Discuss
two positive and two negative impacts that political satire/comedy shows have
on political discourse. Overall, do these shows make people more engaged in
political discussion? Or do they make people more cynical about
politics/politicians, which could lead to disengagement? You must offer examples
from at least two comedy programs/comedians to support your arguments. Be sure
to also cite at least two of this week’s readings in your response.
DiSalvo
ReplyDeletePolitical comedy is cynical to some and a form of catharsis for others. Currently one’s opinions of political comedy depend on how he feels about Donald Trump because late-night comedians who tend to lean left see Trump as the ultimate source of material. One host, Seth Meyers said, “Like, no matter what your politics are, I don’t think that Hillary Clinton would’ve given us this much to go through every day”(Setoodeh). Because of their one-sided nature, political comedy shows have both positive and negative impacts on political discourse.
First of all, political comedy on late-night shows gets the non-politically active Americans exposed to politics. The hosts talk about politics in a way that is entertaining and easy for all Americans to understand. They might learn about some aspect of politics that motivates them to go out and vote to support a particular viewpoint. A second positive, is that they offer an alternative type of political conversation in a time when discussion about politics is always caustic. As Billy Nilles explains, “With the world going mad at an ever-increasing rate, audiences wanted someone who would explain it to them without the performative objectivity of the evening news or the spin of the pundits on cable news”(Nilles). Finally, and most importantly, late-night comedy serves as a place for people who are horrified, saddened, and fed up with Trump’s presidency to turn to for relief and validation of their feelings. Watching these shows assures us we are not facing this administration alone.
Trump supporters see political comedy in a very different light. In fact, “Regular viewers of MSNBC and CNN accounted for roughly four times the audience of CBS' The Late Show With Stephen Colbert when compared with Fox fans”(Berr). These shows are deepening the divide between Democrats and Republicans and their tolerance for one another. To some it seems, “People are increasingly living in their own protective bubble where they are afraid of encountering ideas or jokes that challenge their worldviews”(Berr). Secondly, political comedy is a form of bullying in the same way Trump is a bully. Trump is calls people names and comedians like Samantha Bee have responded with name calling, most notably, directed at his daughter. These shows are perpetuating a climate of harsh political discourse while giving viewers something to laugh about.
DiSalvo 2
ReplyDeleteWhile controversial, I believe political comedy ultimately engages Americans in politics. After election day in 2016, I was devastated. I felt as though issues that I cared aboutーeducation, healthcare, the environment, women’s rights, and LGBTQ rights were under attack. I didn’t want to go to school to see Trump fans running through the halls draped in American flags, donning MAGA hats. I knew I wanted to leave the country, as soon as possible. That’s when I stumbled across a multitude of late-night comedians who shared my sentiments. Seth Meyers described going to bed on election night and telling his son he would wake up to the first-female president. When he found out Trump won, he screamed, “We have to get out of here”(Schneider)! and for the first time all day I laughed. While partisan and sometimes rude, political comedy is my escape. It allows me to laugh at our devastating reality. And it motivates me to go out and vote to make a difference, because I know there are others out there that feel the same way as me who are counting on me to help them turn our country in a better direction. Comedian Conan O’Brien took a different perspective. He said, “The optimist in me chooses to be happy that we have fair and free elections...if we don’t get our way, we have the chance to try again”(“Conan on the 2016 election”). He and other late-night comedians, restored faith in Americans bewildered after election night, and inspired us to act on our frustrations. We can laugh about Trump at night, but in the morning we have to wake up ready to resist him.
Works Cited
Berr, Jonathan. "Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television." Forbes, vol. 31 July, 2018.
"Conan on the 2016 Election Results - CONAN on TBS." , directed by Anonymous , performance by Conan O'Brien. , 2016.
Nilles, Billy. "How Late-Night Left Behind the Dancing Itos and Became a Political Battleground.", 28 June, 2018.
Schneider, Michael. "Seth Meyers on Trump’s Victory: ‘I’ve been Wrong about Him at Every Turn’ — Watch.", 9 November 2018, 2016.
Setoodeh, Ramin. "Seth Meyers on Surviving (and Thriving) on Late-Night TV in the Age of Trump.", 2
October, 2018.
Nardone 1
ReplyDeleteOne of the most positive impacts of political comedy is that it promotes a conversation, whether you agree with the viewpoint or not. The conversation might be between college kids staying up to watch or between a parent and their high schooler, either way, more people are becoming politically engaged. Comedy also serves as a critique of the government, which is one of the founding principles of the Constitution. Personally, I think political comedy is just good for us at the end of a long day. Being able to laugh, despite everything that is happening makes people hopeful and feel heard. This is especially true of younger viewers who are just forming their political ideologies. Billy Nilles of E! News discussed the unexpected rise of the Daily Show in his piece, “How Late-Night Left Behind the Dancing Itos and Became a Political Battleground.” Nilles said, “As viewers, especially young, civic-minded ones, tuned in in droves, making an admittedly fake news program into one of the nation's most trusted sources of information.” It is important to keep in mind that for some people late night shows are the only source of political news they get, even with the plurality of social media available. For me, this is also the biggest pitfall of late-night comedy as well. People who solely depend on these shows for news they are not getting all the information. We can’t wholly blame the show for this, people need to be responsible for their own news coverage. The job of the host is to present the information in a humorous way and in doing so they usually have a biased viewpoint. Jonathan Berr of Forbes also pointed out that there is a serious lack of conservatives in late night television. In fact, even the viewership of Colbert, Kimmel, Fallon, Noah, and others show a lack of conservative audiences. “Kimmel’s audience attracted about 80 percent more CNN fans and 46 percent more MSNBC fans than regular Fox News viewers. Fallon's viewership includes about 31 percent more CNN devotees and 16 percent more MSNBC viewers than Fox fans,” (Berr, 2018). So where are all the conservative comedians, and how important is it to have them?
Nardone 2
DeletePolitical comedy is a large part of engaging more people in the political conversation. While it tends to be one-sided, the shows are still able to present current events and political news both while making people laugh, which is what people need right now. Late night is a great way for politicians to make fun of themselves and to connect with voters. People loved when Obama would go on the late night circuit and when he did mean tweets with Kimmel. It humanized him and made him seem more approachable. I think we are also finding the level of political discourse is raised by these shows. Samantha Bee is one of my favorite late-night hosts because of how harsh she is with critique. She is not afraid of the consequences of what she says, even after she was forced to apologize to Ivanka Trump. Bee is always willing to call out politicians, and one of my favorite things is that she doesn't just talk about the president the whole time. She does segments that focus on real issues such as access to abortion and health care, which can help people understand the issue. John Oliver does the same thing. He dissects an entire issue using relevant data and it just happens to be funny while doing it. Another thing to keep in mind is that these are real people. They are affected by the issues as much as we are. When Kimmel went all in on healthcare it was because of his personal connection. “Mr. Kimmel has a personal connection to the debate — his son has a congenital heart condition that, Mr. Kimmel has said, would potentially go untreated under the recently proposed new health care laws if the boy did not have a wealthy father,” (Rutenberg, 2017). A lot of people have said that late night is only about politics, but the argument is that there is always something to joke about. If Trump didn't invite Kanye to the White House then there wouldn't have been hours of comedians making fun of it. Trump really brings it on himself, especially when he engages with them on Twitter. I think political comedy is a great way to get people talking about politics and it plays a role in creating an educated electorate.
Berr, J. (2018, July 21). Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#27a4555e7b44
Nilles, B. (2018, June 28). How Late-Night Left Behind the Dancing Itos and Became a Political Battleground. E! News. Retrieved from https://www.eonline.com/news/947657/how-late-night-left-behind-the-dancing-itos-and-became-a-political-battleground
Rutenberg, J. (2017, September 24). Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.htm
Lindsey Guadagni
ReplyDeleteThe topic of political satire/comedy shows is very controversial. One positive impact political satire has on political discourse is that current issues could reach and inform a new audience that would not have known before. For example, there are tons of people who follow comedy shows instead of politics so making skits about current issues informs the viewer about what is going on. These political issues are reaching a new audience that they may not have reached before. Another positive effect is that it humanizes the politicians. When politicians are able to laugh at and relate to voters it can create a very positive outcome. One negative outcome has fewer viewers because of all the political jokes about president Donald Trump. For example forbes.com article “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television” wrote, “Conservatives who support President Donald Trump are avoiding late-night television shows, which have featured some of the sharpest commentaries about the former reality television star’s performance in office, according to data from TV analytics firm Alphonso.”(Berr, 2018). I personally feel that it depends on if you like president Donald Trump or not. If you like president Donald Trump you might find these late night comedy shows off-putting, but if you dislike Trump you might find these shows comical. For example ‘the audience of CBS' The Late Show With Stephen Colbert when compared with Fox fans. The demographic breakdown was similar at ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel Live and NBC’s The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon. Kimmel’s audience attracted about 80 percent more CNN fans and 46 percent more MSNBC fans than regular Fox News viewers. Fallon's viewership includes about 31 percent more CNN devotees and 16 percent more MSNBC viewers than Fox fans.”(Berr, 2018). Another example of comedians making fun of trump was when Jimmy Kimmel did a skit about Kanye West visiting the White House. Jimmy Kimmel joked about the subject saying “That's the President of the United States sitting quietly while an irrational madman rants and rave at him. Now he knows how we feel.”(Perez, 2018). My overall view on if the late night comedy shows are more positive and negative depends on if you support our president Donald Trump.
Berr, Jonathan. “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Aug. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#ecb93147b44b.
Perez, Lexy, and Katherine Schaffstall. “Late-Night Hosts Dissect ‘Madman’ Kanye West's White House Visit.” The Hollywood Reporter, 11 Oct. 2018, www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/late-night-hosts-dissect-madman-kanye-wests-white-house-visit-1151781.
