In order to have a functioning democracy, citizens must be well informed on current events. The public obtains their news from a variety of sources including television, newspapers, and social media. For decades, the spread of social media has become an increasing challenge and citizens are constantly faced with the problem of deciding if the information they are consuming is real or fake. Without the ability to determine this, citizens are unable to make informed decisions on who they should elect to represent them in government.
As one might recall from their American History classes, a democracy is a “government by the people” (“Democracy”). Since power lies with the citizens, they have certain responsibilities that come with being part
…show more content…
To become informed about the world around them, almost everyone uses some form of news to obtain their information, including television, news websites, social media, and even satire. Fake news and satire are often mistaken for one another. While fake news is intended to misinform, satire uses humor to make fun of current issues, such as politics (“Satire”). Saturday Night Live (SNL) is an example of satire. In the months leading up the election, SNL actors would recreate the presidential debates that took place, which provided their interpretation and comedy of the debates. While SNL would make fun of the presidential election, they never included any false …show more content…
People typically write fake news to make money from the advertising (Swartz and della Cava). During the 2016 presidential election, many fake news stories went viral (or were spread quickly). Throughout the campaign the presidential nominees Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, were both subjects of false news stories that were published on social media websites, such as Facebook and Twitter. One false story claiming that “Mrs. Clinton is paying public pollsters to skew results,” was shared by Donald Trump Jr. on Twitter (Rutenberg). In October 2016, an imitation website of NBC News released an article claiming that Donald Trump “had died of an apparent heart attack” (Borchers). An article in the Washington Post stated “The final weeks of the campaign featured a heavy dose of stories about supposed election irregularities, allegations of vote-rigging and the potential for Election Day violence should Clinton win” (Timberg). In an age where news can be spread through social media so quickly, it is challenging to fact-check everything that is posted online. Martin Baron, executive director of the Washington Post, asks, “If people have a society where people can’t agree on basic facts, how do people have a functioning democracy?”
In his essay, “The Good, The Bad, and The Daily Show,” Jason Zinser explores the vices and virtues of so-called “fake” news programs. “Fake” news, as Zinser explains, are those programs that blend newsworthy events with comedy. By examining The Daily Show, Zinser reveals both positive and negative impacts that “fake” news could have on society. As a result, Zinser concludes that there are benefits as well as potential problems with “fake” news programs but insists that the true challenge is determining the net impact on society. The essay, which first appeared in The Daily Show and Philosophy: Moments of Zen and the Art of Fake News in 2007, challenges experts on both sides of the argument who either claim fake news is for entertainment only or that fake news is an acceptable source for information on current events. On one hand, Zinser uses expert testimonies to support his argument that the end result is a better informed public but on the other, he makes logical arguments enhanced by examples to illustrate the potential impacts “fake” news can have on its viewers and mainstream media.
For example, the comedy shows The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon expresses satirical humor concerning politics. His show also demonstrates political satire by telling jokes and even impersonating political figures for the audience. He creates humor through sarcasm that focuses on real issues. His sarcastic humor causes others to feel more confident in their criticism toward politicians. For example, “Jimmy Fallon expresses his humor about Donald Trump, impersonating his appearance and imitating his voice while talking about politics. He uses his humor by impersonating Donald Trump and his sweeping generalizations with Madea (Rogo).” Jimmy Fallon shows people his views through humor and it creates a sense of community to express their agreeable and disagreeable views. As we discussed some ideas about satirical humor that affects political changes, it was important to reveal their feelings about changes in life and drove them to look upon their society or government more
Comedy Central’s Drunk History abridged television series episodes, “Claudette Colvin and Rosa Parks” and “John Adams vs. Thomas Jefferson” feature an inebriated individual that tries to recount moments in history. The Onion’s video clip of “Breaking News: Bullshit Happening Somewhere” mimics a news report of a bear cub being spotted running through a neighborhood. The Drunk History video episodes’ purpose is to slightly inform and entertain viewers of historical moments through a different engaging perspective; the Onion’s video clip’s purpose is to taunt at news reports while retaining their basic sequence and structure. These three videos demonstrate the different use of rhetorical strategies to achieve their purpose while adopting humorous tones to appeal to their viewer demographic.
Popular culture also plays a role in why Americans do not trust politicians. Late-night television shows use politicians in their comedy skits, where their mistakes are punch lines for comedians. A study produced by Jody Baumgartner and Jonathan Morris found that people who view late-night television shows have a more negative view of candidates, (Medvic p. 5). In particular, people who view The Daily Show have drastically less faith in the electoral process, (Medvic p. 5). Russell Peterson argues that these jokes as “implicitly anti-democratic” because they declare the entire system as fraudulent, (Medvic p. 5).
Satire is the most powerful democratic weapon in the arsenal of modern media. Sophia McClennen, the author of America According to Colbert: Satire as Public Pedagogy, describes it as the modern form of public pedagogy, as it helps to educate the masses about current issues (73). In fact, ”a Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey in 2004 found that 61 percent of people under the age of thirty got some of their political news from late-night comedy shows” (McClennen 73). This statistic shows how influential satirical shows such as The Colbert Report or South Park can be.
