The Daily Show Analysis

Reshaping News Broadcasting, One day at a Time

The 1990’s proved to be a successful decade for America as far as its economy. Following the end of the Cold War, the American economy thrived: unemployment rates rested at a mere 4% as a result of president Clinton’s creation of twenty-two million new jobs and rescue of over eight million Americans from poverty. Similar to any other decade, the 1990’s also facilitated controversial loss for Americans. Following events such as the murder of abortionist Dr. David Gunn, Clinton’s impeachment, and the Columbine mass shooting to name a few, news stations continued to broadcast these events through their biased lens’ and skew the perception of the American public. In the mid-nineties, television network

Comedy Central’s tolerance for the misrepresentation of the news reached an all time low.

This intolerance served as the driving force behind the creation of The Daily Show. Over the show’s lifetime, it evolved from a light-hearted parody of television news presenters to a show that seriously critiqued the underlying messages of news programs themselves and undoubtedly skewed those in power. “It has established itself as a source of legitimate critical examination of American political and media culture, and of current events.” (Popkin) Stewart’s boldness grudgingly earned respect from many big names in politics, further contributing to his credibility.

Craig Kilborn aired as host for the first episode of the daily show on July 21st, 1996 and continued to host through the end of 1998. His successor, Jon Stewart, hosted the show from the 1990’s-2015. During these years of broadcasting, The Daily Show “made its mark as an American late-night talk and news satire television program… strongly focused on politics and the national media.” (Wikipedia) “Describing

itself as a ‘fake news program’, The Daily Show draws its comical satire from recent news stories, political figures, media organizations, and often aspects of the show itself.” (Movie DB) Host Stewart typically opens with a monologue regarding recent headlines and follows with exchanges between the show’s “news correspondents”, who voice a ludicrous and/or humorously exaggerated aspect on a current event. Show host Kilborn/Stewart then goes on to critique current national affairs as well as deliver news nobody else is willing to discuss. Ending the show is a segment devoted to a celebrity interview with guests ranging from actors and musicians to authors and political powerhouses.The critically acclaimed Daily Show went on to receive multiple awards: two Peabody Awards for its coverage of the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, twenty-one Primetime Emmy Awards in the categories of Outstanding Variety, Music, or Comedy Series, an additional seven Emmy nominations in Outstanding Writing for a Variety, Music, or Comedy Program, was selected by Time magazine as one of "The 100 Best TV Shows of All-TIME" and an abridged audiobook edition of the show received the 2005 Grammy Award for Best Comedy Album. (Wikipedia) Technically speaking, in addition to many awards, The Daily Show proved highly successful as Jon Stewart’s last episode garnered over five million people who tuned in to wish him farewell. The Daily Show left behind a legacy that will be forever engraved in American Culture.
Major news networks possess the power to publicly legitimize or delegitimize people, ideas, and point of views. Stewart implies that networks should be more selective about who they have on their shows. “You can trust these folks, because the news networks carefully vet each and every one of their expert analysts - whether they be [the] guy who worked for Fred Thompson’s failed presidential campaign or [the] guy who helped Howard Dean lose..” (Stewart) As host of The Daily Show Jon Stewart felt it was his duty to deliver the truth to his viewers: he accomplished that and much more. Although he is not the first person to hold news networks accountable for what they report, he is the first person with this much influence to publicly reveal falsifications of the news. As a part of his show, Stewart regularly criticizes news networks for their lack of truth in the news they present. “[The Daily Show] reveal[s] hypocrisy and lack of transparency of the political process.” (Popkin) Nobody was spared by Stewart as he targeted big name cable news networks like Fox. Despite The Daily Show’s liberal influence, Stewart did not spare networks like CNN and MSNBC either. An article in the New York Times compares Stewart and the news networks he critiques as a liver and strong alcohol. “In the body of American civil discourse, Jon Stewart [is] our liver.. Sixteen years [is] a pretty good run for a liver, considering how many shots of high-proof bad faith and doublespeak our culture knocks on a daily basis.” (Poniewozik) One of Stewart’s most notable accusation of misrepresentation of news is his commentary on Sean Hannity’s 2010 criticism of President Barack Obama:
Hannity: “Now the president did have a rare moment of honesty during his speech and I hope his viewers around the country are watching this”
Obama: “Taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next year for everybody”
Hannity: “Alright, that’s right. I know the anointed one will make that happen”
Stewart then interjects: “Wow, I can’t believe that the president of the United States would just blurt out everybody’s taxes are going to go up substantially. Probably because he wouldn’t do that.” Following his comment regarding Hannity’s commentary of the president’s speech, Stewart reveals the rest of the statement given by the president that Hannity failed to include. “Under the tax plan passed by the last administration, taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next year for everybody. By the way, this was by design.” By calling to attention Hannity’s blatant lie through incorrect footage cut-off , Stewart reveals how easy it is for big names in the news to mislead viewers.
In addition to holding news shows accountable for their accuracy, Stewart unabashedly interviews many people, earnestly seeking the answers his viewers ask for. Stewart goes as far as to challenge politicians with questions most big name news networks dare not ask, and in doing so, advances the quality of political discourse. His guests tend to be characters of controversy or those who have views that oppose his own. A study in 2007 noted that, of the guests who have declared which political party they belong to, “[fifteen] were conservative, while [eighteen] were liberal,” (Pew Research) and shows that Stewart examines both ends of the political spectrum. Stewart does tend to take a more harsh approach with his right-wing guests, however it is apparent he does so to challenge himself by engaging in an honest discussion to understand the side of people who do not agree with him. Douthat, of the New York Times proposes, “[that] cable news needs..something more like what Stewart himself is doing...Instead of bringing in strategists, consultants, and professional outrage artists who predominate on other networks, he ushers in conservative commentators...for conversations that are...often riveting.” Geoffrey Baym adds, “Stewart’s goal is not the tearing down of the ‘other’ side...but rather an effort to gain greater understanding of national problems and their potential solutions” (85)
While accountability and determination are appealing aspects of The Daily Show, perhaps an even greater function of the show is its ability to expose hypocrisy.