PART ONE Charlotte Gardner
ReplyDeleteI think that one positive impact that political satire is, is to bring light to serious issues in a way that is easily digested by consumers. By using humor and exaggeration, consumers will be informed of the most popular political problems in a way that will hold their attention and help them remember it more than just watching it on the news. Funny clips are also the most shared clips on social media. For example, Saturday Night Live’s clip of Matt Damon impersonating Brett Kavanaugh has garnered over 22 million views. Another positive impact that satirical shows have is that they do urge people to make a difference in their communities if they are unhappy with the government around them. Although these shows stray from seriousness, they always remind people about the importance of their voices. When the trump Administration was close to revoking laws holding up net neutrality, John Oliver of Last Week Tonight devoted a large segment of his show toward the issue, and made a website for his fans to go to in order to try and save the free internet. One negative issue that political satire presents is usually a massive amount of bias. Especially from Saturday Night Live, hits toward the republican party are prevalent. There have been characters representing the democratic party, but they are not the featured punchline by any means. Since Trump’s candidacy in 2016, Alec Baldwin has appeared on almost every cold opening to portray the president, “Right off the bat, we get treated to Baldwin’s usual Trump talk. His impression is both funny and gut-wrenching in that it reminds us that Baldwin’s impersonation isn’t too far from the truth and this man is really running our country” (Deadline, Ramos).
PART TWO Charlotte Gardner
DeleteThe skits aim to target political issues as a whole, but they often involve members of the republican party as opposed to any other political alignment. Another issue with political satire is that it only covers the mainstream issues. Shows recap the most current and most popular events that are occurring, but cannot possibly summarize every other event. Many young people like me, don’t like to watch the news. However, I tend to use social media to get information on important topics and have been informed by satirical shows. However, just because they cover the biggest topic in the present, doesn’t mean that that problem is the only one that the government is causing. Even though these shows can give up a small amount of information, on a nation-wide scale, they barely clarify all of the problems we have. I believe that people can become politically engaged from these shows, but they aren’t a catalyst for engagement by any means. It can get people talking because of the humor and the actors or actresses who make guest appearances, but I don’t think it causes any meaningful conversation. I think it is very cynical of politicians, but everyone is. The only disengagement these shows would cause is between the show and its viewers. As Forbes states, “Alphonso’s data further illustrates how divided America has become in the Trump era as the media comes increasingly fractured. People are increasingly living in their own protective bubble where they are afraid of encountering ideas or jokes that challenge their worldviews. It's kinda sad” (Forbes, Berr).
Works Cited
Berr, Jonathan. “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Aug.
2018, www.forbes.com/sites/jonathonberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-
television/#23064b6d7b44
Ramos, Dino-Ray RamosDino-Ray. “'SNL': Donald Trump Realizes That Kanye West Is The Black Version Of Himself
During Oval Office Meeting.” Deadline, 14 Oct. 2018.deadline.com/2018/10/snl-cold-open-donald-trump-alec-
bladwin-chris-redd-kanye-west-kenan-thompson-1202482377/.
With so many controversial issues being discussed in our society today, you have to be very careful of what you say and who you say it to. A New York Times article by Jim Rutenberg says, “The job of a late-night comedian was once so straightforward: Give Americans something to laugh about so they can forget about their workday worries. Presidents always made for comedic fodder, as did the daily headlines. But it was all in good fun. And it generally hovered on the edge of the partisan divide” (Rutenberg). Talking about politics can be a very difficult and sensitive subject for some people, especially those who feel strongly about a specific political party. In 2017, Stephen Colbert, comedian and host of “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” hosted the Emmy’s Award Show. For his opening monologue, he wanted to put former White House press secretary Sean Spicer behind a face White House lectern and have him make a fake comment about the size of the Emmy audience-which copies the false claim he made about President Trump’s inaugural crowd. Colbert in fact had Sean Spicer come onto the stage and make the claim. Their were many people angered by this. CNN White House correspondent, Kaitlan Collins wrote in a tweet, “Is it supposed to be comical that the former White House spokesman is now tacitly admitting that he lied to the American people?” (Rutenberg). To people that lean more on the Democratic side, this was not very funny. Jimmy Fallon in the past has stayed out of politics on his show “The Tonight Show”.
ReplyDeleteHowever, after President Donald Trump tweeted at Jimmy Fallon in regards to a previous situation between the two, he could not help but get involved. He opened his nightly monologue by saying “I just want to give a shout out to our show’s No. 1 fan: the President of the United States!” (Yahr). He then went on to say how Melania’s anti-bullying campaign is not working because her husband is bullying him on Twitter. A positive aspect of adding political satire to late night talk shows is that it exposes people to politics. For example, I do not follow politics closely at all. However, I find out information from watching Saturday Night Live. This is a good way to target millenials. Also, joking about controversial issues can bring light to the problem and cause more people to form opinions that did not have one before. This allows many people to become informed without watching or reading dense material about politics. A negative effect of adding political satire to late night talk shows is when viewers who disagree with the content refuse to watch the show. In a Forbes article by Jonathan Berr, it says “Conservatives who support President Donald Trump are avoiding late-night television shows, which have featured some of the sharpest commentaries about the former reality television star’s performance in office, according to data from TV analytics firm Alphonso” (Berr). These shows start to lose their viewers drastically. Also, controversies can develop when a political figure feels they are being attacked. Trump is notorious for tweeting at people who make comments about him, which in return, can cause heated fights between people. Overall, political satire can cause people to become more involved or the complete opposite. The people that find it funny and agree with it become involved, whereas the people who find it offensive, tend to step away from it. I think Johnny Carson summed it up best when he said "I've got nothing to gain from it and everything to lose," Johnny Carson famously told Life Magazine in 1970 about his decision to keep politics out of his Tonight Show” (Nilles).
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited:
Rutenberg, Jim. "Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night." New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017.
Yahr, Emily. "Jimmy Fallon Responds to Trump’s Tweet: ‘I’ve never called this human in my life.’" Washington Post, 26 June 2018.
Berr, Jonathan. "Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television." Forbes, 31 July 2018.
Nilles, Billy. "How Late-Night Left Behind the Dancing Itos and Became a Political Battleground." E! News, 28 June 2018.
Political satire has always been around. Popularized largely through Saturday Night Live, the satirical genre gave birth to such masterpieces as The Colbert Report and The Daily Show. With President Trump taking office, however, every talk show’s writer’s room has gone into overdrive, trying to turn their product into a haven for satire. Traditionally harmless hosts, such as Jimmy Fallon, have even entered the political fray on a number of occasions. Every comedian brings their own unique perspective and delivery, but only the best are able to consistently attract audiences.
ReplyDeleteOne of the distinct benefits of this type of entertainment is the ability for one figurehead to communicate messages to millions of people at a time. Jimmy Kimmel did just that last year, with a heartfelt monologue that worked a personal message into a politically-driven speech: “Jimmy Kimmel was riding a wave of Resistance support, because of the way he eviscerated the latest Republican health care bill on his show,” (Rutenberg 2017). He included an anecdote about his daughter, and how she wouldn’t have been able to have a heart procedure done without the current healthcare, in order to drive the point home. The figurehead comedians have gone as far to team up to try to spread a message: “Now, Fallon and Colbert have teamed up for a video that will kick off both tonight's Late Show and The Tonight Show—a late night first—which finds Colbert hard at work trying to write a Trump-roasting monologue,” (Piester 2018). They combined to set the record straight, while also taking a light-hearted approach (they called each other by the nicknames that Trump used for them (Fallon = lost soul, etc). That’s another advantage that satire provides: no matter how negative the narrative is in U.S. politics, someone is always there to make light of the situation.
Then comes the problems with satire, a genre that is maligned as often as it is praised. Much of the satire in 2018 is aimed at the White House, as opposed to in support of it. While networks are entertaining a certain crowd, but are actually alienating a larger crowd: “For instance, regular viewers of MSNBC and CNN accounted for roughly four times the audience of CBS' The Late Show with Stephen Colbert when compared with Fox fans,” (Berr 2018). That’s a distinct disadvantage of the genre as a whole; you have to stick to one side of the spectrum, and can’t flip-flop to try to please everyone. No matter what, someone will be upset. There also come times when the joke just goes too far. Comedians can be feeling confident in their material, and go for the knockout punch. When it lands, it makes headlines everywhere. When it doesn’t however, it still makes headlines, but for the wrong reasons: “The gag was woefully off-kilter with Mr. Colbert’s brand of principled, political comedy,” Jim Rutenberg said. “Much of his criticism revolved around Mr. Spicer’s role in forwarding the president’s anti-press, ‘alternative facts’ strategy,” (Rutenberg 2017). This was a gag involving Sean Spicer, which caused Stephen Colbert a great deal of scrutiny and controversy.
Overall, I do believe that political satire has a generally negative impact on the political climate in the United States. While it does succeed in calling attention to certain issues, it also makes light of situations that should be taken seriously. For those on which the sarcasm is lost, it can lead to the incorrect message being sent, and can cause more confusion in a world that already struggles to find the truth in media coverage of politics.
Works Cited
DeleteBerr, Jonathan. “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Aug. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#71435bc97b44.
Piester, Lauren. “Stephen Colbert & Jimmy Fallon Unite to Address Trump Comments.” E! Online, E! News, 27 June 2018, www.eonline.com/news/947390/stephen-colbert-and-jimmy-fallon-unite-to-address-donald-trump-comments.
Rutenberg, Jim. “Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html.
