In 2007, America woke up to a revelation, by the Pew Research center, on the most admired journalist; At number four, was Jon Stewart tied with Brian Williams, Tom Brokaw (NBC), Dan Rather (CBS) and Anderson Cooper (CNN). The question that got the attraction of many Americans was who is Jon Stewart a journalist or a comedian, as most of his shows are comic? What is it that he does that is different from, traditional mainstream, press? A close analysis of the show indicates that Jon Stewart has a significant impact on dialogue with Americans but the contents of the show cannot be used as a reliable source of news. This can be analyzed on three criterions; firstly, the show uses comic, profane language and satire in broadcasting. Secondly, the show focuses entirely on politics, and fails to cover other pieces of information. (Gray, Jeffrey and Ethan 104). Finally, the use of fake respondents in his show makes the information lack the originality element and that which cannot be relied upon (Roberts 43).
The daily show resonates in a time when cognitive dissonance is considered as a national epidemic. The show is not just wickedly funny but is keen to focus on the issues that have led to this epidemic. Stewart exclamations like ‘are you insane’ seems suitable to describe the reality where the outrageous have been considered as common. However, the news is more of entertainment than informatory. The show informs truth in a funny way by use of language and playful looniness that speaks truth to power in honesty. It is entirely designed to be humorous and does not leave that dialogue and brainstorming concept among the viewers (Stewart 12-15). The humor element of the news makes it unreliable for consideration as news since the viewers only pursue it as a joke.
The news anchored in the show can be described as fake; the contents are not satisfactory to any viewer who would wish to be informed on certain crucial matters. This is because the contents are derived from existing stories from other media houses. The show opens with a typical monologue from Stewart who exchanges features with some respondents who use humorous and exaggerated takes on current affairs. These respondents have no obligations in delivering the current affairs or the most important news that every audience would like to hear. They are too complicated in their language and also boring. Their key allegiance is on comedy and entertaining the viewers.
Most of the news in the show are based on political themes. The show does not inform on other aspects like business, environment etc which are informatory and useful to viewers. The show does not meet the political awareness and information needs among most Americans. The show offers candidates chances to present their policies and views to the nation. This assists in reaching out to voters and reinforcing on the candidature preferences. The show also activates supports in swaying undecided voters (Stewart 23). However, show is clearly focused on politics especially on the Bush administration policies in Iraq, Washington’s political background and the Government’s accountability. It focuses mainly on criticism and limits the positivity of the policies of these leaders.
Participants involved in this show and exposed to the jokes and humor tend to rate candidates negatively (Stewart 26). The show brings out every negative element of the candidates making the viewers uninformed. In addition, the show exhibits cynicism towards the news media and the electoral system. This misguides the viewers and makes them make wrong decisions. The show drives down political institutions support and leaders inclined towards nonparticipation.
The show can also be criticized on lack of substance in providing comprehensive news. For some reason, most of the stories aired in the show are presented in a rational way. The critical parts of the stories are ignored, and this leaves information seekers and viewers with doubts. Although Stewart does not seem to benefit from any financial or political support, he is keen to provide some politicians with more time than others (Stewart 20). The show seems to be skewed to some political backgrounds and leaves out other political aspirants. There lacks that debate substance that most viewers would like to see and hear in making political decisions.
Stewart’s refusal to abide in traditional journalistic conventions signaled his lack of mutual embrace to politics and press (Roberts 40). Most Americans viewed his move as immature and vulgar and since then, they have always dismissed his content. Most of the Americans claim that his journalism lacks accountability and responsibility (Gray, Jeffrey and Ethan 98). He airs what to his views is suitable, but not depending on what the viewers would like to see or hear. His stories are considered as fake and lack originality. For people who would like to make informed choices, decisions and have comprehensive news on the status of America, and the rest of the world, the daily show is not a viable means.
Participants involved in this show and exposed to the jokes and humor tend to rate candidates negatively (Stewart 26). The show brings out every negative element of the candidates making the viewers uninformed. In addition, the show exhibits cynicism towards the news media and the electoral system. This misguides the viewers and makes them make wrong decisions. The show drives down political institutions support and leaders inclined towards nonparticipation.
The show can also be criticized on lack of substance in providing comprehensive news. For some reason, most of the stories aired in the show are presented in a rational way. The critical parts of the stories are ignored, and this leaves information seekers and viewers with doubts. Although Stewart does not seem to benefit from any financial or political support, he is keen to provide some politicians with more time than others (Stewart 20). The show seems to be skewed to some political backgrounds and leaves out other political aspirants. There lacks that debate substance that most viewers would like to see and hear in making political decisions.
Stewart’s refusal to abide in traditional journalistic conventions signaled his lack of mutual embrace to politics and press (Roberts 40). Most Americans viewed his move as immature and vulgar and since then, they have always dismissed his content. Most of the Americans claim that his journalism lacks accountability and responsibility (Gray, Jeffrey and Ethan 98). He airs what to his views is suitable, but not depending on what the viewers would like to see or hear. His stories are considered as fake and lack originality. For people who would like to make informed choices, decisions and have comprehensive news on the status of America, and the rest of the world, the daily show is not a viable means.
Reference.
Gray, Jonathan, Jeffrey P. Jones, and Ethan Thompson. Satire TV: Politics and comedy in the Post-Network Era. New York: NYU Press, 2009. Print.
Roberts, Kristal. “The Daily Show” Vs. Network News: Where’s the Substance? London: Proquest inc. Print.
Stewart, Jon. Earth (the Book): A Visitor’s Guide to the Human Race. New York, N.Y: Grand Central, 2010. Print.
