There
has been so much going on in the news lately and no shortage of topics to
discuss. However, having a baby in the
house has had a rather predictable impact on my writing. That said, I would like to address the retirement
of Jon Stewart. All sorts of luminaries
and dignitaries have spoken of his talent and ability to make others laugh and
that cannot be denied. They have talked
about the groundbreaking nature of his program – The Daily Show. That also cannot be denied. However, what does his success mean? That is my concern.
Jon
Stewart once explained to Fox News that he is not to be taken seriously – he is
a comic on the Comedy Central telling jokes about news-worthy events. I could not agree more. My concern is that his audience does not take
the same view. Recent polls suggest that
a large number of viewers, mostly younger folks, used his show as their only
source of news and information. This is
the first major concern I have about Mr. Stewart’s legacy and those who seek to
continue the same. He made no attempt at
being comprehensive or objective; he made no attempt at providing context,
historical or otherwise. Yet, there are
many Americans who were armed only with the information that Mr. Stewart and
his crack team performed. One might say
that being mal-informed is better than being uninformed. I would hate to live off the difference.
Second,
much of what Mr. Stewart did was satire at various politicians, pundits and
personalities. An old tradition and one
that he did quite well, this is not an attack on such tactics. It is at times necessary to take pot shots at
the popolo grasso in our nation’s
capital. However, with no other news
digested by the viewer, one gets a horribly skewed view of our politicians, the
jobs they are elected to do and the institutions in which they serve. What is the cumulative effect of such slanted
exposure? When one considers that the growing
number of young people who do not vote (yes, I know many other age groups don’t
vote either) and their lack of engagement, what are the consequences for our
Republic? It is nothing good and such a
thought should frighten those who care.
More
than anything else, I’ve seen a growing number of people who cannot take the
serious without the frivolous. I’ve seen
it with my students the most. I assign
them a serious topic to research and present to class and I have to make the
caveat that they are not allowed to make light of the subject or goof off. My students complain saying that the “fun”
will make it interesting without considering that the inherent interest of a
subject is interesting enough. I’ve
written before about the phenomena of education that must be “fun” or news
presented as “entertainment.” The
question that I pose is – what is the impact of this approach?
This
cultural trait is not to be laid at the feet of Jon Stewart. He is a comedian doing his job and he did it
quite well. What is troubling is the
importance that people placed in him – an importance he rejected often. These people range from his viewers who used
him as their sole source of news to those who sing his praises as something
greater than he thought he should be considered. As Neil Postman once said, the idea of being
well-informed is not changing but what it means to be well-informed is. I sometimes wonder if this is what it looked
like when the Roman Empire began to collapse.