Politics is a very dry topic to most, and to make it approachable a lot of people view it through a comedic lens. This allows for others who may not understand politics to approach it more easily and understand the larger issues generally. Political satire is controversial in society, and many argue that for all the positive effects of it, it has many negative impacts as well. Most recently, Saturday Night Live, a longstanding political satire show, created a sketch around the controversial Brett Kavanaugh hearings. According to the article by the Washington Post, Matt Damon portrayed Kavanaugh and his ornery behavior on stage. This can be seen positively, because it draws attention to a part of our government that doesn’t receive a lot – SCOTUS. It’s also positive because it allows people to maybe approach a tough subject and understand the facts of it a bit better. On the other hand, this kind of portrayal can diminish the importance of what actually occurred. Additionally, I think that it can be harmful to make fun of a situation as controversial and personal as the one Christine Ford was in.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to SNL, another political satirical show is Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. This is personally my favorite TV show ever, and where I get a lot of my political information. John Oliver approaches politics sarcastically, but the information is given straight-forwardly. He never deviates the facts, and when the situation calls for it, he speaks quite seriously directly to viewers. The difference between these two shows is that while John Oliver explains the situation and facts at hand, SNL acts it out. SNL takes liberties sometimes, as seen in the article from Deadline. The articles states, “Just two weeks after Kanye West appeared on Saturday Night Live serving up a heaping scoop of his pro-Donald Trump MAGA rhetoric, this week’s cold open — without missing a beat — addressed the meeting of the two minds at the Oval Office earlier this week and it was quite a revelatory moment of realization for Alec Baldwin’s Trump,” (Deadline). The positive effect of a show like John Oliver’s is that people can approach politics in a way that isn’t “dumbed down” and still retains its qualify of the facts. The negative impact of this show is that of any source of information these days, the idea of misinformation. People can take what he says out of context and think they’re knowledgeable about a topic, which can be dangerous. Ultimately, political satire is a great way for people who may not be politically engaged to become informed and vote, but it is also a risky way for people to take information out of context.
References:
DeleteRao, S. (2018, September 30). Matt Damon plays a fiery Brett Kavanaugh in the SNL
premiere's cold open. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/09/30/matt-damon-plays-a-fiery-brett-kavanaugh-in-the-snl-premieres-cold-open/?utm_term=.36e5f1e4fdd3
Ramos, D. R. (2018, October 14). 'SNL': Donald Trump Realizes That Kanye West Is
The Black Version Of Himself During Oval Office Meeting. Retrieved from https://deadline.com/2018/10/snl-cold-open-donald-trump-alec-baldwin-chris-redd-kanye-west-kenan-thompson-1202482377/
Kevin G. Slattery
ReplyDeleteProfessor Lisa Burns
Strategic Communication in the Trump Era
24 October 2018
Blog Post # 8
The art form of comedy and the world of politics have long been intertwined with each other. For decades, comedians have found humor in the policies, mannerisms, and flaws of America’s most powerful political leaders. However, there is an ever increasing focus by comedians to use politicians in their shows and jokes. Nowhere is this more apparent than on the late night comedy shows. A negative of the growing political satire is that comedians risk annoying Pro-Trump supporters while also failing to meet the expectations of viewers who want to see President Trump be criticized (Rutenberg 1). In a way, this political satire serves to divide the American public even more along partisan lines. At this point, I do not believe Americans need to be divided anymore. Another negative of the political satire is there are times when a comedian will harshly criticize a political leader or one of their family members. For example, comedian Samantha Bee used a derogatory term in criticize Ivanka Trump and received plenty of public backlash for her statement (Bradley 1). Increased political satire means relatives related to a public official are also caught in the crossfire. These public attacks by comedians also serve to divide people further.
However, there are positives to the increased use of political satire. One of those positives is that people are more engaged in political discussion because of political satire by late night comedians. For example, more people have tuned in to watch Stephen Colbert on CBS rather than Jimmy Fallon on NBC (Rutenberg 1). This can largely be attributed to Colbert primarily focusing on political satire while Fallon mostly tries to avoid the topic as well as audiences desiring more political satire in their late night comedy. An example of how political satire has led to increased political discussion is when Saturday Night Live parodied the Brett Kavanagh hearings (Rao 1). The sketch was then analyzed and talked about by media outlets such as the Washington Post (Rao 1). I do not believe the current political satire is contributing to the cynicism towards politicians and I do not believe it is leading to disengagement.
Another positive of the political satire in late night comedy is it leads to opportunities for political candidates to reach a broader audience with late night hosts. For example, Jimmy Kimmel had a sit down interview with then congressional candidate Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez about her campaign and topics such as healthcare (ABC). By being able to talk about their policies and ideals on late night comedy, politicians can reach a new audience while also appearing personable and likable.
Works Cited
Rutenberg, Jim. “Colbert, Kimmel, and the Politics of Late Night.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html.
Bradley, Laura. “Samantha Bee Apologizes One Last Time for Ivanka Trump Comment -But with a Catch.” Vanity Fair, Vanity Fair, 7 June 2018, HTTPS://WWW.VANITYFAIR.COM/HOLLYWOOD/2018/06/SAMANTHA-BEE-IVANKA-TRUMP-APOLOGY-FULL-FRONTAL.
Rao, Sonia. “Matt Damon Play a Fiery Brett Kavanaugh in SNL Premiere's Cold Open.” The Washington Post, The Washington Post, 18 Sept. 2018, www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/09/30/matt-damon-plays-a-fiery-brett-kavanaugh-in-the-snl-premieres-cold-open/?utm_term=.3f73cd422a9e.
“Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Jimmy Kimmel Live!
The reality of late night shows is that it is all about forgetting about stress. In other words, the hosts are there to make you relax. On the other hand, because comedy relieves stress, a lot of the content of these late night shows come from the news. This can bring up both positive and negative impacts on political discourse.
ReplyDeletePrimarily, a major positive that these shows have on political discourse is that it brings up the topic. These shows allow people who might have not checked the news, to be aware of what is happening. Also, another good part about this is that it is not shoved in your face. Instead, these hosts bring up the news in a way that you would not get stressed about. I think that this is a really good part of late night comedy shows because they allow people to understand what the news is saying while also keeping the mood positive. Another reason why I think that this is great is because it brings the younger generation closer to the news. As for me, I watch Jimmy Fallon religiously, and although he does not do much with politics, I can still grasp some key highlights of the news world. Also, I pay attention to the news a lot, but I know that a lot of my friends do not watch the news. For this reason, these comedy shows introduces the younger generation to the news.
On the other hand, this can also be a negative because the hosts are “joking” around about the news. This can lead into a lot of complications. For one example, this gives the host a political reputation which can lead to a split in audiences. An article in Forbes stated that “regular viewers of MSNBC and CNN accounted for roughly four times the audience of CBS' The Late Show With Stephen Colbert when compared with Fox fans” (Berr.) If Colbert brought up a joke about republicans, most republicans would change the channel. I think this is because we have grown into a split country; we do not make room for political satire. This happened to James Corden when he felt that he had to apologize for a picture of him kissing Sean Spicer on the cheek. Although we do not know exactly what Corden’s political values are, we know that he “felt compelled to apologize” for the picture (Rutenberg). Another issue that this could lead into is people fighting back. Comedy shows are supposed to be fun, but lately it has gotten to be a bit on the edge. For instance, when Trump called out Jimmy Fallon, that went too far. I do not think that a host of a late night show and the president should be arguing about anything. That really gives a bad look to Fallon for disrespecting like that because now his audience could decrease.
As for another positive impact that comedy shows have on political discourse is that it brings together unity. A great example of this was when Colbert, O’Brien and Fallon did the sketch, “Late Night Lowlifes.” Yes, they were talking badly about the president, but they did it together. I really enjoyed how they came together in order to talk about it instead of doing it individually. In other words, it showed that three hosts, on different channels, all were on the same page. I think that this is what we need in today’s society. It always seems that the different hosts need to be in competition with one another, but this showed that they were choosing our country over their viewers. I really liked this because they could have been ruder with a more cruel joke, but instead they laughed about something so simple as name calling. This ultimately made Trump look like a fool and the hosts look like they were keeping things together.
In my opinion, the one major negative impact that comedy shows have on political discourse is that they are switching from entertainment to politics. Yes, I know that all comedy shows use politics as their content, but we should not be joking about this stuff right now. Between everyone on social media and the news, we do not need more shows that discuss politics. I do understand that it can be funny, but it should not be the basis of the show. We want to watch these late night shows to release stress, not add to it. Bill Carter wrote in the New York Times that “One explanation, he said, is that late-night comedy has always played off the news, and these days, all of the news is about Mr. Trump. Then there is the content of that news, and the reactions it so often causes” (Rutenberg). I agree with this statement completely because it summarizes our society today. Yes, we really do want to laugh, but everything in the news is about Trump which brings back a lot of reactions. These reactions can not always be pretty which is why I think that the heat is rising for television hosts. They are not realizing that our president has a lot to do with the media, but the audience does not want to hear more about Trump. I want to watch these shows to laugh, not talk about politics.
DeleteOverall, I do not think that these shows bring up more political discussion. I think it does bring the show into the media, but it is not the source of news for most people. Most people will go on their apps, on the website or watch it on the TV. Because of this, I do not think that these shows will really have a major impact on increasing political discussion. On the other hand, I do not think that it makes them disengaged either. Basically, people watch these shows to laugh, I don’t think that they are turning it on to find out more about politics.
Works Cited
Rutenberg, Jim. “Colbert, Kimmel, and the Politics of Late Night.” The New York Times, 24 September 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html. Accessed 24 October 2018.
Berr, Jonathan. “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television.” Forbes, 31 July 2018. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#531393d47b44. Accessed 24 October 2018.