Unless news shows with hypocritical statements are shown back to back, most audiences do not immediately catch the hypocrisy as most people do not openly contradict themselves within the same news program. Que Jon Stewart. Armed with video evidence, Stewart exposes the hypocrisy in the logic of the claims made and in the specific statements made by political figures. He accomplishes this many times by juxtaposing two statements made by the same person but on separate occasions. On one occasion, Dick Morris, a commentator for Fox News, is shown openly contradicting himself on issues of sexism. Stewart first shows him criticizing Hillary Clinton for acting as a victim of sexist comments, while he defends Sarah Palin against the very same sexist comments. (Comedy Central) Also examined is John McCain’s Policy Advisor, Nancy Pfotenhauer, participating in the hypocrisy. Pfotenhauer claims that same comments made about Sarah Palin are the “most outrageous double standards” Stewart then cuts to a compilation of her blatantly contradicting herself. Moreover, The Daily Show presents a significant contrast between the way conservative commentators discuss Democratic candidates and Republican candidates. Stewart calls the integrity and consistency of these news media outlets into question with the implication that their

discussions are simply an analysis of the two viewpoints, and nothing more. Stewart, however, does not limit his criticism to conservatives. For example, in 2009 there was a disagreement surrounding the discharge of openly gay, Arabic, Dan Choy from the United States Military. “Amazingly, in this time of national crisis, when we are marshalling every tool at our disposal to fight...Dan Choy is one of [fifty four] Arabic translators dismissed due to their sexual preference. So it was okay to water board a guy over [eighty] times, but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend.” (Stewart) Stewart sought to point out hypocrisy whenever it was presented. Aside from its left wing views, when given the opportunity to expose hypocrisy, The Daily Show did not pay heed to political boundaries. As a result of this, The Daily show has drastically reduced inconsistencies and duplicities among news stations, and improved the reliability of the political process.
The Daily Show provides valuable insight of the American democratic process and political system. With consistent highlights of hypocritical claims, candid discussions about current affairs, and the exposure of power corruption within news networks, The Daily Show labors to cultivate a better political discourse. “Through sarcasm and humor, the show confronts political dissembling and inaccuracies, demanding a more accountable media and government.” (107) Thus, The Daily Show is a check on the democratic process, with regard to both the media and the political process itself. To the dismay of media critics and scholars, The Daily Show does not fit into one specific category of news broadcasting. Contrary to popular belief, it is not a “fake news show”, however it is not just a comedy show. It is satirical commentary that seeks to foster more reasoned discourse, resulting in the evolution of news broadcasting of the political process.