This was my first time watching
“Crossfire”. I found it very interesting being that this time I was actually
analyzing how they expressed their arguments to each other. A few things I
noticed about the so-called “debate” was that Jon Stewart was able to use his
comedic personality to get the audience on his side. I also saw that the hosts
of the show had the advantage to list on screen three of the questions Jon used
in his interview, which makes their argument seem much stronger. Jon later on shoots an immature, but useful,
comment about one of the host’s bowtie to make him seem younger and more
ignorant. Towards the end of the argument, the hosts criticize the way Jon is
speaking to them currently, which makes it appear that Jon is winning the
argument and they feel threatened.
Using “The
Method” to point out a few repetitions and contrasts during the debate was very
difficult for me. I did notice a few words that were repeated multiple times;
such as: argue, bad, comedy, and funny. I am having trouble finding a meaning
behind these words. The reason for repeating argue may be just emphasizing the
fact that they have completely different opinions on these matters they are
discussing. They repeatedly say bad, which is also a little humorous because it
is obviously not a very intense word, but they use it to describe each other’s
shows. Comedy is common because they are using comedy in this debate to make it
more interesting, and funny falls under that category also. Argue and bad could
be a strand and comedy and funny could be a strand as well. I am still learning
how to use The Method, but that is what I understand from it right now!
