Satire and Propaganda Essay

In a sense, the outside pressures can censor a person’s opinion as that person will be held to said opinion for as long as it is remembered. In modern day the ease of consuming news makes it so that the media relays the news of the day to information-seeking Americans, creating few major news channels to inform the masses, often with a political slant. Jon Stewart’s role as a political satirist and news host becomes crucial when placed against the major powers of CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News.

Zinser utilizes his readers emotional appeal, pathos, to prove that “fake” news programs, such as The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, use “deception and dilution” (365). He states that deception is giving the wrong information on purpose; yet, states that The Daily Show does not claim to be a legitimate news source (Zinser 366). Then, Zinser asserts that he “[assumes] that the audience is

Propaganda is hard to define as most definitions do not cover the full meaning of the word. The Webster's Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary defines propaganda as " the systematic propagation or discrediting of a given doctrine or cause by circulation of polemical material, such as posters and leaflets" (1353). However, this definition does not cover the full scope of the of the word. Terence Qualter also feels the definition for propaganda needs to be more refined for its new usage. The definition that he gives is "the deliberate attempt...(to) form, control, or alter the attitudes of other groups...(with) the use of the instruments of communication" (27-28). He goes on to say that the propaganda must be aimed at the group in general because that is the basic nature of the word, in that the most effective propaganda is the propaganda which has a large audience. Qualter does mention, however, that there need be no difference in the propaganda to persuade one and the propaganda to persuade the many (28). Germany did this by controlling the flow of information into the country.

Network News stations like Fox and MSNBC have distorted news information so much so that viewers now turn to comedy central to keep current with the news. Turning to comedians for news is not a horrible idea as long as viewers understand that comedians must also distort news in order to entertain. Now that is not to say that comedians give out fake news; a comedian must first understand the whole of the topic before running it through a comedic process, in which they then begin distorting the information to attain laughter. Jon Stewart has an enormous impact in the media. Many young viewers turn to Stewart for his take on the news. According to Cox of Wonkette.com in an article by Kurtz Howard, The Campaign of a Comedian; Jon Stewart’s Fake Journalism Enjoys Real Political Impact, says “It’s not that young people don’t like politics. The way politics is talked about in the media is alienating. They’re seeing Jon Stewart as a kind of hero who will lead us out of the darkness.” Stewart allows his viewers to keep current with the news by giving sound bites, which they then could verify or explore. While many news reporters believe Stewart to be highly controversial, the majority of young adults will watch Jon Stewart’s comedic take on the news because it is unbiased and attempts to only entertain.

The government makes mistakes in the public that some of us citizens don’t see. Stewart points out those mistakes in an entertaining way to keep people tuned in and informed as well. Jon Stewart helps young citizens gain enough information and knowledge to understand American Democracy. If we don’t know what our governors, president, and vice presidents etc.. is saying during public announcements and speeches that are important than we’ll be lost. Stewart’s show is basically getting people to view those issues in an entertaining way and not being bored throughout the shows.

Hence, the claims are believable as the show relies heavily on the use of various news footages, often in a documentary way that employs archival video to show contrast and contradiction, even if the purpose is satirical rather than reportorial. The content on the show is unburdened by objectivity, journalistic integrity or even accuracy, nevertheless, it speaks volumes with Jon Stewart’s big unauthoritative persona as he attempts to breakdown on selective representation.

Simply hoping to fuel the racial prejudice of citizens to switch parties. This kind of deception is grossly inappropriate, something that should never be represented in the education of the public. However, this is now the case, with networks like Fox and MSNBC. The news landscape has changed to one of politics rather than information. This shift is one that must be exposed for the betterment of American society, and that is what satirical programs such as The Colbert Report, and The Daily Show do. Through a comedic lens and always a skeptical eye, these programs mock the errors that national news has today. In a segment done by Jon Stewart, he dressed as Glenn Beck, a Fox News contributor with his own show at one time, and thoroughly outlined the absurdity of his show. Connecting conservative libertarians to Arians through word break down, and even finding a link between Sesame Street and Hitler, Stewart creates a fantastically over the top representation of the real show. Though theatrical and predominantly for comedic intent, the segment exposes the absurdity of this “news program,” a show that people watched and believed simply because it was branded as the news. This is not to say that comedy news is

I would also along with researching whether people use political satire for their news, is to understand whether the news they’re getting is reliable enough to use as a news source. I think it’s important to know why things gain popularity, and why things continue to grow and grow more popular as the years go by, especially when it comes to the changes of where people get their news and information in order to be a functioning part of our democracy. But the real question is; why do people love political satire, why have they moved from the traditional forms of journalism to political satire programs? It seems that, “the popular demand for Stewart 's narrative signals a larger shift in the way Americans think about news and where they go to get it - away from institutional journalism and its longstanding ethos of objectivity and the authoritative voice and toward more independent voices that essentially return to iconic ideas of the press as a tool for building community and enabling conversations between publics rather than acting as the mass medium it did in the latter part of the twentieth century” (Cutbirth).

