Debate+Paper+-+Does+comedy+news+enhance+political+and+environmental+history?

Arunesh Ghosh Debate Paper #2 Topic: Does Comedy News Enhance Political and environmental Literacy 10/17/2011 1955 words

 You flick on the television screen and you see an all too familiar scene. A man behind a podium, dressed sharp with a coordinated tie, hair slicked back. The all too familiar set of stills flash in the background as your jaded ears instinctively begin to mute out the information you’ve probably already heard before. But wait, this can’t be real news, no way, that’s impossible, in fact it’s hilarious. Welcome to the new breed of comedy, if it can even be called that. Funny? Yes. Informative? Possibly. Appealing to audiences? Most definitely. With the popularization of comedy new sources spreading like wildfire across all ages, the question soon arises: Is this epidemic of what people perceive as “smart comedy” actually increasing our awareness on political and environmental issues or simply befuddling our minds with dull humor to pass the time? Critics argue that comedy news is juvenile and aimed more at appealing stimulating the humor the general public so craves. Supporters claim that comedy news if anything increases awareness of the basic issues. Even the comics themselves, maintain a rather ambiguous stance on the matter, on occasion claiming to be “simple comedians” while still standing in the spotlight as some type of political champion exposing the shamelessness and lack of morals of modern politics and the media. If the gurus of this type media themselves do not establish a set goal or image for themselves then what exactly is comedy news accomplishing?

 Supporters of this new breed of comedy have high hopes in the value of this most recent media trend. According to Chris Smith in “//America is a Joke”,// individuals like Colbert and Stewart have “become America’s sharpest political satirists by aiming at least a little bit higher.” How high exactly is subject to debate.

 Quite early on, the article establishes the fact that “print is crumbling”. And that the internet is “overcrowded” and more or less unfiltered often times muddling accuracy and reliability of web based media. Throughout the piece, emphasis is placed on the genuineness and good will of comedy news shows particularly Jon Stewart of the Daily Show. Jon Stewart and his loyal, dedicated, and highly intelligent crew were cast as a group of genuine, truth seeking individuals. Down to earth and quirky in their own ways, the dynamic of the team is portrayed as a very organic end efficient entity. The author almost describes it as a flurry of spontaneous creativity and legitimate research combined to create the perfect combination of humor and stimulation of political awareness through satire. In fact the article goes on to claim that “Media people’s lack of passion for moral or editorial authority always struck Stewart as weird.” Further emphasizing the point that though sharp, crude, and often times a bit forced, comedy news sources still aim to bring the unadulterated truth to the eyes of the public.

One point rung true however, that the popularity of the Daily Show truly has evolved over the years from earlier episodes poking fun at Barbie dolls to their breakthrough episodes of “Indecision 2000”. This evolution from simple humor to politically charged satire has its fair share of drawbacks and responsibilities. One responsibility the author claims the Daily Show fulfills is its fearlessness of attacking both sides equally. Though attacks on Bush and other Conservative leaders from Mr. Stewart are not only common, but expected, Mr. Stewart did not fail to call out our very own president for his shortcoming either. According to Stewart, “ Obama ran as a visionary and leads as a legislator.” This further emphasizes the surprising flexibility of comedy news shows, flexibility that many news sources such as Fox News and MSNBC lack. Overall the author continues to herald the legitimacy of comedy news sources as stimuli for political and environmental literacy. Many of these claims however, are questionable.

The piece mentions that more traditional news sources have gradually placed into camps in the public’s minds with Fox being seen as an “Evil Empire” and MSNBC the more liberal counterpart. This brings to question if individuals even care about the actual content of the information or rather who and in what manner it is presented. A liberal individual would almost immediately dismiss most claims made by Glenn Beck or other views expressed on Fox News and vice versa for a conservative individual. In like manner, would individuals who are undoubtedly aware of Mr. Stewart’s typically liberal bias simply dismiss his views despite the legitimacy of information?

Furthermore, the article intricately describes the dynamic process that goes on live during the Daily Show itself. Though much of the initial script may have contained legitimate content based off of real issues and the desire to bring them to light, an astounding amount of the script is cut and replaced at the last minute. According to the author “As Stewart speeds along, hours of work by writers and producers are cut, and replaced by improvised digressions”. This can throw into question if news comedy sources are indeed legitimate sources of information or are easily dismissible, simple comedies.

 Further questioning the legitimacy of comedy news sources is the claim that current news sources are simply divided into conservative and liberal camps simply broadcasting what the viewer base of each side wants to hear. Are comedy news sources immune to these pressures? Though the author claims they are free from these shackles the process described could call this claim into question. Mr. Stewart during the brainstorming phase prior to the show exclaims “But let’s get a sense of where the media is trying to build the narrative and where the story lines are going to go.” If at the root, the basis of Mr. Stewarts is what is broadcasted in mainstream media sources, isn’t it simply echoing the existing bias and misinformation plaguing traditional sources? Critics of comedy news sources have even more ammunition against individuals such as Stewart, bringing to light the contradictions in Mr. Stewart’s role as a political satirist.

