PennacchiaDebatePaper1

Issue 2: Does comedy news enhance political and environmental literacy?
 Comedy news has been around almost as long as journalism itself. While in many cases it is presented in a similar format to mainstream journalism, this type of news, also known as fake news, aims at drawing comedy out of recent headlines, political figures, and media organizations. While comedy news began with hoax articles in newspapers, it has recently become much more popular on television and the internet, where it is much easier to mimic credible news sources for a larger viewer base. Satirical programs such as The Daily Show and The Colbert Report air on Comedy Central and are widely popular among younger audiences, some of who watch these types of shows for the news headlines, not just the comedic relief. While a substantial percentage of the American population get their daily news fix from internet and television sources similar to these, many critics argue if comedy news actually enhances the political and environmental literacy of its viewers. On the one hand, a study released by the Pew Research Center indicated that regular viewers of The Daily Show tend to be more knowledgeable about current news than audiences of other news sources [1], beating out other programs such as The O'Reilly Factor and network morning shows. However on the other hand, campaign surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center during the 2004 elections indicated that those who cited comedy shows such as The Daily Show as a source for news were among the least informed on campaign events and key aspects of the candidates' backgrounds while those who cited the Internet, National Public Radio, and news magazines were the most informed [2] . While both views may argue valid points, it is necessary to understand that the public needs the news, and it is their right to be informed of what is going on in the world to a certain degree of validity.  New York Magazine recently wrote an article on one of the most popular satirists of the recent decade, Jon Stewart, host of the The Daily Show. The article is titled “America is a Joke”, and it explains in depth how Jon Stewart has taken advantage of the worst of times for politics and media, creating the best of times for his show. Since Stewart took over the show in 1999, he changed its direction from popular culture to a more politically focused humor. The 2000 election campaign allowed Stewart to become a leading critic of the political-media complex with the “Indecision 2000”, which was a parody of the presidential election recount. After September 11 th , Stewart gained more viewership and job security by aiming his content “at the acquiescent and co-opted news media... becoming a voice of comic sanity in the whirlwind of real and manufactured fear” [3]. His 'straight to the point' position became widely appreciated by the show's viewers, and even caught the attention of Brian Williams, an NBC Nightly News Anchor who stated, “Jon has chronicled the death of shame in politics and journalism. Many of us on this side of the journalism tracks often wish we were on Jon’s side. I envy his platform to shout from the mountaintop. He’s a necessary branch of government.” [3] What most people enjoy about watching his show is his “willingness to call bullshit to the face of the bullshitters” [3], which is something that not many people do on television, even though his feelings are shared by many people. The article continues to explain the average day of The Daily Show staff; how they begin by scanning the news headlines for appropriate material, and then write and rewrite sketches that will mimic and bring out the irony in the news that forms the comedic aims of the show. Stewart understands his role for the American people, and states that “You want to add something to the world that is clarifying and not obscuring. 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.” [3]  This article, in a way, aims at creating a greater understanding of the meaning behind all the jokes on The Daily Show. They are an attempt to find all the holes in politics and the media that are often overlooked by the American people because they are either unaware or passed on by people who know they can not make a change. Jon Stewart is one of the few who call politicians and journalists out on their stupidity, and give power to the people, even if that power is simply in the form mockery. However, back to the issue of political and environmental literacy, the example of The Daily Show gives the impression that people who watch similar comedy news programs are only seeing the headlines that the program wants them to see, or only the headlines that fit into that night's sketch. While the most important headlines are most likely shown, there seems to be a level of information that might not be met for people who rely on comedy shows as their main source of news.  One of the few articles on the internet that criticizes forms of comedy news, more specifically criticizing Jon Stewart, is an article posted in Blog for Reason Magazine. The article is titled “The 'Jon Stewart Game': Everyone Loses, Except Him!”, and aims to directly criticize Stewart's role as a comedian and political satirist. The author of the article, Matt Welch, believes that Jon Stewart is disingenuous to the American people and when he falls back on his comedic occupation “he's not escaping from the collective fantasy. He's feeding it. The collective fantasy, you see, is not just about Jon Stewart, it's about America, especially liberal America, and its need for redeemers to rise out of its ranks. Jon Stewart's just a comedian the way gunslingers in old westerns are really peaceable sodbusters who hate all that bloodshed and all that //killin' // but finally have to strap on them six-guns and march on into town.” [4] Welch focuses this argument on the role Stewart played in the passing of the bill that promised benefits to 9/11 first responders. Congress had been stalling on passing the bill, which pissed Stewart off enough to make a public argument against Congress in which he stated to “just ****king pass it” [4]. Welch saw the praise that Stewart received after the bill was passed as Stewart's way of “tapping into the collective fantasy without knowing it”. [4] He believes that Stewart has outgrown comedy after experiencing the higher pleasure of preaching to others, and is lying to the public when after all of his rants he must always “remind us that he's a comedian, for crying out loud.”