Just like anything else, political comedy can have both positive and negative impacts. A positive impact that comedy can have would be to shed light on a situation showing that it is not as bad as many people might think, therefore explaining it from a different point of view. Another positive impact that political comedy can have is that it creates room for people to have a conversation about it and interpret it differently while gaining new insight from the other people that they’re discussing with, as well as giving the hosts of these shows the opportunity to talk about politics in a way that the audience would understand and be able to relate to. Personally, I think that political comedy is a great thing. It allows for people to loosen up, laugh, and say that things aren’t so bad after all. In the article “Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night”, it said “The job of a late-night comedian was once so straight forward: give Americans something to laugh about so they can forget about their workday worries. Presidents always made for comedic fodder, as did the daily headlines” (Rutenberg). Politics are something that are seen as so ridiculously serious and are the main topic right next to religion of “what not to discuss”, so adding some humor into it is beneficial for everyone. Although of course, there is a negative side to political comedy as well. Late night shows that display political comedy could easily give people the wrong information, being that all of the information from that previous day is almost never fully displayed to the extent that it should be. Another negative aspect of political comedy is how some people can see the jokes as bullying, and take some serious offense to them. Now late-night comedy has moved further away from the old broadcast network imperatives – safe and not offensive (Rutenberg).
ReplyDeleteNowadays, the job of a late-night comedian seems to have become a time of choosing sides, and using the politics of that day in their presence that night, which more often than not means talking about President Trump (Rutenberg).
In the article “Jimmy Fallon Tried to Stay Out of Politics. But Trump Sucked Him In”, it talks about how Jimmy Fallon has never been one to really engage in talking about politics on his late-night show, he’s always steered clear of doing so (Yahr). Jimmy Fallon says “it’s just not really what I do, I love pop culture more than I love politics” (Yahr). Although, Fallon seemed to have went against his words by having the President come onto his show where the “hair tousle” interview took place, but he seemed to deeply regret it afterwards and had President Trump even call him out for it. Fallon defended himself by saying he didn’t do it to normalize himself nor to say that he supports Trump’s political beliefs (Yahr).
Works Cited:
Rutenberg, Jim. "Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night." New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017.
Yahr, Emily. "Jimmy Fallon Tried to Stay Out of Politics. But Trump Sucked Him In." Washington Post, 25 June 2018.
What perfect timing for this blog. I am currently taking a Media Research class and I conducted a focus group today. The focus group was centered around finding out whether people feel that late night shows are over politicized. The consensus was simply yes. Many of the the participants felt that late night shows were too politically oriented. I’m not exception to this opinion. I try to keep entertainment and political views fairly separate, and now I find myself in a tough spot. Late night hosts like Jimmy Kimmel and Jimmy Fallon were once funny to me but now I can hardly sit through a Kimmel monologue without him getting political. Shows like SNL seem to not bother me as much however. I feel this is because these are actors playing a role. Dressing up like Trump and exaggerating his behavior is a lot more tolerable for me than Jimmy Kimmel outright calling Trump stupid within the first few minutes of his show. It is just outright disrespectful. Another blatant sign of disrespect comes from a moment “where Mr. Fallon has been widely criticized for being too apolitical — and was eviscerated for playfully mussing Mr. Trump’s hair.” (Rutenberg) I just cannot seem to wrap my head around the fact that people are in such public positions, openly bashing the man who runs our country. You may not agree with the things the president does or says, but that does not give you a free pass to not show respect, something that people seem to demand in today’s society. I know this is not much of a quote from a source but the headline itself seemed to bother me. The headline reads “Jimmy Fallon tried to stay out of politics. But Trump sucked him in” (Yahr). This just rubbed me the wrong way as right off the bat it makes it seem like Jimmy isn’t the bad guy here, despite the fact he messed up a guests hair. While Trump agreed, it put the president in a position that I’m sure made him feel at the very least uncomfortable. I know that we have never had a president like Donald Trump before, but I just can’t seem to rationalize calling a President stupid and messing with his hair on television to a multimillion viewer audience. I think it is important for these public figures to take a step back and really think about how the words they say truly effect people. I am certain that I am not the only one who has been off put by the over politicism of late night shows. The things these hosts say really impact a lot of people, so they should be sure to think before they speak.
ReplyDeleteWork Cited
Rutenberg, Jim. “Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html.
Yahr, Emily. “Jimmy Fallon Tried to Stay out of Politics. But Trump Sucked Him in.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 25 June 2018, www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/06/25/jimmy-fallon-tried-to-stay-out-of-politics-but-trump-sucked-him-in/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5b7857ed42ce.
Dana Vogt (1/2)
ReplyDeleteOctober 25 Blog
I have been a fan of SNL for years and have seen every single episode, from season 1 with Dan Akroid and Andy Kaufman to season 44 with Keenan Thompson and Pete Davidson (ugh). However, the tone of political engagement with a side of sarcasm to lighten the mood has never changed. In fact, SNL’s political pull has only strengthened along with its appeal to millennials. One cast member that has kept his voice in the realm of political satire far beyond SNL is Seth Meyers. He played a very important role in Weekend Update, an iconic episodic skit from SNL that comments on the events of the past week, particularly political events. Despite this, his solo endeavor into late night TV, “Late Night With Seth Meyers”, took a while to find its political groove. According to Variety.com, “Meyers’ pivot to politics wasn’t part of the plan when he started his show in 2014, but it’s become a winning formula that draws an average of 1.5 million insomniacs.” (Setoodeh). His dissections of Trump’s latest tweets, policy announcements, and general buffoonery are a popular point of his show for a reason: people can (usually) more easily understand politics when it is put into a comedic perspective, therefore lessening the seriousness of what is being said. This can be a positive and a negative point for satirical shows in terms of comedy. On one hand, it gets the public to discuss politics more often and in a more “friendly” way. On the other hand, the fact that satire takes the edge off of politics can make issues seem less pertinent than they really are. For example, Meyers has said of Trump that “his campaign was a perfect reflection of what his presidency was going to be” (Setoodeh), which in laments terms means that his campaigning was extremist in the same way that his presidency is, and therefore set the tone for the ridiculous satire that Meyers’ show is now able to produce. This is good for comedy, but bad for our country.
A truly positive aspect of political satire that can be found in “Late Night With Seth Meyers” is that it gives a widely heard voice to the dissatisfied people of America. Comedy feels like a safe space for the unhappy to air their grievances without directly inviting opposition, because if the comedian is only taking themselves half seriously then others will feel obligated to return the same energy, if any energy at all. And, honestly, comedy makes the truth easier to swallow, which is why many people turn to comedy about topics outside of politics as well. In the words of Seth Meyers, “We don’t decide whether or not this stuff happened. It happened. And we’re also going to give you a lot of jokes so it goes down, maybe, a little easier.” (Setoodeh). I like the fact that Meyers emphasized the word “maybe” because there is no guarantee that comedy will soften the blow of life-altering changes, such as Donald Trump becoming president.
Dana Vogt (2/2)
ReplyDeleteOne negative thing about comedy in recent years is the fact that, try as they may, comedians have been unable to avoid the topic of politics. It almost feels obligatory for them to make some sort of comment on the current state of the country. This marriage of politics and comedy feels almost forced at times, cheapening the two in their own rights. According to a Washington Post article, “Jimmy Fallon has never been a fan of talking about politics. ‘It’s just not what I do,’ Fallon said in an interview last October, when asked about the pressure to be in the ‘anti-Trump lane’ like so many of his fellow late-night TV hosts.” (Yahr). This begs the question, is all comedic commentary on politics genuine, or are they simply saying something just to be part of the conversation? At the same time, choosing to stay out of politics can make a comedian, or anyone else for that matter, seem “soft” to those who discuss it at any given time. Inititially, after taking over The Tonight Show from Jay Leno, “Mr. Fallon acknowledged that his ‘Tonight’ will not be a place to go — at least initially — for hard-hitting interviews with politicians or celebrities dealing with some unpleasantness,” the New York Times wrote in a profile. “If that means taking criticism for soft interviews, Mr. Fallon said, so be it.” (Yahr). So, does this shift mean that Fallon compromised his own beliefs, or that he chose to step up to the plate? Overall, I think that politics has its place in comedy, but I am not so sure that comedy has its place in politics. I am also unsure if, at this point, we have the ability to make that choice anymore.
Works Cited
Setoodeh, Rami. "Seth Meyers on Surviving (and Thriving) on Late-Night TV in the Age of
Trump." Variety, 2 Oct. 2018.
Yahr, Emily. "Jimmy Fallon Tried to Stay Out of Politics. But Trump Sucked Him In." Washington
Post, 25 June 2018.
Political satire is one of my favorite forms of comedy. What is so admirable about political satire is that it bridges those who do not follow politics and those who do together. It sets the stage for a national conversation of what is occurring on Capitol Hill. Despite it being funny, it can be a great tool to educate the general public sometimes more effectively than a civics course. A prime example of a bit that has stuck with me for months is John Mulaney’s “A Horse is Loose in the Hospital” sketch. Something as simple as a sketch filled completely with analogies has the power to stick with someone, and I feel like a lot of people would be a lot more inclined to talk about political satire than actual politics because of its light-hearted nature. Another positive of political satire is that it is as critical as regular media. It is like the fourth estate in a sense that it plays a watchdog role on each branch of government, but it has a different dynamic from regular news. It is not nearly as invasive as news, and it gives the chance for anyone to laugh no matter their political views. Political satire is an all-seeing eye that will provide humorous commentary on both aisles of Congress.
ReplyDeleteToday, the realm of comedy has become divided, thus showing the negatives of political satire. Today, the most common (and the easiest) target for comedians is President Trump, since he exhales controversy. Because he is targeted so much by left-leaning media outlets, his supporters now associate late night shows as the enemy as well. Dannagal G. Young, an assistant professor at the University of Deleware explains the misconception of political satire being coined as “liberal”: “The rhetorical structure of satire and irony is more compatible with a liberal psychology and the rhetorical structure of what is called outrage … that genre has been perfected by Limbaugh, Hannity, and now Tucker Carlson. The vibe of those shows is more compatible with a conservative psychology” (Berr 2018). It is understandable for Trump and his supporters to think this, since for generations political satire has always had multiple subjects to talk about, rather than just one. I think that it is important for there to be some balance between Democrats and Republicans. Another negative that is piggy-backing off of the Trump administration is that sometimes jokes can go too far. Comedian Samantha Bee lost sight of what political satire is about when she took aim at Ivanka Trump. Bee immediately knew the consequences of her actions and how the media would react, saying, “I hate that this distracted from more important issues. I hate that I did something to contribute to the nightmare of 24-hour news cycles that we’re all white-knuckling through. I should have known that a potty-mouthed insult would be inherently more interesting to [the media] than juvenile immigration policy” (Bradley 2018). Political satire can be very counterproductive when executed poorly.
