But isn't that what the confirmation process is all about here in Washington? And isn't that what the confirmation process is all about? Weeding out the truly qualified to get to the truly available.<br /> —Jon Stewart, White House Correspondents' Dinner 1997

Young Pre-'Daily Show' Jon Stewart's Compelling Performance (1997 WH Correspondents Dinner)

Satire in the Age of Murdoch and Trump. The Problem With Jon Stewart Podcast, 2023-03-09. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbOiXmMnyw4.

Watched most of this passively while reading on 2023-04-06

Roberta Stewart of Dartmouth has written a description (available on the website) of how an article for the TLL is generally written. [01:10:26]

When manufacturers, like Pietra, help influencers manufacture their own product lines, we've taken another step from big celebrities having their own product lines (think Martha Stewart cookware and other lifestyle plays her company has made).

This is splitting the difference between the Tupperware parties of old where you're empowering your users to sell your product and having celebrities sell your product.

What is the next step along this evolutionary path of breaking down the sales funnel? Can it be disintermediated further?

Another example of this are the thousands of small Etsy shops that are churning out products as intermediaries. An example of this is the proliferation of sticker companies that are selling somewhat custom designs for 2-3x the going rate and adding a rather large mark up for themselves. In this case there are at least some modest creative pieces being added in the value chain, but at what overall cost?

Will everyone be a manufacturer? When does it all become Amway?

How do we intentionally and proactively work to avoid the problem with Jon Stewart by addressing diversity, equity, and inclusion in the writers’ room?

Interesting to see the social change that has occurred since then. Women are now more than 60% more likely to win custody if a divorce is filed. Sort of reminds me of the quote from Stewart, " look at many of the most worthy and most interesting or us doomed to spend our lives in gentlemen 's kitchens"

As the kitchen is now one of the sexist jokes regarding where a woman belongs, that statement seemed odd to me. This seems like a similar situation, although I'm sure that few jokes revolve around custody battles.

Compare to Stewart: "I have come forward and made myself a hissing and a reproach among the people" through her public speaking (1039).

This seems like an example of the abolitionism movement's influence on her feminist arguments, since bondage of the mind, heart, soul is frequently described as an argument against slavery. This is similar to what Stewart says about the souls kept in chains.

Perhaps that idea was only the effect of the sagacity common to the ,sex, and the advantages which their natural address gave them over rough and simple warriors. Stewart would agree that there was more to woman than the their beauty, but perhaps there is something there in terms of softness and ability to woo a crowd that gives women a little extra something?

is it not the God of ancient times the God of these modem days? Did he not raise up Deborah, to be a mother, and a judge in lsrael?

In addition, the societal construct at the time determined their livelihood. I especially like her word choice of "ignorance," because I think it can apply to both whites and African Americans: whites are ignorant of the struggles that African Americans face and cannot truly know/understand their experiences; African Americans are ignorant of their own capabilities and do not understand their true potential, as society's judgments of them have clouded their self-image and have influenced them to think less of themselves. I don't know if she intended this, but it has a somewhat psychological connotation in regards to self-perception in light of the rhetoric/environment/society at the time.

This is a nice summary of one of Stewart's main points: African Americans, of any sex, are just as capable, just as intelligent, and just as American as whites are. She concedes that there are some who are "idle," but counters that this does not just apply to African Americans, but also to whites (and by extension, all races). I wonder if this helped the reception of her speech: acknowledging shortcomings, but pointing out that these shortcomings apply to others as well, suggesting that all people are equal.

Opposite of Astell, who said that women should not speak publicly and should instead speak in "appropriate spheres".

Really love the extreme detail here given to the use of his voice in speaking. It is reminiscent of the comparison between men and women in Stewart. Perhaps Fred had a little bit of womanly softness with his "tenderly moving, quiet tones"