Home > Media > WWJSD

WWJSD

By Jen Schmidt
on February 7th, 2010
Leave a comment Go to comments

What would John do?

It has been made fun of, mocked, copied and even challenged and yet we keep coming back to everyone’s favorite fake newscaster. The Daily Show with John Stewart, and its equally “conservative” cohort, The Colbert Report, have become trusted news sources for us meager millennials. But what exactly is it about this comedy central show host from New York that grabs us?

Is it that he does a perfect job pointing out the missteps of journalists, while never committing the faux pas of inserting himself into the official profession; or, more than anything else, is it because he is right on. Mr. Stewart shows me what politician “A” said in November, and then shows me how he changed his position in June. He talks about stories in a way that I understand, and speaks to my interests of satire-infused news.

We see a generational disconnect regarding primary news sources; do younger generations have a obvert obsession with satire, have older generations lost their love for the lewd? I am not sure it is either, but I do know that watching The Daily Show as solid news source allows me to escape the deeply embedded, pre-conceived notions that all my other options are biased, wrong or just plain stupid. John Stewart will give me the facts, present the situation, make fun of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents: all in a single sentence

I don’t mean to say that we, as millennials have lost our respect for journalists like, Brian Williams, or Glen Beck it is just that we don’t necessarily trust what they say (okay, maybe lack of respect for the last on the list). A good portion of this mistrust comes from other media sources telling us not to trust them; liberal biases this, conservative tendencies that.

So is it really any surprise that we turn away from news sources that everyone seems to have a problem with? Not really. What did media expect us to do? If the 24-hour news cycle can’t have or show any respect between their shows, networks, or even anchors, how am I expected to shell out support and ratings?

Even our own Mr. Stewart seems fed-up with the mass media and over indulgent networks; taking fact-checking shots at CNN, doing a better Glen Beck then Glen Beck does, destroying Jim Cramer on economic policy, and forcing Crossfire off the air by pointing out that the show wasn’t actually reporting the news.

So it would seem that a comedic, satire infused, fake news show has become a source of real information, and the “real” news shows have become the butt of a very bad comedic joke. Comedy central = the new CNN? I sure hope so.
Jon Stewart kills Crossfire

Photo Credit: thejointstaff

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Tumblr
  • Posterous
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • RSS
  • Noooo, you totally beat me to writing this article! Well done.

    IMHO, John Stuart is better than the news for three reasons. First, he actually calls politicians on their sound bites. If say Giuliani or Pelosi says something in complete contradiction to a previous statement (and I'm talking a total 180, not nit picking) Stuart calls them it and I'm confounded as to why I never see that type of thing on CNN. I don't get it.

    Second, he puts stories in context (albeit using humor) and doesn't try to be "fair and balanced" any more more than he tries to be reasonable. There are no pundits mouthing off talking points mascaraing as "perspective."

    Third, the questions he asks his guests and the ways that he pursues answers from them are better than any other interviewer I've seen on any of the major news networks. He has a conversation with the people and they have a real back and forth (any interview with Huckabee is a must see). As opposed to someone like Katie Couric, and others, whos interviews are essentially the other person reading their talking points verbatim. There's no authenticity, no real follow ups. They never just say: "You didn't really answer the question," (then again their questions kinda suck anyways).

    I don't think that John Stuart is a journalist, but that's NOT the issue here. It depresses me to think that, in spite of his self proclaimed role as a comedian, he's somehow doing a MUCH better job than almost any journalist on TV right now. It's depressing, but yes, I get a lot of important information from Stuart because it just isn't coming from any places else.

    edit: Brian Williams is cool...
  • adelineguerra
    Great article. I agree with you 100%. And when I'm in France I often turn to the Daily Show to get my American News, it's short, it's funny, and it points out to stuff that no other TV network puts on the air or comments on. Of course, it shouldn't be the only source of news, and if you are interested in politics I think watching Jon Stewart helps reflect on our own opinion of the news. There is no such show as the Daily Show in France, maybe a little segment of "Le grand journal" called "le petit journal" which has ridiculed many politicians from all over the world. To me, a show like the one Jon Stewart presents is essential to a dynamic democracy. I'm sure some people will say this is an overstatement, but the way I see it from my country, the day a network is too scared to let a show like this air, then there is danger ahead.
  • joe
    Glen Beck is not a journalist and he will tell you as much. He is a conservative commentator. John Stewart is NOT a journalist, and his show isn't really a news show either. its pure entertainment. I think that needs to be remembered when watching it. I wouldn't go to his show for news. He is also not unbiased though he may present himself as such. He has a definite liberal bent, which is all well and good if he didn't try pass himself off as neutral.
  • Valid points joe, but i feel like i need to add a few clarifying remarks...

    to yours and alex's comments, i agree- Glen beck is not a journalist, he was just the most right-wing person i could think of at the time, and as a self-proclaimed liberal, i enjoy taking shots at him whenever possible.

    I said in the very first paragraph that john stewart was a "fake newscaster" I don't consider him a journalist and in fact, John Stewart himself has said he is not a journalist and that the daily show is not a news show, and i don't think i was trying to make any of those assertions. I am entertained when i watch the show, and i am not saying that it is my only source of news, but i do know that after watching/reading BBC, NPR, or CNN and learning about a story i like to see what John Stewart has to say about it because i respect his opinion as an intelligent commentator.

    I am also aware that it is a liberal biased show, but this article was never about watching the show because it was unbiased, it was about being so overly fed-up with the 24-hour propaganda slander ridden news media outlets that the daily show, by comparison, is becoming reputable
  • I think it has a liberal bias so far as reality has a liberal bias...
  • I think part of the problem with news channels is that because they're 24-hour, they have to have something to report all the time. That usually means either choosing a topic that's ridiculous, or over-covering a topic. I have to watch CNN at work, and while I used to enjoy the TV time, it's started to grate on my nerves. So I love that Stewart and Colbert -- and, to an extent, the comedians on SNL -- can not only tell news stories, but also poke fun at the anchors and other people involved. It's nice when even the industry starts to realize how it is.
  • alexpeerenboom
    First, I don't consider Glen Beck a journalist. But I think you're right on about the point that John Stewart just simply tells it like it is. Although his goal is to get a satirical and histerical response, he still manages to deliver timely news from around the world. So many times I try to watch news from the major networks and get no real value from it.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Canonical URL by SEO No Duplicate WordPress Plugin