http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/cthyr1/good-news--you-re-not-paranoid---nsa-oversight

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/news-team/john-oliver/kovgs5/sir-archibald-mapsalot-iii

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/news-team/john-oliver


When Ricky Gervais recommended fellow British comic John Oliver to Jon Stewart in 2006, Oliver had never been to America before. Four score and seven years later (more or less), Oliver will be taking over as host of Comedy Central's The Daily Show for an entire summer (starting on June 10) while Stewart directs a drama called Rosewater in the Middle East. Oliver swears that there’s no trace of a Benedict Arnold nor a Jay Leno in him, and he just wants to be a good custodian, with the goal of “returning Jon’s baby in one piece.” But we’re red-blooded Americans, so we interrogated him anyway, and found out how many apologies he edits out of his segments, why he needs to soften his deskside manner, and the difference between Michael Caine and the Queen of England.

http://www.vulture.com/2013/06/john-oliver-the-daily-show-interview.html

but unfortunately they won't play here. I'll have to check out Youtube and see if there's anything there.

I don't often watch Jon Stewart, simply because he always seems to be on when there's something else I want to see, but if John Oliver is taking over, I'll make sure I record it and get in the habit of watching it. We're always a few days behind, so with luck, I should still be able to catch his first episode.

(And I agree with his opinion of Richard Quest - surely the most irritating man on television?)

...still make sense.

- The man's a genius. Suck it GB he's ours now.

K&R!
[center][/center]

John Oliver certainly speaks for me.

The only thing I don't understand - the USA apparently made a ton of money hosting the WC in '94. Not sure why Brazil can't do the same. Can someone enlighten me as to the differences in the two scenarios?

South Africa’s World Cup in 2010 did not turn out to be the economic success it was predicted to be, with only 309,554 people arriving to see the event out of the estimated 450,000 visitors. The African nation made $513 million.

South Africa is the best example in recent years of the “World Cup effect,” in which host countries are more harmed economically from hosting the event. The country, which was ecstatic to host its first World Cup, estimated revenues of $900 million and ended up making about 60 percent of that. By the end of 2010, South Africa had made back only 11 percent after a $4.5 billion investment to build and renovate stadiums and infrastructure.

Will Brazil go the same road? Sport economists like University of Maryland professor Dennis Coates think so. “There is no evidence that the benefits promised by event organizers have ever materialized,” he said in a study, which pointed out that when the World Cup was hosted by the U.S. in 1994, the average host city experienced an income reduction of $712 million relative to predictions.

http://www.ibtimes.com/2014-soccer-world-cup-brazil-predicts-revenue-20-times-over-south-africas-2010-experts-skeptical

http://www.umbc.edu/economics/wpapers/wp_10_121.pdf