AdamsDebatePaper1

Does Comedy News enhance political and environmental literacy? It’s Wednesday night and I’ve just got finished with an assignment at the library. I walk into my apartment and sit down, say hello to my roommates and we begin to talk about the day. After a while, I become conscious of the time. I realize it is almost 10pm. Time for //South Park//, an animated television series on the Comedy Central network. Everyone is immediately excited in anticipation of relieving some stress with a few hardy laughs. That is because //South Park// is one of the few satires that exist today that is extremely effective in translating something that is relevant in today’s news into a simpler context. Halfway through we are in stiches and as the show concludes, its point is made obvious. Our political approach to immigration issues is seriously backward and the way it is being handled by our government is much like the game of “Base!” that kids play at recess. By mocking the way America handles immigration by using a game of “Base!” we finally get a very important message along with some humor. As famous as //South Park// is, another show //The Daily Show// is just as popular and even more filled with comedic news. Why these shows are so popular is obvious, they make you laugh. But the real reason they continue to be successful is that they provide something that no other news program can, a fresh approach to politics and social issues. Throughout history there have always been satires that help explain the world we live in by mocking it and poking fun at it. Some have been very successful in educating people who may have not been so keen to investigate an issue. //Moby Dick// is a great example of this and effectively uses an adventurous novel about the whaling industry to allude to a grander issue like the industrial revolution and the human condition. Mark Twain even used a pen name Samuel Clemens to provide hoax articles to make a point. Today is much different. Television provides instant gratification by expressing daily events. Comedy news has only recently been invented and although it’s founded on the same grounds as Greek plays, it uses social media and comedic commentary to reach its viewers. A key problem with the concept is who actually can access the news? Also, if a show fails to be funny is the point really made, or rather if the show is too funny is anything really gained? These are some of the issues I will discuss. In Chris Smith’s article //America is a Joke//, he provides us with an exclusive behind the scenes look into what it takes to create 15-18 minutes of //The Daily Show//, the most famous and most watched news program currently on late night television. Although the funny conversations and quotes from creative meetings with John and his writers make up the bulk of the article, Chris also touches upon why the show is relevant. Fueled by the humoristic critique to social media and social perspective that John Stewart provides//, The Daily Show// is extremely effective in reaching the young (18-30) audience. But why? Well for one thing, it is John Stewart’s show. As a comedian it is his job to be funny, and because he is intelligent and can link a funny clip of WWE to a current political fiasco and make it work. It is also his political opinion and intelligence that leads him to come up with a show that provides truthful commentary to something that might not be true at all, but the “truthiness” doesn’t matter, as long as the point is made. As John puts it, “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)” So this article argues that we really should leave this type of social commentary to John Stewart and the few other comedians like him, that’s why it works, because he firmly believes in, “ the naïve hope that the legitimate news media will get its act together and become a resolute force for truth and good government. (3)”, and because we’re watching him it has become true. The success of comedy news programs and online podcasts certainly indicate that people are getting information. But can viewers easily sift through the comedic distractions? If a point is being made, one would hope it is not just for the sake of comedy and would actually be effective in making it stick. Chris Smith certainly feels that someone is being reached, but who are? If the viewers are all 18-35 then a majority of people are not exposed. The argument in favor of comedy news being effective has only the popularity of the shows to back it up because the individual who watches the show can choose to take from it what he or she wants. Even if trust between the viewer and the show has been made and the delivery system is in place, people still can simply tune in for the humor and not gain literacy on issues. In Matt Welch’s article John Stewart is made into an enemy of the type of progress that he preaches about. “ Stewart isn't just being a bully here. He is being disingenuous, and he knows it. Worse, he's tapping into the collective fantasy without knowing it. (2)” This type of false advertising by John Stewart is argued to be misleading, a type of commentary that only points at a thing and changes into something that can be comedy. Whatever is the topic at hand; it shouldn’t be disguised or altered. Misinformation is the problem. Even worse than not getting any information is the confusion of a mass audience on issues. This type of illusive influence is what political figures and media personalities like Bill O’reilly identify as the error. That is the problem with comedy, is it usually works best when a joke is not true, because the truth is rarely funny. This causes John Stewart and Stephen Colbert to create a fictional world. Most of what it is being said is true in actuality, but the details and approach uses lies. Although the “truthiness” of comedy news is highly questionable, they still provide a commentary whether it be bad or for good. The real holes in the argument against comedy news being effective are that people only need to be informed and not truly understand an issue to be effectively aware. To become literate in environmental and political issues there needs to be more than just witty anecdotes and asides. However, last week’s show of South Park proved that even if a show is 90% fictional and irrelevant, if the important 10% of the show is effective than the point is made. Someone who disagrees with comedy as a medium for change will always use the argument that it is not true enough to work. But sometimes, you have to step back and take a look from a different perspective. If one person is inside the world of social commentary and news, and is trying to make sense of what is going on they will only see things in that language. A Study by Ohio State University in 2008 concluded that, “ people who watch fake news shows learn far less about political issues and candidates than people who watch television news shows on networks such as CNN and NBC. However, the study also found that people watching fake news shows still learned more than people who didn't watch any political content. (1)”The findings were published in the //Journal of Communication//, suggesting that fake news shows can be influential in forming impressions about a candidate based on their background, but are not useful in learning about the issues and political procedures central to an election. These differences in knowledge gain may be caused by how people are using fake news shows. For example, a viewer may already decide before a segment starts what he or she will take from it. So, is it possible that comedy news can be extremely effective if a viewer is willing enough? This obviously is still a dark spot in the world of psychological understanding of how people use comedy news. But if someone is gaining more than if he or she didn’t watch anything than it must be viewed as a positive. I chose to agree with the side of comedy news being effective. There have been times when I’ve learned a lot about issues in politics from comedy news and although they may be misleading and sometimes not effective, I still personally have taken a lot of good. I personally think that South Park, like the Simpson’s in the past are extremely powerful in educating and keeping Americans aware about issues. Art is rarely easily understood but is certainly effective and powerful. I am however enlightened in terms of environmental and political issues, so therefore perhaps I benefit from these sources of news more than others. But, at the same time I believe that someone who has no interest in learning about an issue can be drawn in by the use of humor. Literacy and understanding in my opinion are different. I can be literate about a subject, being able to go into a voters booth and make a decision and still not fully understand the details. I certainly cannot pretend to know how an energy bill will function but I know it is important and will attempt to do good or bad. This is the key difference I see. Effective use of comedy can educate and create awareness without being true. Does comedy news enhance literacy? No. Not unless it is funny and holds merit. I think in order for us as a social group to really create a more effective approach to news and thus be more effective is to de-privatize news. News is often not accurate and is usually never fully presented because it is usually intended to influence you as to oppose to inform. I think this is a very important issue considering how powerful people can be influenced by media. Media is subjective but there is an objective when a story runs. Are the viewer’s benefit ever considered by news organizations? I believe John Stewart does really care and that’s why he does so well. Also, television these days is driven by advertising deals and if a news program such as PBS’s frontline became more of the norm, a publicly supported news program we would all benefit.

Citations 1) "Fake news shows less important in learning about politics." //Newswise//. Ohio State University, 8/9/2008. Web. 17 Oct 2011. . 2) Welch, Matt. "The "Jon Stewart Game": Everyone loses except him!." //reason.com//. Reason Magazine, 9/11/2011. Web. 17 Oct 2011. . 3) Smith, Chris. "America is a Joke." //nymag.com//. NY Times, 12/9/2010. Web. 17 Oct 2011. .