Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert
“This confirms what daily show fans have known for sometime. Somewhere between its coverage of the last presidential campaign and Jon’s war of words with Jim Kramer, the daily show became a trusted news source, whether it liked it or not. It is still very much a comedy show, but like most stand-up comedians are fueled by their constant dissatisfaction (and questioning) of everything around them, the daily show’s comedy is fueled by (and reflects) its fans’ dissatisfaction with politicians, and media coverage of politicians. See Jon’s chilling debate with Huckabee over gay marriage as proof of why he won in this poll. There was nothing funny about it.”
This is a comment I left about a year ago on a Huffington Post article titled: Online Poll: Jon Stewart Is America’s Most Trusted Newsman.
Megan Boler, in the introduction to Digital Media and Democracy, discusses viewership of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report and how well-informed they (the audience) tend to be. In the Huffington Post article, which links to the actual TIME magazine poll, the author concedes that there’s a chance that Jon Stewart was able to win just by being the odd man out. He was the one comedian paired with three established news anchors and one gets the feeling that a lot of the votes for Stewart might have really just been votes against the established status quo of network news journalism. But again, this would be in sync with my theory on why people put so much trust in what Stewart and Stephen Colbert have to say.
In the years since I began paying attention enough to notice the dynamic between politics, government and the media, I went from being a somewhat naive college freshman eager to exercise my right to vote for the first time ever, eating up any sound-byte that got to me first, to just being amused at the entire spectacle. This is a journey I think is familiar to a lot of young people and college students. Somewhere between the starting point and end point, there is a lot of frustration. This frustration is really what Stewart and Colbert cater to four nights a week.
On some level, I think the pessimists in Boler’s interview series have it right: Stewart and Colbert foster cynicism. However, this is cynicism that already exists due to the backward nature of the political process and media coverage of it. This cynicism is the unfortunate result of the political machine’s constant efforts with help from the media to manufacture enthusiasm and a false sense of urgency for questionable initiatives that lead to human rights violations, institutionalized prejudice, and outright wars. It isn’t a matter of choice between cynicism and manufactured enthusiasm/urgency, it’s a matter of how long it takes before one gives way to the other.
For the purpose and intent of this blog post, let’s say Stewart and Colbert seem to be the only people who really recognize this frustration in viewers and are willing and capable to address it head-on. What does it mean to be capable of addressing these frustrations in ways real news outlets can’t? They are comedians, and like a lot of comedians (stand-up comics to be particular) they use their comedy as a front for their own frustrations beneath the surface. Stewart is able to deconstruct a really corrupt situation while pointing and laughing at it. Colbert, in the guise of his on-screen persona, is able to repeat things that politicians and the news media are saying to comedic effect, calling attention to the ridiculousness of these things. This is why these two have become so popular today. They aren’t just a welcome distraction anymore, they’ve become a necessary distraction.
It’s interesting that he was voted America’s Most Trusted Newsman. Do you think this is strictly because of his news reporting or because of the fact that he grabs viewers and they enjoy his style of humor? I think that it is hard to really day that he is the most trusted newsman in America when he is put up against people like Brian Williams. I don’t doubt that he is the most trusted newsman in his field of comedy news, however, was there a push to vote him this title? It seems like if there were just “straight-laced” newsmen, he would be left out, but although he is the most popular in his field, he is not the only one.
I agree with Alan is questioning the role Jon Stuart plays in the media/politics/journalism arena. I will unveil my bias that I watch The Daily Show on a regular basis and used the show as my primary education on the recent elections. It seems to be the only way I can stomach a lot of the political back and forth nastiness, but I don’t consider the content provided as the ultimate truth.
I tend that to think that most regular viewers understand the motivations of The Daily Show, but it is not for everyone. I think the jester plays a pivotal role in court, but it should be one of many voices, not the supreme voice. That role is reserved for the king, or prince in your case
Great post, Olu. Satire is, of course, a time-honored form of social critique. It is only sad that Colbert and Stewart have such an abundance of material from which to choose.
