HeplerDebatePaper1

DOES COMEDY NEWS ENHANCE POLITICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY?
Comedy news has come about in recent years as a creation of the merger between comedy routines and news commentary. The most common programs that air regularly are the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and the Colbert Report with Steven Colbert. Both of these shows take a view on todays news in a way that is meant to be both satirical and grounded on reality. In other words they both have a motive to be funny yet also raise awareness of some ridiculous happenings in the real world. In the same way the Yes Men hope to reveal flawed logic, these shows often push the current trends to a point where the viewer is supposed to re-evaluate their original thinking on a topic. The stakeholders in this case could be described as everyone in the world that can be reached by digital media. But, on a more focused scale, the viewers are the largest stakeholder when it comes to the issue of comedy news being helpful or harmful. In addition, the animal species that are highlighted in environmental pieces, the scientists that rely on funding that is related to public opinions on the severity of an issue, the legislative bodies who represent people that are exposed to comedy news, and the actual comedy news shows themselves are all stakeholders.

In “America is a Joke,” published in NY Magazine, Jon Stewart is portrayed as a comedian who is stuck in the comedy news routine until he can clean up the news world and then get back to comedy - his world. The article does a fantastic job going into the creative process behind the writing of episodes as well as the thinking behind many of the satirical points that they will choose to get across. It paints a picture with example after example of how the thinking on the Daily Show is supposed to be the viewers own thinking on a topic present on the news. Jon Stewarts creative process and the the thinking of his writers is revealed as the Chris Smith takes a look into the workings of the daily show. A brief history of the daily show and Stewarts appointment to host is given. His main breakthrough being “Indecision 2000” as he covered the political spectacle that gave us George W. Bush in 2000.

The article is written as a TV profile. It is meant to give a detailed view into the Daily Show and Jon Stewarts life there. As far as information is concerned, the article does an excellent job of providing the reader with the backstage details that the reader would want. Its a chance to go behind the curtain and see how the show works and the creative inspiration that leads to the daily episodes. That unique view was very interesting for me to read about and made a personal connection between the show and the reader - me. The downside of the way that the article is written is that it is a TV profile. It is not meant to give any sort of accurate critical analysis of the quality of the show. It is more of a high profile review written with the intention of providing support for the show and generating interest for the show from the viewers who are already exposed to it. It is written with a clear New Yorkers voice and has nothing but praise for John Stewart. I find that I’m tempted as a reader to believe that the Daily Show is the savior of sanity on the television, but in reality, the article fails to break down the actual affects of the satirical or comedy news. It is merely an informative but positive piece written to give the readers behind the scenes knowledge and a greater understand behind the thinking of Jon Stewart.

In the “Jon Stewart Game” article written by Matt Welch is a quick and short article that represents the authors opinions of the Daily Show and Jon Stewart. It is hardly talking about the specific content of the show but more talking about the role that Stewart has taken as the liberal savior of sanity with his game he plays of cleaning up politics before he can go back to comedy. The article gives a strong critique of the merits of Stewart and also the merits of show as a voice in the American political spectrum. There is even an effort to look at how the jokes work on the daily show and the ploys that Stewart uses as a comedian to make the show itself funnier i.e. fart jokes and strange faces.

The Welch article is an actual critique of the Daily Show and does a better job at providing a point of view that is relevant to the debate topic about comedy news. It is critical of everything Jon Stewart, and carries a strong conservative right wing voice. The reader gets a detailed account of the reasons that Matt Welch thinks the Daily Show is bad for todays political and cultural picture, but it does not really talk about the merits of the show or the content that could be considered helpful or detrimental. The main focus is on Jon Stewart as some invincible and self elevating figure of sanity that has maneuvered himself into a position where the rest of the political world cannot touch him because he is this lone crusader from the world of comedy here to point out all of the flaws in conservative thinking without exposing himself by aligning with any specific political views.

Without focusing on a specific show or media outlet, Ken Doctor provides his own reasons for the value of comedy news in his article “When News Turns Comedic, Comedy Turns to News”. Not meant to be a critique, the article only highlights reasons that Doctor thinks the comedy news shows have value in todays society. He gives examples from both the Daily Show and Colbert Report to round out his view that comedy news enhances the news by drawing in viewers with a promise of laughter but then giving them actual news. There is even an argument made that satirical news has a value beyond that of the normal news because it allows the viewer the chance to step back and realize just how silly some of the political game is. The relationships, statesmanship, carefully chosen words, and ridiculous views of modern day politics need this kind of analysis from an outside source that isn’t trapped into playing seriously. Doctor thinks that the comedy news stations have filled a role that used to be occupied by the satirical writers in the papers that produced weekly articles that were a commentary on anything in America that the author thought we had a skewed perspective on.

Ken Doctor’s article is an interesting commentary on comedy news because it isn’t personal. It is a broad look at a couple of the shows and it does a good job of summarizing the viewers of those shows and what they normally turn on the TV expecting to see. Comedy news is not generally taken seriously as legitimate news sources, but Doctor is arguing that the news that we watch on the comedy news shows does serve an actual purpose. His point is not that the viewer is going to learn about top news stories alone, but that the viewer is going to learn about the nature of the politics behind the top news stories, the thinking or lack of thinking that leads to the days headlines. In a sense, the argument is being made and supported that comedy news encourages the viewers to not take politics too seriously, but to see through the smoke to the fact that news these days is actually outrageous, and does not always deserve to be taken seriously.

I think that comedy news has a negative impact on the public today. Not to say that comedy news couldn’t have a role in enhancing environmental literacy, but that the shows on television today do not. Satire is powerful but the trap that both of the main examples used in the articles above fall into is they are partisan. If we are willing to acknowledge that satire is needed because there is so much opportunity for comedy in the news to point viewers to human motivations and thinking, then we have to take a step back and bring out the satire as a tool against all politics in general not just the liberal left or the conservative right. It actually takes away from the merit of these shows when you see a political trend because we realize that they are not “above” the political games, but actually on one side of the fence or the other throwing their own political jabs across the border but relying on the protection of being satirical so they are immune from contradiction or expectations to make a strong stand on a subject and provide solid reasoning for their support. The comedy news that could be helpful to raise environmental literacy needs to exist above the realm of politics. Half of America automatically doesn’t trust a show if it has a partisan leaning, so half of America isn’t going to be affected by any kind of pieces they could do on the environment. It is sad that there is such a missed opportunity on television these days, but the reality of audiences does not let a show exist.

Bibliography:
Yes article: September 12, 2010. NY Magazine. “America is a Joke” by Chris Smith []

No article: September 19, 2011. Blog for Reason Magazine, “The ‘Jon Stewart Game:’ Everyone Loses, Except Him” by Matt Welch []

3rd Article:

June 10, 2008. Seeking Alpha. “When News Turns Comedic, Comedy Turns to News” by Ken Doctor []