Overall, political satire today certainly engages people. My own mother has become more politically active than she ever has in her life, and she will openly attribute SNL and Colbert as two sources that got her so fired up. I feel that today late night shows have been a drive force to engage those who are not politically invested, but disagree with Trump’s administration. However, as aforementioned I also think that it has had an adverse effect on Trump supporters because of their hyper-loyalty to the president and his crusade on the media.
Works Cited
DeleteBerr, Jonathan. “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Aug. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#39881be17b44.
Bradley, Laura. “Samantha Bee Apologizes One Last Time for Ivanka Trump Comment-But with a Catch.” HWD, Vanity Fair, 7 June 2018, www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/06/samantha-bee-ivanka-trump-apology-full-frontal.
The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. “John Mulaney: Trump Is 'A Horse Loose In A Hospital'.” YouTube, YouTube, 9 June 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU2ye11FyIQ.
One negative impact that Malcolm Gladwell of the popular podcast Revisionist History believes is that satire has a negative effect on the political discourse when comedians on SNL make fun of politicians and that it somehow gives them validation. He argues that by making fun of them, the comedians draws attention to them and almost humanize them. When Alec Baldwin makes fun of how messed up President Trump is, the audience takes humor away from that instead of realizing just how messed up he really is.
ReplyDeleteAnother negative impact that political satire could have on political discourse is that people might not know how exaggerated the satire is or the impressions that comedians are doing. For instance, one of the Melissa McCarthy’s Sean Spicer press conferences from SNL has accumulated over 32 million views on the show’s YouTube channel. The odds that the viewing numbers for white house press briefings are that high are very, very unlikely. So that leaves a large majority of people who will see the SNL cold open of Sean Spicer and that will be the only lens that they see that press conference through. Obviously they are being funny, but they are also informing a large majority of people of what is going on through their humor. Luckily they are smart about it, but it could create a dangerous precedent if they weren’t.
One positive influence that political satire has on the political discourse is that shows like SNL and The Daily Show expose younger audiences to what is going on in politics. There are so many millennials who watch those shows and are therefore aware of what is going on in the world. While that Sean Spicer piece could be considered negative, it also revealed his craziness to an entirely new audience.
The other reason political comedy could have a positive effect on political discourse is that it can be used to keep politicians in check. Much like the way that journalism does, comedy can be used to expose the flaws in politicians. Again, take for instance Sean Spicer. The SNL skit went over the top and used comedy to show his distain for the press covering the White House and how he goes about his press conferences. The same can be said for Matt Damon playing Brett Kavanaugh during the investigation into his abuse. Damon obviously went over the top but that segment played up how Kavanaugh essentially lost his mind during the hearings. Though the segment obviously didn’t have an effect on the Senators voting, it did create a reaction amongst the viewers and hopefully kept some of the Senators in check.
Although I don’t think that political satire creates a divide down the political isle, I have always thought it’s pretty interesting that most, if not all, of the late night hosts lean to the left of the political spectrum. That is something that conservatives pushed for after the latest White House Correspondents Dinner. Though the comedian at that dinner typically goes after members of both parties, the comedian is typically more liberal. Part of that might be the audience that political satire services. Jonathan Berr of Forbes talked about this in his article about why conservatives might not like late night television, “ The demographic breakdown was similar at ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel Live and NBC’s The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon. Kimmel’s audience attracted about 80 percent more CNN fans and 46 percent more MSNBC fans than regular Fox News viewers. Fallon's viewership includes about 31 percent more CNN devotees and 16 percent more MSNBC viewers than Fox fans.” On the topic of political satire forcing people to take sides and being sucked maybe too far into the political discourse, Jim Rutenberg of the New York Times said it best in his article, “The job of a late-night comedian was once so straightforward: Give Americans something to laugh about so they can forget about their workday worries. Presidents always made for comedic fodder, as did the daily headlines. But it was all in good fun. And it generally hovered on the edge of the partisan divide. Now, the divide is wider. And this has become a time of choosing sides, embracing the politics of the day in all their ubiquity. In Hollywood and New York — where the late-night shows are based — that often means leaning into the resistance to President Trump.”
DeleteBerr, Jonathan. “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Aug. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#f16c4a37b44b.
Kilkenny, Katie. “In Defense of a Performance That Needs No Defense: Tina Fey's Sarah Palin Impression.” Pacific Standard, 19 Aug. 2016, psmag.com/news/in-defense-of-a-performance-that-needs-no-defense-tina-feys-sarah-palin-impression.
Rutenberg, Jim. “Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html.
Professor,
DeleteThe top comment says "unknown" but it is me, Josh Silverman.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest takeaway that I have noticed in recent satire is how seriously people seem to take it. John Oliver said something along the lines of “People are taking comedians seriously and laughing at politicians” during the storm that was the 2016 election cycle. I was an avid Saturday Night Live watcher during the election and I also thought that Donald Trump’s candidacy was a joke. It was a joke when other Republican candidates started dropping out. It was a joke when he won the primary. It was even a joke when the votes started getting counted. The entirety of Donald Trump’s candidacy for president was a joke to me and many other people who I talked to until it was undeniable, irreversibly, serious. Alec Baldwin’s portrayal of “The Orange” allowed me to believe it was a joke throughout what turned out to be my shared delusion. To me, it seemed that no one took him seriously so, why should I?
Late night television has become a comedic special of the news with a revolving door of speakers. Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon, John Oliver, Conan O’Brien, Seth Meyers and any other comedian with a spot is constantly flooding the market with their thoughts on everything that people have already watched on the news. “‘There’s no example of any kind of sustained attack like this on a politician,’ [Bill] Carter told me last week. ‘There’s a horde of writers writing jokes about Donald Trump every single night’” (Rutenberg). As each show comes an goes with the hour, viewers get more and more of the same information spewed out in different tones. I heard from many people how Hillary Clinton was a robot before Kate McKinnon portrayed Clinton as such on Saturday Night Live. All her performance did was drill it deeper into the minds of viewers who did not think the portrayal would matter. But, as the same opinions and skits get rehearsed, viewers begin to internalize this information and it impacts the choices that they make with their words and with their vote.
Completely fresh takes on news events, like John Mulaney’s “Horse Loose in a Hospital,” motivate me to continue to stay engaged with politics. The analogy (this has never been seen before, how do we deal with it, you cannot send a bird catcher to catch a horse) offered new perspective to me in a time where I had already heard that Trump was an idiot for this and Clinton was not meant to be our first woman president for that. I think that the way for comedy in politics to keep people wanting to stay up to date is by ensuring that each monologue and skit are completely original and do not repeat the same opinions over and over again to viewers. That repetition is how viewers get desensitized to the policies being practiced and the news articles that they are seeing. A fresh takes invigorates the public and draws their attention to the fire.
Works Cited
Colbert, Stephen. “John Mulaney: Trump Is 'A Horse Loose in A Hospital'.” The Late Show, CBS, New York, New York, 9 June 2018.
Corcoran, Nova. “Chapter 4.” Communicating Health: Strategies for Health Promotion, 2nd ed., SAGE Publications, Inc, 2013, pp. 69–93.
Rutenberg, Jim. “Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html.
Weldon, Glen. “Life, Puberty And The Pursuit Of Horniness: 'Big Mouth,' Season 2.” NPR, NPR, 5 Oct. 2018, www.npr.org/2018/10/05/653657218/life-puberty-and-the-pursuit-of-horniness-big-mouth-season-2.
Blog 8
ReplyDeleteSophia Toppo
Political satire and comedy shows have both negative and positive impacts on the overall views and discussions on politics. Politics are usually something no one wants to see on a late night show, but as the entertainment industry and politics are evolving, it is now a normal thing to encounter politics on your late night TV shows. There are many people who enjoy this, and many people who think that the way political figures are being portrayed on the media is inaccurate.
Personally, as a person who dislikes politics, I enjoy watching these late night comedy shows, especially SNL because not only is it entertaining but the messages behind these skits have some truth to them and create conversation. Like the recent Brett Kavanaugh skit on SNL, Matt Damon was dramatically portraying Kavanaugh during his testimony, and not only was it very funny, but in a sense it was accurate. These types of skits are what bring the light to these serious, current issues in society and it leaves a long-term impact on the viewer. By presenting these political issues in a very exaggerated humorous way, it makes the audience think about how despite how funny and entertaining it is, this is actually reflecting what is going on in our government. Another positive impact could be the fact that this allows people to use their platform to express their thoughts and opinions on politics. According to an article, Jimmy Fallon explained that, “Even though ‘The Tonight Show’ isn’t a political show, it’s my responsibility to stand up against intolerance and extremism as a human being”(Yahr, 2). When people have access to platforms that reach out to a large audience, they should not hesitate to use it to express what they believe in. By doing this, it could inspire viewers.
Despite what is good about political satire and comedy shows, talking about politics on these shows don’t always have a good impact on people’s views on politics. Lately, most political satire has been a hit towards Trump, and according to an article, “Conservatives who support President Donald Trump are avoiding late-night television shows”(Berr, 1). Many people understand the humor these night shows demonstrate, but others take it too personally, which can lead to very heated and unnecessary debates. This can tie into how these comedy shows are usually accused of bias. Most of the segments are against the Republican Party, and that could be due to the writers and actors beliefs on politics. This may not cause too many problems for people who like watching these shows, but they people they are making fun of may not like this so much.
