Daily Show Discourse

This essay will focus on the extent “soft news” has improved political discourse in the United States exclusively through The Daily Show, analysing episodes, critique of the show and public opinion. This essay will argue that whilst The Daily Show is not reliable as a sole source of political information, and its cynical humour could alienate viewers from politics, it has improved political discourse by challenging the standards of the media, and expectations of politicians, as well as creating a more informed, more analytical America public.

2. Research questions and possible answers:
Politicians:
Is there political support for TDS? Politicians from President Obama and Hilary Clinton to John McCain and Mike Huckabee have appeared on the

Does Stewart favour the Left? Members of both parties have been interviewed on the show, many returning multiple times. Although Stewart attempts to be impartial, critics like Davidson argue TDS is pro-Left. Further research into these areas needs to be done.

Public and Media:
Has soft news improved political discourse? How? Yes and no. It has created both a more analytical and a more cynical audience.
Is soft news reliable and/or informative? Similarly to traditional news forms, TDS needs to be scrutinised and not simply watched by audiences in order to be informative. The reliability is contentious as TDS is first and foremost a comedy show, created to entertain.

3. A brief analysis of the literature relating to your topic. This should include: major debates, agreement and disagreement amongst scholars, absences in the literature if there are any, different approaches and methods (2-3

Feldman and Baum indicate that TDS encourages viewers to seek out the details and context of Stewart’s jokes, which is important in light of Hollander’s argument. Although TDS is not informing viewers, it is giving them the starting point through which they can glean further information. Feldman, along with Baumgartner, Morris and Hart argue that the humour of TDS increases cynical attitudes towards politics, which is important when considering TDS’s overall effect on political discourse. However Painter and Hodges disagree, claiming that TDS teaches viewers “media literacy”, encouraging them to hold journalists and the media to a higher standard, and enabling audiences to analyse what they are being told, rather than blindly accepting it. Painter and Hodges argument explores how TDS achieves this, creating a sophisticated counterargument.

Both Berry and Colapinto emphasise TDS’s role as an entertainment-news programme on a comedy channel, dismissing its responsibility to uphold journalistic standards of traditional news reporting. Both authors explain that viewers who are able to learn from TDS gain an added benefit, but the primary intention of TDS is