Similar But Different

I always have to laugh whenever I hear the fill-in newscaster begin a broadcast by telling us their name and then informing us that the regular person is off that night. I find this funny for two reason 1) we could already tell you weren't the same person just by looking at you and 2) most of us don't care. Because of the volatile nature of broadcasting where contracts can be voided based on one bad ratings period, news organizations have to turn over their staff as much as the next company. Therefore getting attached to one broadcaster isn't worth the investment because they could be on another network by next week. I know there is something comforting about hearing the news from the same voice for many years, but the days of Walter Cronkite being the most trusted man in America are long gone. These day most of these broadcasters are nothing more than newsreaders - they aren't doing the actual reporting or offering their opinions, just telling us whatever awful thing happened that day in a non-regional dialect. With that in mind it really shouldn't have mattered that Jon Stewart was taking a 3-month sabbatical from "The Daily Show" to direct a movie. After all, that is a fake news program, so the person delivering the fake news should matter even less. However, after this week I learned it matters a lot more than I expected it to.

Let me make something abundantly clear before I go any further - I really like fill-in host John Oliver. I always find his 'fish-out-of-water' look at America really funny and his British sense of humor great. Also, I thoroughly enjoy his stand-up show, where he put a lot of new faces on TV. Really, of all the people at "The Daily Show" who could have been tapped to fill in for a few weeks he was probably the best choice. (I fully expect him to use this opportunity to get his own show somewhere down the line.) That being said, I really hope he doesn't spend the next few weeks trying to be Jon Stewart. The first few shows, where Oliver was clearly nervous, were filled with too many fist pumps and other idiosyncrasies Stewart has made his signature over the last decade of doing the show. A couple weeks ago I was talking about how the worst thing an assistant coach hired from a successful staff could do was try and act like their former boss and instead they should just do things their own way. Well, it goes double for comedians. Everyone can tell when a comedian isn't doing their own material because it just doesn't sound authentic and the whole act suffers. I understand Oliver may feel like more of a placeholder than a replacement, but that doesn't mean he has to do the show as one giant Jon Stewart impression.

I always sort of wondered just how much of the writing for "The Daily Show" was done by John Stewart versus how much was being done by writers and Stewart was just the perfect mouthpiece for their opinions. Well, after the first week I think it is pretty obvious the staff is writing things with Jon Stewart's voice in their heads, then tailoring all the jokes for his delivery and not the other way around. The goods news for everyone involved is that this was just the first four shows and they have plenty of time to grow into their new roles. Even though Oliver has plenty of experience on TV it is one thing to be a correspondent, but hosting the show is entirely different. I am very confident he will get the hang of it shortly. I'm sure if you went back and looked at the first show Jon Stewart did they wouldn't resemble the current format at all. I'm not saying they need to change everything about "The Daily Show" as if Stewart is never coming back, but someone needs to remind everyone involved at the show that for the next three months it isn't "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" and adjust the writing accordingly. They probably feel like they have to return the show to Stewart in the condition they got it, but if they keep doing things the same way it may not be the same show when he gets back, at least not in the ratings.

I guess this just shows that for all my talk about how insignificant the late-night talk shows have become, it may be the one remaining entertainment program where who the host is actually matters. I mean, there has to be a reason the first episode of "The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien" got the highest ratings of his entire run. People want to see what the new guy is all about and if they don't like him they will ignore the show until it gets cancelled. Meanwhile, people may complain about guys like Ryan Seacrest on "American Idol" but he's such a small part of the proceedings he can be easily ignored no matter how grating you may find him. Plus, if Seacrest wanted to leave after this year the show would just keep on trucking (how many judges has "American Idol" gone through at this point?), but unless you're talking about "The Tonight Show" when a late-night host leaves a talk show they just take the entire production down with them. Hell, fear of the new guy in and doing their job better is probably why guys like Letterman show reruns rather than have guest hosts when they take vacations. No one wants to be Drew Bledsoe - stepping aside for a break and coming back to find your office cleaned out. Well, if this first week is any indication, Stewart should have no problem getting the chair back when his directing itch has been scratched.