamed of his parentage?
He defended Joe Rogan — so, he got cancelled by the left. Simple as that.
Earlier topic:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4056073/posts
The above is passive-aggressive.
Although he likely said the above in a humorous way, he could just as well have screamed the same words in rage which is how he would have liked to rant at his Apple TV audience (who aren't worthy of his greatness).
This brings up my current grammar crusade:
“The Problem, with Jon Stewart” would sound like Jon Stewart telling us the Problem. “The Problem with Jon Stewart” reads like Jon Stewart is the Problem.
No, there is no grammatical rule saying a comma is required there. That’s the thing about commas: they represent a break in the speaker’s rhythm, and are used to aid comprehension. The whole Oxford comma debate utterly misses the point of commas: A comma is OFTEN useful before the “and,” but is not ALWAYS required. Stick a comma wherever it aids comprehension. See that sentence above? I used an Oxford comma because the two list items create two different thoughts. But it would be odd to write, “I like to eat peanut butter, and jelly sandwiches, since that suggests that “peanut butter” and “jelly sandwiches” are two different things I like to eat.*
In fact, you know how people use elipses to represent someone talking real slow? Like this: “NEVER ... TRUST ... A ... SINGLE ... DEMOCRAT”? Strangely, the grammatically correct thing would be to insert commas, except you should always minimize confusion, and such a use would be so unusual as to create confusion. Like this: “Never, trust, a, single, democrat.”
* In fact, “peanut butter and jelly” COULD be hyphenated. As in: “peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches” since you could conceive of them as forming a single adjective, but I wouldn’t because a “peanut-butter sandwich” is also a similar thing. However, notice that I hyphenated “peanut butter” when I used it as an adjective, since “peanut” is not a modifier of “butter,” but rather “peanut butter” is its own thing. This is a lost battle, however, because computerized grammar checks will always see “peanut butter” a noun, never an adjective, and you use the hyphen to form a single adjective out of two nouns. And yes, “peanut-butter” is an adjective, which modified “sandwich.” Almost all nouns can be used as an adjective.