Not Funny

On the Work of John Stewart and Stephen Colbert Compared to Modern Journalism

                There has been great discourse over fake news shows like “The Daily Show” and the “Colbert Report.” Questions as to whether these shows, headed by individuals who are not reporters but comedians and have no place in real journalism, are a reliable source of news information have been asked again and again. While news parody programs are meant for entertainment purposes only, their audiences have begun to go to them for their daily news information. The idea that Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are sometimes trusted over actual reporters is fascinating and, in fact, understandable. Comedians like Stewart and Colbert do not just regurgitate headlines to the citizens—they analyze the content within the news and delve into critical discussions over topics that are only mentioned as fact in the media. Modern journalists can take this idea of looking beyond basic details and apply it to news coverage in television broadcasts and newspapers while still retaining the basic values of journalism.

                I chose to focus on “The Daily Show,” reading several articles about Stewart’s comedic approach and how it compares to modern news casting. While humorous, I believe it is not the comedy factor that gives Stewart a certain level of reporter credibility. What makes his show both popular and important in relation to journalism rests in the fact that he is unafraid to dig for the truth. “The Daily Show” is not scared to judge officials or politicians. If a person in some form of power says something ridiculous or otherwise damaging to the public in an interview or news story, Stewart brings the mistake to light. By marking the inefficiencies of public figures and discrepancy of businesses, the comedian suggests that his audience pay attention to the words they hear and not to let people in power get away with actions or words that they should be otherwise held accountable for. Journalisms could do this without being biased by equally exposing the faults of both sides of an issue, that way balance is retained while a deeper dig for the truth still prevails. 

                Objectivity is too important to mainstream media and the tip-toing swallows up any sincere viewpoints—even opinion segments or articles can lack any fever. Besides, telling the truth is journalism’s main objective. Reporters should not be writing to keep companies, businessmen, employers, or politicians happy. A new station’s number one obligation should be to its people. The most prevalent priority should be to deliver the truth to citizens. Having a bullshit meter is part of being a community watchdog. Applying this techinique, Stewart calls public figures out and lets them speak for themselves, in person as well as through detached interviews as direct fact checking—what better expert to quote? This should be integrated from John Stewart’s “Daily Show” into serious journalism. One can be objective while still being honest. It is a thin line, but it can be walked. 

                Reporters do not need to try to become more hip or humorous, for this can back fire. Humor in news media is unprofessional and uncalled for in a field that is quite serious. Instead, journalists can learn more realistic and accurate reporting from John Stewart by trying to uncover inconsistencies and political/public lies. Instead of just relaying the points of different sides to a story/argument, writers should delve into the information and facts behind the opinions and try to reveal the truth of both sides to keep objectivity and balance yet still tell the truth better than what modern journalism has been doing. Balance is very important in journalism, so both positive and negative truths should be uncovered—if a reporter just focuses on bad aspects, a cynical twist is spun on coverage. There are just as many constructive stories that go uncovered, just as many beneficial actions and standings that do not get enough exposure. By covering both the good and the bad, a reporter can reveal the truth while still retaining a good sense of balance and avoiding biases. 

                There are some factors that modern journalists can take from programs like “The Daily Show” and apply them to news coverage. Creation of a new formula of reporting is not necessary—a slight modification of existing procedures could help win audience loyalty. Comedy is not one of these factors and, when comparing Stewart’s show to news casting, should be disregarded. But if Stewart’s truth-seeking style is added to real news coverage, the viewership will be better informed. There can be equally as positive coverage of people and events, because it would not be for comedy’s sake it would just be a style applied to certain existing journalistic coverage. Journalists need to dissect news for their audience and not just regurgitate facts. Instead of simply relaying info, reporters should break down the facts and begin to answer questions raised by their own hands, delivering truth to the masses while remaining both balanced and objective.