[4]  The author of this article attacked Jon Stewart's career as a comedian and his relationship with the public as almost as fake as his news is. While Welch may have some sort of predisposed anger towards Stewart, he is arguing that Stewart got all the praise for the passing of the 9/11 first responder bill, when all he did was publicly bully the congressmen to pass it. Welch argues that if Stewart is just a comedian like he says he is, than he is stepping way out of his ranks, and giving a bad impression for Americans. I am not completely sure why this is a bad thing for Americans. Jon Stewart stood up for what he believed in, and for what New Yorkers believed in, and said something. Even though he might not have physically voted for the bill, his efforts helped the public opinion of the bill to pass it, which may have increased its chances of being passed. When at first I thought that this article was mainly a shot against Stewart and comedy news in general, I now see that Stewart was doing his job by informing New Yorkers of some of the bullshit going on in Congress, which is something that might not have been portrayed in other news programs.  The article published in the New York Times entitled, “In ‘Daily Show’ Role on 9/11 Bill, Echoes of Murrow”, describes in further detail the opposite side of the argument posed in the previous article written by Matt Welch. The Times article compared Jon Stewart, who believes that what he does has nothing to do with journalism, to a “modern -day equivalent of Edward R. Murrow”[5]. Before the bill was passed last December, it seemed that Congress had already derailed it before it was voted on. Jon Stewart saw this as an “an outrageous abdication of our responsibility to those who were most heroic on 9/11” [5] and continued his argument throughout an entire segment of The Daily Show. Stewart aimed his focus on two main targets; the Republicans that were blocking the bill, who Stewart accused of belonging to “the party that turned 9/11 into a catchphrase”[5], and other broadcast networks that had not covered the progress of the bill for months before it was in legislation. Many people, especially the 9/11 first responders, believed that Stewart was responsible for the change in momentum needed to pass the bill. New York City Mayor Bloomberg commented on Stewart stating that “Success always has a thousand fathers. But Jon shining such a big, bright spotlight on Washington’s potentially tragic failure to put aside differences and get this done for America was, without a doubt, one of the biggest factors that led to the final agreement.” This type of protestation by Stewart is called advocacy journalism, and his role in the passing of the 9/11 bill brought him up to par with other historically important advocacy journalists such as Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow who both used public opinion to 'call the bullshit' in government and do what is right for the American people. Brian Williams of NBC stated that “Jon gets to decide the rules governing his own activism and the causes he supports and how often he does it — and his audience gets to decide if they like the serious Jon as much as they do the satirical Jon.”  While much of this paper is concentrated on Jon Stewart and The Daily Show, I believe that the issues presented in the articles are relevant to comedy news on a broader spectrum. The quote above from Brian Williams states that Jon Stewart, and others like him, have the ability to control what they are supporting or discriminating towards the public. But it is up to the public itself to almost believe what they want to believe. Comedy news such as The Daily Show and The Colbert Report get the important headlines out there for the people, similar to network news programs, however the key difference is that they add a level of opinion to the news that network programs do not. I feel that this is the main dividing issue between the two types of news, and the issue that most closely relates to the question if comedy news enhances political and environmental literacy. The answer in my opinion is that it depends on the individual viewer. There are people who watch these shows just for the comedy, and CNN or Fox for the headlines, and people who watch for both comedy and the headlines. However, comedy news might have the upper hand in the discussion because it has the ability to stir political and environmental debates in a raw way, allowing the possibility of a greater change in public awareness and policy. <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">[1] "Public Knowledge of Current Affairs Little Changed by News and Information Revolutions." <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">//Pew Research Center// <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">. N.p., 2007. Web. 17 Oct 2011. <http://www.people-press.org/2007/04/15/public-knowledge-of-current-affairs-little-changed-by-news-and-information-revolutions/>. <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">[2] "Cable and Internet Loom Large in Fragmented Political News Universe." <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">//Pew Research Center// <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">. N.p., 2004. Web. 17 Oct 2011. <http://www.people-press.org/2004/01/11/cable-and-internet-loom-large-in-fragmented-political-news-universe/>. <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">[3] "America is a Joke." <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">//New York Magazine// <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">. N.p., 2010. Web. 17 Oct 2011. <http://nymag.com/arts/tv/profiles/68086/>. <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">[4] "The "Jon Stewart Game": Everyone Loses, Except Him!." <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">//Blog for Reason Magazine// <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">. N.p., 2011. Web. 18 Oct 2011. <http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/19/the-jon-stewart-game-everyone>. <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">[5] "In ‘Daily Show’ Role on 9/11 Bill, Echoes of Murrow." <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">//The New York Times// <span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif;">. N.p., 2010. Web. 18 Oct 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/27/business/media/27stewart.html?pagewanted=2>.