DeleteOverall, the late night shows and satire have definitely been heavily steered by politics. People argue that entertainment should turn away for politics because it is a way to escape the reality around us. But the world we live in today revolves around political issues and the entertainment industry is making light of these situations, which could lead to long-lasting impacts on the audience.
Berr, Jonathan. "Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television." Forbes, 31 July 2018.
Yahr, Emily. "Jimmy Fallon Tried to Stay Out of Politics. But Trump Sucked Him In." Washington Post, 25 June 2018.
Cali Kees
ReplyDeleteProfessor Burns
Blog Post #8
25, October 2018
Today’s “Late Night” television has gotten more political than ever and while some view this as a negative thing there are some positives that come out of this new found political satire.
This very prevalent political satire in comedy shows has promoted more conversation than ever. These comedians—Fallon, Colbert, Kimmel, Seth Meyers, etc. have a following. When they do or say things politically controversially it opens up a conversation regarding policy, politicians, etc. Another positive is that it allows people who maybe do not always consume political news, to do so and stay current with current events. Although this is not the ideal situation for consumers to educate themselves on politics and current events it can maybe have the affect on having an increase of people more educated in politics than they have been in the past.
I think these shows ultimately make people more engaged in politics. There are those groups of people who do not consume the nightly news but will consume “Late Night” talk shows. For those groups if there is a particular skit that one of these comedians focuses on a relevant political topic that resonates with them that may even entice them to do research and become more politically engaged. Even if that is not the case at least they become more aware of current events and can more educatedly speak about them. For example when Jimmy Kimmel spoke up about a proposed Republican health care bill. Kimmel had a personal connection to this debate. An article published in the New York Times by Jim Rutenberg, explains this, "his son has a congenital heart condition that, Mr. Kimmel has said, would potentially go untreated under the recently proposed new health care laws if the boy did not have a wealthy father. The response from the right was intense,” (Rutenberg 2). Him speaking was engaging and it resonated with people and because of that they spoke out about it.
A negative is that this is continuing to politicize television networks, in the article “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television,” by Jonathan Berr many stats were listed that compared the number of viewers who watched the “Late Night” shows with those same viewers and whether they preferred CNN, MSNBC or FOX as new sources. One of the statistics were, "Fallon's viewership includes about 31 percent more CNN devotees and 16 percent more MSNBC viewers than Fox fans,” (Beer 1). The trend with all of these comedy shows is that because politics have become a source of comedy with a republican President it appears that more Republicans are avoiding these “Late Night” shows and Democrats are more engaged.
Another negative is that some comedians are taking poking fun at politics too far. A great example of this was given in the Times article, when Stephen Colbert hosted the Emmy’s. He decided to do a bit with Trump’s former press secretary, Sean Spicer, having him put behind a fake White House podium and have him make fake claims about the size of the Emmy audience—reflecting back to the controversy of the inaugural crowd. Many people had an issue with this skit, “Is it supposed to be comical that the former White House spokesman is now tacitly admitting that he lied to the American people?” a CNN White House correspondent, Kaitlan Collins, wrote in a tweet. Entertainment Weekly quoted Julia Louis-Dreyfus as saying, “There’s nothing funny about Sean Spicer and what his actions have been and what his behavior has been about. Period,” (Rutenberg 2). Too many this was taking political satire too far.
Works Cited
Berr, Jonathan. "Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television." Forbes, vol. 31 July, 2018.
Rutenberg, Jim. “Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html.
In the last 50 years, late-night network comedy programs have become highly politicized. It seems that every night hosts are finding a new way to mock the president and other prominent political figures. There are a number of positives and negatives about late night shows being politicized. I think one of the biggest positives is that it may engage or tune people into the political realm that do not already pay attention. Not everyone cares about or follows politics so a show like SNL can get people who don’t pay any attention to politics, to pay a little. These Shows may get people to watch political events, but a negative to this is that it pretty much undermines the serious tone of the political activity. For example, the nature of the Kanye West visit with the president was made fun of relentlessly on late-night TV: “Noah mentioned that he wasn’t buying Trump’s praise of West. “You know, Trump’s mouth said, ‘That was impressive,’ but you can see he was thinking, ‘Is it racist if I call the cops?” Noah joked. Though Noah said he was “not a fan of this new Kanye West,” he was amused that the rapper had the ability to “make Trump feel the way Trump makes us feel every day,” (Perez, Schaffsall). Noah may be speaking rather negatively here, I’m not sure that it will effectively disengage any voters but he could make them more bias. Although satirical political shows can get more people paying attention to politics, it may completely take away the serious nature of any presidential event.
ReplyDeleteAnother positive effect that satirical late-night shows like SNL have is that at its very basis its informing and entertaining people. A viewer might not have known that Sean Spicer was the speaker of the house or that he was even a person, until Melissa McCarthy did her impression of him. While these shows are in a way educating people they also have the negative effect of allowing people to live deeper in their political bubble: “Alphonso’s data further illustrates how divided America has become in the Trump era as the media comes increasingly fractured. People are increasingly living in their own protective bubble where they are afraid of encountering ideas or jokes that challenge their worldviews. It's kinda sad,” (Berr). These shows are more likely to engage a liberal biased person. It’s much less likely for a Jimmy Fallon or SNL fan to be conservative than liberal. If these shows do not start engaging a broader political audience, they could potentially do more damage and create more separation than they might have already created.
Works Cited:
Perez, Lexy and Katherine Schaffstall. "Late-Night Hosts Dissect ‘Madman’ Kanye West's White House Visit." The Hollywood Reporter, 11 Oct. 2018.
Berr, Jonathan. "Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television." Forbes, 31 July 2018.
Rick Lessard
ReplyDeleteJohnathan Swift once argued that in order for poverty stricken Irish families to survive, they should sell their children for food to wealthy gentlemen and ladies. He then went on for the rest of the essay explaining why this is a fantastic idea and even went so far to explaine how to cook the children. In a way, the bar was reset after this piece for political satire and comedy. The tradition of politics and comedy has evolved substantially with television and of course, the internet. The positives have been relatively straight forward: this a way to inform and educate people with the issues and act as a form of catharsis. The negatives of political comedy are the omni present liberal biases and complete exhaustion of from the genre itself.
The first Saturday that Donald Trump won the election, SNL star Kate Mckinnon played on the piano Leonard Cohen’s classic ballad “Hallelujah” for the cold open. There was not one laugh during the entire opening act. Regardless of being on the right or left, most people did not know what was going to happen next and anxiety seemed to drench Americans. Then the jokes began to flow and the it seemed suddenly every late-night comedy show was throwing pointed jokes at the Trump administration. It was a form of catharsis for a country of a lot of scared people. The beauty of the Trump administration was how easy it was and still is, to write jokes about it. As Billy Nilles wrote, “Between a litany of scandals, a revolving door of unbelievably colorful (to put it mildly) staffers, some unprecedented (and, at times, alarming) executive orders, and a federal investigation into his campaign, Trump has provided more fodder for these emboldened comedians than they likely know what to do with.” (Niles) On the first day of his presidency, Donald Trump complained that the size of his inauguration crowd was bigger than Obama’s and the media got it wrong. For a comedy writer, this is like shooting fish in a barrel. Which is even more interesting is that viewers want to see political humor.
Rick Lessard
DeleteThe leader of the late-night political comedy push is Stephen Colbert. Stephen Rutenberg said, “His increasing turn toward Trump jokes as the campaign wore on gave Mr. Colbert and CBS what they needed: ratings, which are, after all, network television’s answer to liquid courage. Mr. Trump doesn’t seem likely to rob Mr. Colbert and his cohorts of material any time soon.” (Rutenberg) Political comedy also informs the viewer of the issues and the key administrators running the country. The Daily Show with Trevor Noah had a segment breaking down all of the Trump administrators. Since the 2016, more and more people know the administrators because the constant barrage and ribbing of these people. The jokes become funnier because they become inside jokes between the host and the audience. For example: John Oliver’s undying love for Steven Mnuchin because they look alike. The Daily Show and the late-night talk shows were eagerly consumed from young people and helped the younger generation learn through the comedians online presence.
The danger of political satire is the bias of a certain side. Almost all of political comedy is aimed at the follies of the right. Jonathan Berr wrote, “Conservatives have long complained that their views are often marginalized by Hollywood which is why the reboot of Roseanne was the surprise hit of the season and lead to Tim Allen's Last Man Standing, another show popular with Trump voters, getting another chance on Fox.” (Berr) Stephen Colbert, Samantha Bee, Bill Mahr, and many others have made their political opinions very clear. Even the more neutral Fallon has started to make fun of the right.
Which is even worse is “political comedy burnout”. There are so many shows making the same jokes that it can become a bombardment. All the variety dilutes the joke and makes them less funny. People do not want to always think about politics and want to escape. Shows lose viewers because of the constant Trump related jokes.
Works Cited
Berr, Jonathan. "Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television." Forbes, 31 July 2018.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#f16c4a37b44b
Rutenberg, Jim. "Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night." New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html
Nilles, Billy. "How Late-Night Left Behind the Dancing Itos and Became a Political Battleground." E! News, 28 June 2018.
https://www.eonline.com/news/947657/how-late-night-left-behind-the-dancing-itos-and-became-a-political-battleground
John McMahon
ReplyDeletePolitics and comedy seem as though they couldn’t be farther apart in terms of likeliness. However, late night television shows and satire sketches like “Saturday Night Live” have found an ally in covering politics to increase viewership. Personally, I believe the coverage of politics in comedy shows only bolsters more political involvement or attentiveness. Comedy shows allow younger audiences or people who are not particularly politically inclined to interact with politics in an alternative way to watching traditional news outlets. I don’t believe comedy shows or late night television shows make viewers less politically engaged but quite the contrary. These types of shows do create cynicism for sure, but more than likely the viewers already watching these shows are watching them because they are existing fans to begin with, not strictly because of the host’s political views.
