SNL: What Does It Do To Politics

Being true to himself, Conan used humor all throughout his speech, undoubtedly keeping the audience’s attention through the whole speech. Being a comedian and television talk show host, Conan has become well known as a comedian, so the use of humor during his speech was appropriate, and was effective in being enjoyable and keeping his audience’s attention. Through his use of humor and movement, the speech seemed less of a deep, heart-felt speech, but more of a conversational, relaxing and enjoyable speech.

Colin Powell had some funny parts in his speech to keep the audience awoke. He made jokes on mostly everything he said. A joke was made about every five minutes. The joke he made was when he said that he wouldn't go to long. All of the graduates of Howard just laughed. I think jokes are an essential part of your speech. If you don't have jokes than your speech will always be on the boring side. I think a joke should be made about two to three minutes of every speech that you make to the public. President Clinton's State of the Union even have jokes in it. I hate it when a public speaker make a speech that last about an hour an never have a single joke. I not saying to try to be a funnyman but just let some semi-funny jokes come at your mouth. Colin Powell didn't have any hilarious jokes but it was enough to grab the audience attention. I remember at my high school graduation when the valor victorian made her speech. I t was the most boring speech in George Washington High School history. She didn't even mention a word about the people who was killed. That speech made me so sick to my stomach. Colin Powell on the other hand made points about the situation that Howard University was going through. He even made a joke about where was Connie Chung (making reference on the news anchor getting fired for making false reports about Howard University).

Television promotes candidates’ image over their policies. Instead of the candidates discussing what they are going to do for the country, they simply argue why they are better than each other. The candidates being televised gives the audience a sense of knowing them, which causes them to lose the audience's interest in political ideals and to be “judged by standards formerly used to assess rock singers and movie stars”(Source B). Instead of the candidates

Celebrities serve as entertainers while the president handles ongoing dilemmas to keep their country safe. By mixing the two positions, all would be a joke. Elaborated in Source B, it states that “television’s celebrity system… presidents are losing their distinctiveness as social actors and hence are often judged by standards formerly used to assess rock singers and movie stars”. As claimed, the source depicts that the television’s intentions are to make candidates relatable to singers/movie stars, pulling them away from their important role of providing for their country. With this, it suggests that the purpose of broadcasts aren’t to promote the ideas of how the candidates will guide the country into a better future, but rather, are more fond of the drama and reality aspects of the candidate’s lives.

Many comedians have been talking a great deal about politics and the government as a way to spread a variety of messages to the community expressing how they feel about how things are going for America. Therefore many comedians have become more popular in this past election season and with Trump 's new presidency. Stephen Colbert an American comedian, television host, and author uses his spotlight in media as a way to attack President Trump and his administration within his comedy. Colbert uses Juvenalian satire and satirical techniques while discussing politics to reveal his opinions as a way to spread messages to society about the Trump Administration and uses his comedic platform to do so.

America is a culture that enjoys having some time away from the reality of political issues within society. Comedic entertainment has found ways to also inform its audience about important political statements that is used to “refer to any act or nonverbal form of communication that is intended to influence a decision to be made for or by a political party”( Wikipedia), or ideas through a comedic point of view. Comical news is what brings our attention with ease because listening to straight political debates can lead a person to not want to sit and become informed on latest political topics. The culture that society has developed into became accustomed to finding it better to have a laugh about serious news because through humor an audience

Television uses the issues debated and discussed and focuses on the way the candidates respond to issues. There is an increasing focus on why a candidate is saying what they are saying rather than the actual content of their policies or ideas on an issue. This focus is used to formulate an image of an individual candidate, which tends to have a bigger impact than the politics itself. For example, in the most recent election, there was a focus on Clinton’s speech because it was presumed that she was just trying to protect herself and hide her emails. In document A, the author states, “One of the great contributions expected of television lay in its presumed capacity to inform and stimulate the political interests of the American electorate.”

