Has funny become the new serious? Have we replaced actual hard-hitting news with a comedic attempt to mock the journalism of today? Have "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report" damaged our generation's ability to discern the difference between reality and a satirical distortion of it?
If you had asked me these questions a few months ago, I would have answered "maybe." But as I research into the matter, I am beginning to think we are viewing a phenomenon that is sparking a generational shift.
Traditionally, the idea of comedy shows, such as "The Daily Show," being the major outlet of someone's news has been viewed as a horrifying possibility. I struggle with this notion as well. In the interest of full disclosure, I must confess that I am a nerd who enjoys watching C-Span. The notion that someone could have an accurate grasp of current events from Comedy Central shows is innately appalling to me. I also must admit to my bias as a big fan of these comedic news shows, but not in that I view them as effective sources of news.
In my previous attempts to defend the show as a source of entertainment, I have used Jon Stewart's argument that they are not a primary source of news because their viewers could not get the nuances in the jokes had they not sat down with a previous knowledge base of the material being discussed. However, I think Stewart fails to grasp the show's full impact on its audience. He continually stresses that the mandate of "The Daily Show" is to be funny and that it makes no attempt to have journalistic integrity. However, despite Stewart's efforts to the contrary, his show is every bit as relevant as major news shows, both in the eyes of the viewers and by quantifiable evidence.
Indiana University did a study revealing that "The Daily Show" is equally substantial to its network news counterparts. However, because of its humorous, non-intellectually threatening nature, these comedic-based news sources are far more potent in their ability to access the mainstream audience.
As Stewart pointed out, the audience would not be able to get all the jokes if they did not have some background knowledge. I believe this stimulates people to find out more about these news topics - they have an interest in current events because of his show.
Stephen Colbert recently appeared before a House subcommittee hearing to discuss the issue of immigration. His satirical approach was met with mixed reviews from legislators. House Majority Floor Leader Steny Hoyer thought it to be an embarrassment and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi thought it to be great and helpful to the process. But one thing cannot be ignored - his presence has an effect. You do not see Wolf Blitzer shaking things up on Capitol Hill. This is part of what makes Stewart and Colbert dynamically different from other news sources, but not inherently, dynamically bad.
The duo now is beginning to hold rallies in Washington, D.C. Jon Stewart's Rally to Restore Sanity, set for Oct. 30, already has garnered thousands of RSVPs and a thumbs up from Oprah. Stewart and Colbert are starting to emerge as visionary leaders who can approach the issues our country is facing without the baggage of political correctness or an inherent party bias. This is why we have begun to embrace their call for reform.
A Truman professor asks in class, "Did any of you see this segment on ‘The Colbert Report' last night?" My initial response is an eye roll if I have not and a chuckle if I have. However, upon learning that the substance is equivalent to mainstream network news, my focus on the merit of these shows turns to their approach. They are not bound by any form of journalistic integrity or political correctness, and we cherish the sincerity that has been removed from so much of our society.
Toby Hausner is a senior
political science major
from Kansas City, Mo.
Be the first to comment on this article! Log in to Comment
You must be logged in to comment on an article. Not already a member? Register now