 In “//The Jon Stewart Game”: Everyone Loses, Except Him!”// author Matt Welch calls into question the neutral, simple comedian mask that Mr. Stewart often puts on. In particular he highlights the few instances when he steps out of just being a comedian and takes on a somewhat more serious role. In particular, the author highlights the post 9/11 campaign of Stewart’s. Stewart and his band of merry followers were the first to attack fear mongering politicians and expose the hypocrisy of instigating panic while still delaying a benefits bill for 9/11 first responders. What differs however from when Mr. Stewart takes a stance and the writers at say South Park take a stance is that people listen, and take action, and there are perks. Not only did the bill pass, but Jon’s son had a special birthday at a firehouse in New York as Mr. Stewart himself got hailed as the next “Edward R. Murrow”. When individuals slowly start to grasp the political strength of gurus such as Stewart who more often than not hide under the veil of comedy, they begin to question their real motives. Are comedy news sources simply extending their own political biases and simply echoing the twisted, near manufactured, views of mainstream media? Perhaps. Are these individuals simply in it for a name, for their own selfish reasons and political and material gain? Desired or not, this has become an inevitable side effect, an effect and an image that Stewart actively tries to move away from. After the comparison to Edward Murrow, Mr. Stewart tactfully exclaims “What the…” subtly reassuring viewers that he is just a comedian and in essence should be viewed as such for the most part. This claim however, is as disturbing as it is misleading claims the article. According to Mr. Welch, comedy news through its clever puns, allusions, and underlying theme of political exposure and keeping the politicians honest, have carved out a niche very near and dear to the hearts of many Americans. This niche however, has been carved with such frightful precision that they have in a sense gotten entrapped. “ He can't go back to the pleasures of fart jokes and funny faces — the pleasures of comedy — because he's experienced the higher pleasure of preaching to weirdly defenseless stiffs like Jim Cramer.” This throws into question if comedy news sources are even at all legitimate sources of information or simply projections of the beliefs and political agendas of their own hosts and staff.

 The article itself though exposes many gratuities that Stewart might receive, blows many of the claims out of proportion. The comparison to Edward R. Murrow seemed to enrage the author tremendously. However, we must keep in mind that this was simply one news source heralding Mr. Stewart as a hero. Just one news source. Countless sources of media hail numerous politicians and leaders as various things, good and bad and most likely have much less significance than the author may have made it out to be. Furthermore, it is important to note that individuals such as Stewart and Colbert do not actively claim or seek out recognition as political leaders, perhaps suggesting a pure motive however entrapped and tangled in their niche they may have become after all.

<span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;"> In spite of all the criticism and distrust of these new forms of media, one thing is for certain, people are watching and listening. In today’s day and age, traditional forms of media and literacy are quickly becoming antiquated such as newspapers and magazines. According to an article in Bloomberg Businessweek, “Publishing revenue at Gannett, including advertising and circulation, declined 5.3 percent to $917.8 million during the quarter. Digital revenue rose 10 percent.” The statistics in itself are highly indicative of changing consumer trends as newspapers and magazines are becoming increasingly inefficient, unmarketable, difficult to access, and detrimental to the environment. Furthermore in a time when the internet is plagued by information overload what sources of information can individuals turn to? If anything, comedy news sources, which are by and large web and television based, do successfully reach out to higher numbers of people than traditional media. This by itself indicates at least some increased awareness in the general public however skewed a manner it may be presented to them.

<span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;"> In all, comedy news sources are a very new and interesting source of information. Relatively young, it’s still a medium in which the players are still learning its boundaries, responsibilities, and above all power, and impact. Perhaps the original intentions of people like Colbert and Stewart may be as pure as exposing the truth to the public, but this vision may easily be skewed with increasing political influence and power. After all, these people are just as human as many of the more traditional figures such as Glenn Beck. Just like any other news source, one must be mindful of the accuracy of the information, and above all else be aware of the inherent biases and skewing of facts that no source is free from. Deep down though, comedy new sources are indeed increasing political and environmental literacy due to their rising popularity and the creative and refreshing manner in which it is a presented, something so needed in the jaded and dull world of mainstream media. Deep down I have faith in individuals such as Jon Stewart and Colbert when they claim they are not trying to be political leaders motivated by hidden agendas at least not yet. In the words of Mr. Stewart “ <span style="color: #232323; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">But I know the difference between real social change and what we do. You know what we are? Soil enrichers. Maybe we can add a little fertilizer to the soil so that real people can come along and grow things.”

**__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 16pt;">Works Cited __** <span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Pulley, Brett. "Gannett Shares Tumble as Newspaper Advertising Declines - Businessweek." //<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Businessweek //<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">. Bloomberg Businessweek, 17 Oct. 2011. Web. 17 Oct. 2011. <http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-17/gannett-shares-tumble-as-newspaper-advertising-declines.html>. <span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Smith, Chris. "America Is a Joke." //<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">New York Magazine //<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">. New York, 12 Sept. 2010. Web. 17 Oct. 2011. <http://nymag.com/arts/tv/profiles/68086/>. <span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Welch, Matt. "The "Jon Stewart Game": Everyone Loses, Except Him! - Hit & Run." //<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">Reason Magazine //<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 13.5pt;">. Reason Magazine, 19 Sept. 2011. Web. 17 Oct. 2011. <http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/19/the-jon-stewart-game-everyone>.