Late night television and politics isn’t a new relationship. According to an article by E News, “Late-night hosts have been poking fun at the president since Steve Allen began hosting The Tonight Show in 1954”, but “largely kept out of heated debates over policy” (Nilles, 1). One of the biggest catalysts in bringing politics largely into late night was when The Daily Show changed host to Jon Stewart in 1999. Stewart “transformed the show from the lark and the afterthought that it had been into a sharply pointed political machine”, and the new host “took politicians and the news media to task for their glaring hypocrisies and various failings” (Nilles, 1). Stewart was able to transform the show into a trusted news source, even though it was satirical. Different from the drab day to day news coverage, the Daily Show was able to attract “young, civic minded viewers”. By the time Stewart retired from the desk in 2015, he had more than set the blueprint for late night comedy shows to tackle politics.
Although many have become “trusted” news sources, late night television still has very much of a liberal slant to their coverage, much to the dismay of conservatives. One of the disadvantages of comedy-covered late night is that created a partisan divide of sorts, but now the divide is wider (Rutenburg, 1). This is partly to blame on the current administration, as Late Night host Seth Meyers described the White House as “the best writers’ room in comedy.” (Rutenburg, 1). Another disadvantage of comedy shows is that it can act as a misrepresentation news. Some viewers can take what comedians say and do about political figures quite literally, while what they are presenting about the politics/politician is a satirical representation.
At the end of the day, late night television hosts cover politics to stay in the game in terms of ratings. Hosts more often than not have to cover political issues to keep their head above water, and this rat race has a ripple effect on audiences nationwide and how they consume political news.
Blog #8
ReplyDeleteShows containing political satire have positive and negative effects on media consumers depending on which topic is being covered in the program. It seems as though all anybody ever hears about with regards to politics is serious subject matter. Making it realistic for a select audience to sit back and laugh at the different political satire shows on television.
Politically motivated satirical shows have a positive impact on society because they give voters another source of obtaining their news. For example, shows such as The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, analyze daily political issues and news for comedic purposes. People who do not like the regular news because of its depressive nature are more susceptible to tune into late night television. Daily viewers of shows such as The Daily Show or Jimmy Kimmel Live rely on these comedians to inform them of recent news with a different approach.
Furthermore, satirical shows are positive because they make everyone laugh through troubling and dark times. For example, during the North Korea and Trump feud, most news networks were covering the story as though the country was on the brink of war. Shows such as Saturday Night Live helped to lighten some American viewer’s tensions over the topic. Sometimes, the news can be a heavy load for particular individuals to handle, making satirical shows a perfect escape from reality. Being able to laugh at your problems is important, and so is keeping your spirits high. The best remedy for keeping an individual’s spirits high is through laughter.
On the other hand, these types of shows do have some negative connotations that go along with them. For satirical purposes, a comedian may leave out certain critical information while discussing a topic in order to get a laugh. For example, if a show was satirizing a health care issue it wouldn’t explain what health care is as a whole, but it would most likely make fun of a particular portion of the system. Ultimately leaving out some critical facts regarding the topic.
The article titled, ‘How Late-Night left Behind the Dancing Itos and Became a Political Battleground’ by Billy Nilles states, “Of course, it wasn’t until President Trump, America’s first reality TV president, that the politicization of late-night was truly unlocked and things were kicked into high gear.” Since the 2016 election, political satire has been at an all-time high in terms of audience and participation. This means that more and more individuals are consuming political satire on a frequent basis.
Although I do believe that satirical shows help people get more engaged in politics; I also believe that some people become more cynical about the system, causing disengagement in politics altogether. If too many outlets are satirizing the political system, it could allow people to not put their trust in the government as fully.
The article titled, ‘Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television’ by Jonathan Berr states, “For instance, regular viewers of MSNBC and CNN accounted for roughly four times the audience of CBS’ The Late Show with Stephen Colbert when compared with Fox fans.” This quote clearly indicates a political party split in audience members for late night television. All in all, the benefits of political satire heavily outweigh the negatives.
Works Cited
Berr, Jonathan. “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Aug. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#507e9d737b44.
Nilles, Billy. “How Late-Night Became a Political Battleground.” E! Online, E! News, 27 June 2018, www.eonline.com/news/947657/how-late-night-left-behind-the-dancing-itos-and-became-a-political-battleground.
Blog #8
ReplyDeleteShows containing political satire have positive and negative effects on media consumers depending on which topic is being covered in the program. It seems as though all anybody ever hears about with regards to politics is serious subject matter. Making it realistic for a select audience to sit back and laugh at the different political satire shows on television.
Politically motivated satirical shows have a positive impact on society because they give voters another source of obtaining their news. For example, shows such as The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, analyze daily political issues and news for comedic purposes. People who do not like the regular news because of its depressive nature are more susceptible to tune into late night television. Daily viewers of shows such as The Daily Show or Jimmy Kimmel Live rely on these comedians to inform them of recent news with a different approach.
Furthermore, satirical shows are positive because they make everyone laugh through troubling and dark times. For example, during the North Korea and Trump feud, most news networks were covering the story as though the country was on the brink of war. Shows such as Saturday Night Live helped to lighten some American viewer’s tensions over the topic. Sometimes, the news can be a heavy load for particular individuals to handle, making satirical shows a perfect escape from reality. Being able to laugh at your problems is important, and so is keeping your spirits high. The best remedy for keeping an individual’s spirits high is through laughter.
On the other hand, these types of shows do have some negative connotations that go along with them. For satirical purposes, a comedian may leave out certain critical information while discussing a topic in order to get a laugh. For example, if a show was satirizing a health care issue it wouldn’t explain what health care is as a whole, but it would most likely make fun of a particular portion of the system. Ultimately leaving out some critical facts regarding the topic.
The article titled, ‘How Late-Night left Behind the Dancing Itos and Became a Political Battleground’ by Billy Nilles states, “Of course, it wasn’t until President Trump, America’s first reality TV president, that the politicization of late-night was truly unlocked and things were kicked into high gear.” Since the 2016 election, political satire has been at an all-time high in terms of audience and participation. This means that more and more individuals are consuming political satire on a frequent basis.
Although I do believe that satirical shows help people get more engaged in politics; I also believe that some people become more cynical about the system, causing disengagement in politics altogether. If too many outlets are satirizing the political system, it could allow people to not put their trust in the government as fully.
The article titled, ‘Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television’ by Jonathan Berr states, “For instance, regular viewers of MSNBC and CNN accounted for roughly four times the audience of CBS’ The Late Show with Stephen Colbert when compared with Fox fans.” This quote clearly indicates a political party split in audience members for late night television. All in all, the benefits of political satire heavily outweigh the negatives.
Works Cited
Berr, Jonathan. “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Aug. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#507e9d737b44.
Nilles, Billy. “How Late-Night Became a Political Battleground.” E! Online, E! News, 27 June 2018, www.eonline.com/news/947657/how-late-night-left-behind-the-dancing-itos-and-became-a-political-battleground.
I am most familiar with political comedy and satire through people like Jon Stewart, Steve Colbert, and John Oliver, who are some of the most famous political comedians out there. Overall, I believe that comedy allows serious subjects such as politics to become easily accessible and approachable by everyone, not just politicians. In order for more people to understand or approach more complex and controversial issues, humor and laughter get rid of the barbs that really stand in the way of important political discussion. On the other hand, I think the “Trump Effect” has driven todays political comedy to Trump power hour. Everything in the news is Trump related, and it has reached into political comedy shows like The Late Show and Last Week Tonight. An over-saturation of Trump comedy only weakens the effectiveness of comedy and satire in politics I feel, especially during the 2016 election. Everyone believed Trump to be a joke, and it provided so much content that all we heard about was Donald Trump, from both the media and our favorite political comedians. From “Colbert, Kimmel, and the Politics of Late Night” by Jim Rutenberg, political comedy airing now has become more than the after work laughs it provided in the past. It is described as “absolutely uncharted territory” as political comedy has become politicized and feeds into the sustained comedy attacks on Donald Trump, and even being used as a means to surpass ratings, as Colbert did against Kimmel. “There’s no example of any kind of sustained attack like this on a politician,” says Bill Carter, former NYT writer and author of many books regarding late night talk shows. From the second reading, “Seth Meyers on Surviving (and Thriving) on Late-Night TV in the Age of Trump,” by Ramin Setoodeh, Meyers references how Donald Trump has given him so much content to work with. From the article, Setoodeh writes, Meyers is aware that Trump’s presidency has affected his place on TV. “I think Donald Trump running for president changed the show, because it helped us,” with ratings, content and otherwise. Using political satire for ratings and gaining new watchers isn’t really what I believe to be the best use for comedy in politics.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited:
Rutenberg, Jim. “Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html.
Setoodeh, Ramin. “Seth Meyers on Surviving (and Thriving) on Late-Night TV in the Age of Trump.” Variety, 2 Oct. 2018, variety.com/2018/tv/features/seth-meyers-late-night-trump-1202964321/.
Political comedy and satire has become increasingly popular in recent years. Standup comedians have always commented on current events but now there are entire shows dedicated to political commentary, such as Last Week Tonight with host John Oliver. One of the most major benefits of political comedy and shows like Last Week Tonight, in my opinion, is that these shows make politics and current events more approachable to people who may not be inclined to watch the news. It can help keep people up to date with the current events in our country and around the world in a way that isn’t as intense or “scary.” Comedy and satire is more lighthearted which helps people watch it without feeling all the doom and gloom that they might feel from watching regular news. Similarly, the other benefit to political comedy and satire is that it can provide relief from often times negative feeling news while still keeping people informed. Often times you hear people saying that they don’t like to watch the news because it’s all negative and it makes them feel bad. I find myself feeling that way sometimes, shying away from the morning news because I don’t want to start of my day with all the bad things happening in the world. I find myself turning to people like John Oliver, Seth Meyers, and Stephen Colbert because they still talk about the topics I’m interested in but they do it in a way where I don’t feel like there’s a raincloud over my head for the rest of the day.