I suspect that Meagan is right and that many viewers first hear of events on The Daily Show and then use that as a platform for further investigation. At least, I hope that is the case…
A like your comment “They aren’t just a welcome distraction anymore, they’ve become a nessacary distraction.” I think this is true. I try not to think of politics too often because it seems to end up in an argument. I think humor helps people work with disagreements.
“Stewart is able to deconstruct a really corrupt situation while pointing and laughing at it. Colbert, in the guise of his on-screen persona, is able to repeat things that politicians and the news media are saying to comedic effect, calling attention to the ridiculousness of these things.” i’m not ashamed to admit that i sometimes count on jon steward and stephen colbert to explain what’s happening in words i understand. i suppose it’s a bad thing that i tend to trust their judgement on most political issues. i’m not sure if that’s a commentary on my generation or laziness. but, i think meagan is right because i often use them to springboard into political discussion with friends.
Nice post Olu….Stewart and Colbert are kind of like a modern Dada movement poking fun at the current state of politics and the media that reports it. I applaud their efforts in helping the viewing public to see that the system is broken. Hopefully the effects of their efforts will do some good and we can get back to an honest commentary.
I trust Stewart and Colbert more then I trust Fox News, is that wrong? I’m not really a follower of politics because of the absurdity that surrounds it. It’s hard to watch the news because so much of it is painted with the colors of who is telling it to you. I’m not sure if news should be completely neutral but what we have now isn’t working either as it isn’t a little bit center anymore in one direction, its a lot a bit off center. When Stewart and Colbert talk about that coverage, you see how far off center it is helping you to see that this isn’t quite right.
I’ve always really respected how intelligent those guys are. It especially shows in Jon Stewart, because his show is of a more serious nature. Colbert has gotten serious before, albiet rarely: he does when interviewing Julian Assange of Wikileaks (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/270712/april-12-2010/julian-assange). They are really smart guys and Jon Stewart shows that time and time again in his interviews. A lot of news pundits have huge ego’s and that comes with ridiculous shows. It makes it more about them defending their worldview than about the news. Stewart and Colbert point out so many hypocrisies in shows like O’Reilly, Glenn Beck, and Hannity (http://bit.ly/seanHannityIsDisgraceful).
I wish the degree of discussion on most news shows was as intelligent as the ones on Jon Stewart. His interviews are simply far more interesting and revealing than anything i’ve seen on other ‘news’ networks. They are comedians, but they are smart and really well informed comedians. I think thats what makes them so great.
Great post! I agree, I am more trusting of Colbert and Stewart mainly because I know they are mostly being satirical. I think other news sources put on this air of unbiased-ness, when they are really just lying through their teeth. At least with Colbert and Stewart, they are upfront about their biased-ness and are entertaining/funny about it while still making a point.
Great post. I find the unique brand of politcal humor proffered by Stewart and Colbert to be entertaining, informative and most importantly, accessible. While working in politics one of the first lessoned I learned was to build accessibility into your candidate’s efforts. The primary thing voters are interested in is how a vote for said candidate will make their lives better…now. I think both Stewart and Colbert speak directly to that interest in plane everyday language, not politico speak. That’s why they are so popular and trusted.
Interestingly I recently went on a self imposed Jon Stewart/Daily Show strike in opposition to some statements that Stewart made about President Obama. However when I realized that Stewart actually produces The Colbert Report, which I never stopped watching, I realized the ridiculousness of my strike. So much for principles! Excellent post!
My apologies for my misspellings, BTW!
Yes…I always think about the relation between media and politics. And I also notice how the politicians use the press, especially when they deal with political crises. Just like Bill Clinton’s sexual scandal. I noticed how he talked in front of the camera. Moreover, I always notice if the politicians know how to produce the soundbite.