In today’s world, the media seems to shape the mindset of society and its people. Whether the media is a news anchor, a newspaper, or even a website- it unintentionally makes the people think a certain way towards the world. The news is supposed to be unbiased. However, Jon Stewart turned this whole news gig into a whole new meaning. Jon was very bias in most situations, but he also was a comedian. With that being said, he used his humor on The Daily Show to get the news out to the public, and he gained viewers by being funny. After watching, “Jon Stewart's Story: How the Fake Newsman Won Over America” argued many points, showed both real and fake news, and what Stewart’s goals actually were.

Stewart takes the news of the day and summarizes in a satiric tone. The success of the daily show brings in viewers of a demographic of young adults who tend to get their political news from the show rather than the headlines of other shows on the news cable networks like CNN, MSNBC, or Fox News. At one point, a culture war ignited between the Daily Show and Fox News. Author David Grondin comments on the culture war that “As a satirical TV show that has made Fox News shows one of its main targets (especially for its negative coverage of the Obama presidency), The Daily Show openly seeks to blur the lines between the real and the fake, entertainment and news—and O’Reilly’s and Beck’s shows were often picked on by Stewart in the first two years of the Obama presidency. Despite all the criticism and negativity, the daily show continues to make people laugh the light-hearted look at Washington and beyond. Another television show that uses political satire every weeknight along with the daily show is their spinoff program called the Colbert report.

“A Project for Excellence in Journalism study found that the substantive content of The Daily Show is quite similar to that of the mainstream press.” (7). The Daily Show and Colbert Report may be over the top with comedy, but it is still as informative as those in the mainstream media are. Audiences of both programs are more knowledgeable than their mainstream media counterparts and newspaper readers. “A 2007 Pew Center Study showed a greater percentage of the Daily Show and Colbert Report viewers scored as high or higher on a political knowledge test than regular viewers of any other television program, internet site or newspaper.” It is ironic that people feel the need to watch a comedy program to become somewhat informed. Some might argue that the negative tone and mockery of politicians and the mass media might make its viewers cynical, but it actually encourages skepticism and holding politicians and the media

Propaganda is defined as “information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.” This can be used as any form of mass media such as television,

The reading assignment R2, Public Discourse and the Stewart Model of Critical Thinking, covers how the Today Show both garnered interest, and bettered it's viewers. Through the use of satire and open debate, the Today Show directly challenged the rationality of modern news, teaching it's viewers to think critically and recognize logical fallacies. This is depicted in several examples throughout the article, divided into sections dedicated to providing a set of examples and explaining their meaning.

However, attracting audiences is not the only purpose of the content. In fact, many media professionals who write and produce these programs, argue that they are behaving in an integral manner and maintaining neutrality and objectivity to their fullest abilities (Nesbitt-Larking: 2009: p.158). Moreover, there are many techniques news programs use that, while helping the program stay within the time limits, add neutrality and professionalism to the content of the news. For instance, in panel discussions on live news programming, like those on CNN, offer opinions from experts on the issue at hand and allow speakers from varying positions on the matter to add objectivity and neutrality (Nesbitt-Larking: 2009: p.158). Similarly, there is focus on live visual and audio content, which adds evidence to the story the journalist focuses on.

Political satire has become a staple to American government and politics in the 21st century. Today, political satire has the potential to be beneficial for civil engagement. Due to the Trump Era, the bounds of what is considered “acceptable” and “unacceptable” within our society is constantly being challenged. Political satire is at a tipping point because of the line between effective and non-effective satire in regards to it’s ability to give the audience information that is easily understandable and humorously ironic. In this paper, I will provide examples from satirists Stephen Colbert, John Oliver, and Jimmy Fallon regarding Trump’s 2017 Immigration proposal, as well as Political Parody and Public Culture by Robert Hariman, a political communication scholar, to display satire as a holistic approach for civil engagement and how it can be both beneficial and detrimental to American civic engagement.