The scene we shot with better acting probably could have been taking directly from a saturday night live skit, that was basically what we were going for because we have seen all the success they have had with political satire in recent years. Elements of satire we used within the project were hyperbole, irony, parody, sarcasm, and generalization. We used a hyperbole in the situation when Daniel tells me to “stay out of his bubble” this was an exaggerated statement that i did not take literally, meaning it's not a physical bubble it's just a symbol.We used irony in the situation where Daniel told me I am not allowed to disagree with his views, it’s ironic because he was disagreeing with my views while telling me I couldn’t disagree with his. Parody was used when I imitated Daniel when he said that we should check the footage. Sarcasm was used when will said he was sorry for the second time because he said he was sorry initially but that apology was not accepted. Generalization was used when Will described all millennials as liberals, that think they have everything figured out and that nobody’s opinion that contradicts their own is

The growing connection between politics and Hollywood has happened for a number of reasons, in a somewhat cyclical fashion. Politicians need Hollywood stars to support their campaigns because celebrities are useful in fundraising attempts and recognition. They have the advantages of fame, wealth, and can easily command press attention. In return, celebrities endorse candidates whose policies are beneficial to their industry. For example, while Clinton was in office he argued for “industry self-regulation and a television rating system, as opposed to formal government regulation” (Ormand and West 38). For this and other reasons, Hollywood stars donated large sums of money to Democratic candidates in return. In 2000, Hollywood contributed $20 million to Democrats as opposed to the $13 million that was contributed to the less Hollywood-friendly Republican party (Ormand and West 40).

On February 28th, 2012 California Senator Barbara boxer attempted to quote The Daily Show bid on the floor of the senate. Senator Boxer said: “Jon Stewart took this issue on and said: Well, I’ll tell you something, I love Blunt Amendment because he says I am an employer and I believe that humor is the best medicine.”

According to Source C, “Our national politics has become a competition for images or between images, rather than between ideals.” This idea can lead to consequences because the person who has a better personality is not guaranteed to be the one who is more capable of leading a country. When the unqualified person is chosen to lead the country, then its citizens will suffer. In source B, the author states, “ Because of television’s celebrity system, Presidents are losing their distinctiveness as social actors and hence are often judged by standards formerly used to assess rock singers and movie stars.” Chances are people who are rock singers and movie stars do not know how to run a country because they focus only on their own image and prioritize that above everything else. In the case of an election, the president should be someone who holds up to the ideals of democracy. With the help of the television, candidate's actions are monitored at all times. But this influence can potentially transform the election into a personality contest that defeats the purpose of a fair

Satire may, in fact, offer more truth than the evening news. “In the new comic order, the most devastating is circulated not by an irreverent observer or a sly opponent but by the target himself… Either way, it’s an unsettling development.” (Kolbert 66). One always has a picture of themselves that they try to live up to. You want to push yourself to be the best politician you can be and shouldn’t settle for anything short of

Presidential Elections in 2016 and presidential campaigns of the Republican and the Democratic Party 's nominees in 2015 and 2016 had become a source of controversy and drama. The participation of the female candidate, who has a high chance of becoming the next U.S. President, controversial remarks of the self-funded billionaire from the Republican Party, major discussions around essential topics, such as economic growth, personal freedom and privacy rights defined the main topics of the debates amongst the candidates. It would be fair to state that the 2016 elections and candidates from both parties have provided enough material to create a multitude of parodies on those debates. There is a variety of key figures, portrayed in these comedic parodies, as well as explicit and implicit messages sent through those parodies. While Republican Party and its leading candidate Donald Trump have given a large volume of reasons for mockery, it is interesting to observe the Democratic Party and the main points that result in the comedic mockery of the debates between the candidates. The main point is that the difference between the implicit and explicit messages has narrowed, mainly as the result of the information availability.

When the poll results in the 2000 election came in, the jokes seemed to last longer than the re-counts. Even now 3 years later the jokes continue to be evoked. Recently at the academy awards, while on stage to receive his academy award for his very humorous gun control documentary “Bowling for Columbine” Michael Moore called George W. Bush “a fictitious president” while following with jokes about the pope and the Dixie chicks.

He utilizes Pathos, as he appeals to the viewer’s emotions many times. One example of this is when he makes fun of Fox News for reporting a study that “A glass of red wine is as good as an hour at the gym”. John Oliver then proceeds to say that the saying is “something your sassy aunt would wear on a t shirt.” Some people might see this as a corny thing for him to say, but in my opinion this is funny because it obviously is not true. By him using humor, he grasps the viewer’s attention in a way that isn’t boring. They are being entertained while also being enlightened.