Many politically based talk shows focus on controversial topics. Their shows aim to cause discussion over many politically controversial topics. The shows cause people from both sides of politics to argue over topics that usually both sides strongly believe in their opinion. The shows begin to turn into a screaming fest, where one side, of the argument, tries to talk over the other side, while the other does the same thing. It shows that without humor or something else being there to lighten the mood a small debate can turn into a fully heated argument. This shows the power of context and diction. Through the use of a humorful tone, when used in the right time and place, people are able to calmly talk about topics that without it would be a full on argument. Through a comedian’s humorful word choice, he is able to make his points usually without completely enraging his audience. Those who don’t use humor or something else to lighten the mood, end up creating an argument that just grows and grows until both sides are screaming at and denying everything the other side says. However, eventually something is said that lightens the mood. This is usually something somewhat comical that both sides can relate to. Whatever it was that was said becomes the thing that both sides can agrees on, and as a result makes the argument
Lately all we hear about is fake news this, fake news that; this has us constantly be on our toes about whether or not the news article we’re even reading is real. In a world where we are more connected than ever, it’s very hard to not share new information; but in light of the recent election there’s started to be a rise of fake news on various social media outlets. The thing is that a lot of people have a hard time telling real news from fake news apart and when someone reads a fake article and shares it. It can cause major problems because these articles have a tendency of spreading like wildfire. What we don’t realize is that this concept of fake news has been around for a very long time.
They are able to use their own judgement as to when the timing is appropriate. As an audience, trying to make fun of those situations would not work because it is not necessarily known to the audience what it felt like to go through that certain situation and then have the ability to make comedy out of that situation. The way the information is delivered and the time it is given changes the way the humor is received. Shows like The Daily Show, The Colbert Report and The Onion are ways for all of us to relate to things that are happening to us currently in a comedic fashion. These shows are all examples of fake news casting outlets.
James Conroy argues that laughter in serious topics has been regarded through the ages as dangerous, deviant, and subversive; yet equally as refreshing, challenging, and constructive. Political humor is extensively used in almost all countries, but political satire is perceived differently from one country to another. The research question is as follows: what factors make political satire an effective tool that affects politics and policy? I argue that humor is more influential when blended with serious topics, such as international relations or politics. Laughter is a great means to put serious topics under the lenses of critical thinking. The use of humor, and political satire specifically can bring about serious political change. Humor can play all sorts of roles in the political process through being informative, educational and influential while keeping its captive entertaining
The introduction of the internet to modern society has brought about a new age of information relation. Since there is no longer a need to wait until the next print day, news from all over the world is available at a person’s fingertips within hours or even minutes of the event. With this advent of such easily accessible information, new problems for the news media have also arisen. Aside from potentially losing good economic standing because newspapers are no longer being purchased in the quantities they used to be, the credibility of the information itself is also put into question. No one would argue that credibility of news sources is unimportant, but there is a discrepancy in what takes precedence; economy and speed or getting the information out correctly at the first publishing by taking the time to make sure all facts are checked. The importance of having a system of checks on all information submitted is paramount. People trust what they read and believe it to be so without always questioning. If all information were to not be checked thoroughly, there would be instances where people read an article only for information included to be wrong and they go on believing such information. This can be very dangerous as misinformed people make misinformed decisions. With an increase in errors being made by citizen bloggers and even major publications, many are worried that journalistic ethics and credibility in the news media are being sacrificed in order to maintain swiftness in the news circuit and to retain personal profits. Though getting information to the masses quickly is a major part of the media’s importance, this should not mean that the credibility of that information being presented should be sacrificed for it...
Television network Comedy Central, obviously known for their comedy programs, has a show called the Daily Show which doubles as a news broadcasting program of sorts. The broadcast is hosted by a South African comedian and actor named Trevor Noah. During the episode of the Daily Show following the democratic debate in Las Vegas, Noah and his news team did a post debate analysis where they presented a few of the main topics of the debate as well as their own remarks on each of the five individual candidates. While the Daily Show focused primarily on the satirical commentary of the top news headlines, the content and presentation can be analyzed through Nosich’s Standards of Reasoning to determine if the comedy show could be considered a reliable news source.
In the presidential election of 2016, one of the factors the candidates running for office used in their campaign was social media. Social media has rose as a new campaign tool. The candidates of the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump used social media as a means of connecting with voters. In 2016, 44% of U.S. adults reported learning about the 2016 presidential election in the past week from social media.(Pew Research Center) People also reported viewing both Donald, Bernie and Hillary’s posts on social media for new election information and news.
Social media is a revolutionary way to connect with friends and family through a single app, much like Facebook. Also allowing the public to be more informed on current events, whether that is an issue in today’s society, all the way to a heartwarming story or a funny video. This sounds amazing and the fact that this type of news outlet is practically new. An issue arises that involves “fake news” and with that comes many opinions on what to do about it. I believe that people browsing these platforms should have a little bit of skepticism behind each story and if the topic truly intrigues someone then they should look into the topic on a reliable resource before passing on the authors misinformation.
In 2016, the U.S. would experience another fiery election between two polarizing candidates, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. While the two definitely had opposite views and agendas, the sole thing they seemed to have in common was how many lies they stated on live television. According to Politifact, during the live presidential debates, the two candidates lied over 50% of the time. While all those lies may have seemed harmless when spoken, the aftermath of such was misinformation sowed among the masses and mass accusations against the other side. Due to the potential damages caused by lying such as misinformation, it can be concluded that although lying may seem harmless or even help in the short run, in the long run, it hurts those involved in it.
From the beginning days of the printing press to the always evolving internet of present day, the media has greatly evolved and changed over the years. No one can possibly overstate the influential power of the new media of television on the rest of the industry. Television continues to influence the media, which recently an era of comedic television shows that specialize in providing “fake news” has captivated. The groundbreaking The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and its spin-off The Colbert Report have successfully attracted the youth demographic and have become the new era’s leading political news source. By parodying news companies and satirizing the government, “fake news” has affected the media, the government, and its audience in such a way that Bill Moyers has claimed “you simply can’t understand American politics in the new millennium without The Daily Show,” that started it all (PBS).