Page 320 - Battleground The Media Volume 1 and 2

News Sat re: Comedy Central and Beyond |

empower an audience member by positing them as a knowing insider. This
presumption of knowingness will be highly problematic and worrying if it is
not accompanied by actual information, but when information is present, com-
edy can sometimes offer a greater sense of personal involvement. Comedy even
allows a degree of honesty and frankness that the news’ stated obsession with
objectivity can sometimes obscure; indeed, as Jeffrey Jones argues of news satire,
“there seemingly is an underlying recognition that [it] expresses a measure of
truth, honesty, or realness that is missing from more formulaic political cov-
erage” (Jones 2004, p. 6). The “inside the Washington beltway” mentality be-
hind much news coverage misses multiple perspectives and opinions, and even
when presented gutturally and in incomplete form, some of these perspectives
are welcomed and given voice in news satire, as perhaps the preeminent form
of political entertainment. Hence, whereas critics like Kalin see The Daily Show
as disconnecting viewers with politics, the show might instead (or, in addition)
connect and welcome some to politics.
Curiously, meanwhile, for all the powers that many attribute to the media (be-
lieving that they cause violence, eating disorders, rampant consumerism, short
attention spans, and so forth), media literacy programs and courses are still all
too rare. However, in concentrating not only on the news, but on how it is told,
The Daily Show and other news satires may play a small role in shoring up this
gap, and in teaching critical media literacy. In particular, the news’ memory is
often tragically short, as best illustrated when The Daily Show contrasts politi-
cal speeches of today with directly contradictory remarks by the same speaker a
year ago, when the nightly news has already forgotten the earlier speech. Simi-
larly, when Stewart, as a comedian, can ask more incisive and probing questions
of his political guests than do his millionaire newscaster counterparts, one is
forced to demand more of traditional news.

ThE CoLBErT rEPorT anD rEaL TimE wiTh BiLL mahEr
For its part, The Colbert Report took aim at a specific format, and even a spe-
cific show: Bill O’Reilly’s The O’Reilly Factor (Fox News Channel, 1996–). Colbert
made a name for himself on The Daily Show as a field reporter and “analyst,” fre-
quently adopting an abrasive, unapologetically defensive character that segued
easily into his mock role on The Colbert Report as an unabashedly Republican,
O’Reilly-worshipping journalist. Colbert’s show involves numerous self-laudatory
homages, includes frequent irate monologues delivered to the camera, and spe-
cializes in inflammatory rhetoric, as does its satiric target. More directly parodic
than The Daily Show, The Colbert Report thus directs its audience’s attention to
news format and news personalities alike.
Bill Maher has also proven to be an unflinching new news satirist of note, in
some senses Stewart and Colbert’s forebearer. With Politically Incorrect (Com-
edy Central, 1993–97; ABC, 1997–2002) and then Real Time with Bill Maher
(HBO, 2003–), Maher mixed news satire and “straight talk” with a news talk
show format, often to considerable success—and controversy. As do Stewart
and Colbert, Maher adheres to the belief that the news and the world of politics
are so heavily steeped in spin, deceit, and ignorance that the common person’s