How Influential Is Jon Stewart?

I saw a survey. It rated Jon Stewart as the #1 most influential man.

Who has more influence, Jon Stewart or Sumner Redstone, who owns Viacom? Obviously, Sumner Redstone has more influence. However, he doesn't want to take public credit for his influence. Otherwise, people would be outraged.

Technically, Viacom is a publicly traded corporation. However, Sumner Redstone has special supervoting shares that give him control. All mainstream media corporations are incorporated that way. All public corporations are controlled by insiders.

If Sumner Redstone didn't obey orders, then the banksters would push down Viacom's share price and arrange for a leveraged buyout. That's easy when you can counterfeit money via the Federal Reserve and counterfeit shares via naked short selling.

For this reason, the mainstream media almost never criticizes the banksters. Via leveraged buyouts, the banksters made sure that the "right" people control the media cartel. When most/all of the leaders are psychopaths, then it's easy to enforce a censorship agenda.

Sumner Redstone could fire Jon Stewart, replace him with someone else, and the Daily Show's ratings would probably be the same. Does anyone remember Craig Kilborn?

Sumner Redstone controls the means of production. That gives him influence. If I wanted a mainstream media program, I'd have to convince Sumner Redstone or a handful of other State insiders. It isn't a free market.

Does Stephen Colbert get good ratings because he's awesome? Does he get good ratings because his show is after the Daily Show? Would someone else be more or less successful with the same opportunity?

You have no idea if "The Daily Show With John Oliver" would get better or worse ratings than the current version. To get your own show, you have to spend years proving your a good slave monkey first.

It was interesting to see Jon Stewart interview the President. At the end, he made an interesting comment. He said "It's hard to just sit here quietly." He was only allowed to ask the questions the President approved ahead of time. He wasn't allowed to interrupt. He wasn't allowed to make a wisecrack if the President said something stupid. It's dishonest when Jon Stewart doesn't explicitly say "The rules of this interview say that I'm only allowed to read the questions chosen ahead of time."

Jon Stewart knows he's a slave. If he didn't obey orders, he wouldn't get to interview the President. He wouldn't be fired for "disrepecting the President". The media cartel would make up some other excuse for firing him.

Nobody interviewing a politician ever asks "Is all taxation theft? Isn't government one huge extortion racket?"

The media cartel is controlled by a handful of psychopaths. If you don't think in the "right" way, then they won't promote you and your ideas. It's censorship pretending to be a free market. To be successful in the mainstream media, you have to prove excellent self-censorship skills first.

The independent thinkers get weeded out, or they learn to conform in order to survive. If you invest years in your career, you aren't going to risk that to tell the truth. The Internet is changing things somewhat. You still won't reach as many people self-publishing on the Internet as with a mainstream media contract.

"Jon Stewart has a lot of influence!" is an illusion. His corporate overlord Sumner Redstone has the real influence. If Jon Stewart were fired and replaced, the new host would probably keep most of the show's ratings. Jon Stewart is a slave, albeit a high-ranking slave.