ReplyDeleteA drawback of political comedy is that some people just don’t want politics in every aspect of their lives. Sometimes they just want a show that they can watch and get a break from the constant talk of politics and current events. Some late night talk show hosts, such as Jimmy Fallon, have tried their hardest to stay away from politics, but unfortunately Trump’s attacks on the media don’t stop at our news outlets. Back in June Trump tweeted about Jimmy Fallon and a show that they did together, complaining that Jimmy messed up Trump’s hair after Fallon said that he didn’t want to normalize Trump or say that he supports his beliefs in a podcast interview. Fallon responded by donating to a Texas organization that helps give legal counsel to immigrant families in Trump’s name (Yahr, 2018). Jimmy still tries his best to stay out of politics and provide that relief that people are looking for, but it is becoming increasingly harder to do so. The second negative, and the most glaring, is that political commentary tends to lean heavily to the left (Berr, 2018). I can’t even name a popular right wing comedian off the top of my head. This helps fuel Trump’s rhetoric that everyone, besides his diehard base, is attacking him, therefore attacking our country. With a lack of right leaning political commedians, many conservatives may feel alienated, especially when shows they once watched that weren’t political suddenly become political.
Work Cited
Yahr, E. (2018, June 25). Jimmy Fallon tried to stay out of politics. But Trump sucked him in. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/06/25/jimmy-fallon-tried-to-stay-out-of-politics-but-trump-sucked-him-in/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.fcc98b9c956c
Berr, J. (2018, August 01). Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#f16c4a37b44b
Jeffrey Evans
ReplyDeletePolitical comedy shows have been taking over late night television for the last few years. A lot of this change has came from the 2016 presidential election. Ever since trump won presidency, late nights shows have found a way to make jokes about politics which has caused a spike in views. I believe that these shows influence politics in a positive and negative way. Firstly, these shows bring light to politics in a way. Personally, I do not follow politics all that much however when I see a clip of a late night show on social media, it usually teaches me something that has recently occurred in today’s politics. For people like me it is very useful to learn some current events that are happening in the political world in a different form than usual. Usually I wouldn’t follow politics because sometimes it’s just boring and a lot of “drama”, however when I see a funny skit about something that happened it makes it way more enjoyable to watch and learn about. Jim Rutenberg feels that late night comedians have the job of: Give Americans something to laugh about so they can forget about their workday worries. Presidents always made for comedic fodder, as did the daily headlines…” (Rutenberg 2017). This is important because it allows Americans to actually enjoy their selves and maybe even learn something important while laughing. Another useful thing I believe these late night shows bring is shedding light on the wrong doings of the president or government. I believe that a person like me that doesn’t watch the news, would find it helpful to learn about some of the bad things the government is doing. These shows will use a mistake or a wrongdoing of the government/president and make a funny joke about it. Not only are they telling a joke, but they are informing the viewers of the wrong doings and things that the government shouldn’t be doing. If I continue to not what the news, then I could still probably learn a lot about politics through these late night shows. However, these late night shows aren’t always a positive either. These shows can allow people to get the wrong idea or misinformation if they do not pay attention enough. Some skits might be a little biased towards situations and viewers might believe everything they say and do is real. So, I believe that people should watch these shows with caution and an open mind. Lastly, I believe these shows can also be bad is because they are starting to create a huge divide within the country. Jonathan Berr states “Conservatives who support President Donald Trump are avoiding late-night television shows, which have featured some of the sharpest commentaries about the former reality television stars’ performance in office” (Berr 2018). This goes to show you that in today’s world while Trump is in office, many conservatives are feeling disgusted or offended by these late night shows. I don’t think that these shows should be causing such a negative impact on society and that is why somethings should change. Jokes are jokes but when it’s a constant attack on someone, then it starts to lose its true meaning. Overall, I believe that these shows do make people more engaged because like I said a lot of people learn better when it’s through a funny skit or something other than just boring news. People love to laugh and why not use that power to get people more engaged with politics. However, I do believe recently late night shows have been creating a divide and somehow that should be fixed because we are all one country. We do not need to be divided or hate each other of comedy skits.
Work Cited
Berr, Jonathan. "Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs on Late-Night Television." Forbes, vol. 31 July, 2018.
Rutenberg, J. (2017, September 24). Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.htm
Sophie Rodgers
ReplyDeleteDr. Burns
MSS 349-01
October 25, 2018
Before I came to college, I was interested in politics. After I came to college, I became informed about politics. For me, that was a big difference, and I think something that played a big role in that transformation was my joining the Quinnipiac Barnacle, our campus’ satirical comedy newspaper.
I joined last year as a staff writer, and this year became assistant editor. Writing for the Barnacle definitely got me out of my comfort zone by forcing me to become more informed, involved, and outspoken about politics and my own political beliefs. While the paper is not strictly political by any means, even just having to keep up with current events and issues had a big impact on the way I saw our country. It brings a lot of things to the forefront of my mind that probably wouldn’t have been there before.
Similarly, I think that today’s political comedy shows are important, for a few reasons. In many ways, they are an important first step to getting more people informed about political events and issues. Millions of viewers tune in weekly to watch people like Stephen Colbert, John Oliver, Jimmy (Kimmel and Fallon), Samantha Bee, Trevor Noah, and the SNL cast. These shows have become part of our national dialog, in terms of both entertainment and politics. Articles like the ones we were assigned to read for this class are written just to cover episodes or sketches from these shows, complete with quotes and background information. The jokes are what people are watching for, but the humor is rooted in actual events. These shows get the word out about things that may otherwise be buried or forgotten by the public. Whether it is Samantha Bee’s segment on the separation of immigrant children from their families at the border, or Jimmy Kimmel’s emotional criticisms of a Republican healthcare bill, comedians are getting information out to the American people.
I think the biggest positive to political comedy is that the information is relayed in a way that makes it much easier to digest and understand for most people. Watching the official news coverage of an event is certainly more informative, but probably more boring, especially to viewers my age or younger. Comedians take the information and put in in a context that we want to go and watch. Take the SNL premiere Brett Kavanaugh cold open, which currently has almost twenty-two and a half million views on YouTube. The sketch hit nearly every major point from the actual hearings, with actors relaying direct references and quotes from their real-life counterparts. But the humor of it is what drew people in, and kept people referencing it for the next week. Matt Damon’s incredible impersonation got people involved in what was going on. At the end of the day, people want to be in on the joke that everyone else is laughing at. For these shows, that means going out and researching whatever is going on. I think political satire keeps the general public a lot more informed than they would be otherwise.
A negative impact of the rise of late night politics would be its contribution to the divide between parties. It’s no secret that Colbert and Kimmel lean left. In fact, “regular viewers of MSNBC and CNN accounted for roughly four times the audience of CBS’ The Late Show with Stephen Colbert when compared with Fox fans”, while “Kimmel’s audience attracted about 80 percent more CNN fans and 46 percent more MSNBC fans than regular Fox News viewers.” (Berr). The space for more conservative comedy in these types of shows is small, and shrinking. Dannagal G. Young, an assistant communications professor at the University of Delaware, even went as far as to say that “The rhetorical structure of satire and irony is more compatible with a liberal psychology” (Berr). Conservatives may choose to tune in the the variety of right-wing talk show hosts, such as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. But that again separates people. People with different affiliations get their news from different sources, and now their entertainment.
(part 2)
DeleteMany would also point to political comedy as a minefield for hostility and incivility in politics. Jimmy Kimmel came under some fire for describing West as an “irrational madman” who “rants and raves” after the recent lunch between him and Donald Trump (Perez, Schaffstall). Talk show host Samantha Bee “publicly apologized twice” for calling Ivanka Trump a “feckless c**t” on air during her show (Bradley). Comedy, particularly satire, often involves humor at someone else’s expense. In this time of division, it does seem that these comedians are encouraging people to pick a side.
Overall, though, I think political comedy is an important part of the political landscape. We as a nation have to be able to make fun: of our society, our government, and ourselves. It puts things in perspective and gives a fresh view to the grueling 24 hour news cycle we’ve become so accustomed to. These shows give us opportunities to criticise, praise, question, and speak up- all while making us laugh. I see no problem at all with that.
Works Cited
Berr, Jonathan. “Why Conservatives Find Few Laughs On Late-Night Television.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Aug. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2018/07/31/why-conservatives-find-few-laughs-on-late-night-television/#f16c4a37b44b.
Bradley, Laura. “Samantha Bee Apologizes One Last Time for Ivanka Trump Comment-But with a Catch.” HWD, Vanity Fair, 7 June 2018, www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/06/samantha-bee-ivanka-trump-apology-full-frontal.
Perez, Lexy, and Katherine Schaffstall. “Late-Night Hosts Dissect ‘Madman’ Kanye West's White House Visit.” The Hollywood Reporter, 11 Oct. 2018, www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/late-night-hosts-dissect-madman-kanye-wests-white-house-visit-1151781.
^Works cited
ReplyDeleteRutenberg, Jim. “Colbert, Kimmel and the Politics of Late Night.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/24/business/colbert-kimmel-and-the-politics-of-late-night.html.
Nilles, Billy. “How Late-Night Became a Political Battleground.” E! Online, E! News, 27 June 2018, www.eonline.com/news/947657/how-late-night-left-behind-the-dancing-itos-and-became-a-political-battleground.