A proper send-off
A couple of weeks ago the world of satire presented us with bittersweet news. The host of the successful satire news program "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" will be continuing without its anchor and producer Jon Stewart before the year ends.
First let me give some numbers on the show itself and of course its host Stewart. Then I will explain why I chose this as the topic of my weekly article. "The Daily Show" originated on the Comedy Central channel and started its life 19 years ago on July 21, 1996. Later on its name changed to "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart." I have been watching it for at least six years. Indeed, a long time, accompanied by an impressive track record. In its early years the show was hosted by Craig Kilborn until the change of mantle in December 1998. In January 1999, Jon Stewart, the current host, took up and changed the focus of the program to more political subjects and more importantly towards coverage of the mainstream media. As of Feb. 26, 2015, there have been 2,562 episodes aired, and the show enjoys impressive ratings as well as 18 Primetime Emmy Awards. However, earlier this year Jon Stewart said that he was thinking of leaving the program. The reactions from his audience speak for the show's success as well.
As the show gained momentum throughout the years, it became clear that more and more people tuned in not just for satire, witty remarks or "gotcha journalism" but also actually followed the news itself. In fact, even though Stewart himself declared over and over that he is hosting a comedy show and not anchoring a news program when he was facing criticism of bias, it seems clear that especially younger generations find him more credible than any anchor on the biggest TV channels in the United States.
But what made Jon Stewart more relevant for the purpose of this article was about his role as a watchdog of the mainstream media. His constant criticism towards the mistakes of news programs and his team's keen eye catching ethical breaches in the sector also gave him the role of a media ombudsman. In fact, for all intents and purposes he was acting as one when bashing, for example, a favorite nemesis of his: "FOX News." He also showed many that even if we think a shady or shabby story gets past readers or viewers, we should think again. Because even if we do not care about ethics and principles of journalism, there are people who do, and sooner or later we will be subject to profound criticism that in time whittles away our credibility, one bite at a time. Therefore, all media organizations should prioritize handling these breaches internally if they wish to maintain their audience. And by handling it, I certainly do not mean "sweeping under the rug." As Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot said, "The truth, it has the habit of revealing itself."
Another lesson we must learn from the show's success lies in its demographics. Perhaps while transforming journalism and newspapers in order to prevent them from being obsolete, we might take a page from Stewart's book and add a little bit of satire to the ingredients.
On that note, I am saddened to see that there are no counterparts to "The Daily Show" in Turkish media; other than caricature magazines and an Onion News counterpart, "Zaytung," there isn't much satire at all. You might think it is about a difference in cultures or a shortcoming; nonetheless, I would cast my vote with the latter.
First let me give some numbers on the show itself and of course its host Stewart. Then I will explain why I chose this as the topic of my weekly article. "The Daily Show" originated on the Comedy Central channel and started its life 19 years ago on July 21, 1996. Later on its name changed to "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart." I have been watching it for at least six years. Indeed, a long time, accompanied by an impressive track record. In its early years the show was hosted by Craig Kilborn until the change of mantle in December 1998. In January 1999, Jon Stewart, the current host, took up and changed the focus of the program to more political subjects and more importantly towards coverage of the mainstream media. As of Feb. 26, 2015, there have been 2,562 episodes aired, and the show enjoys impressive ratings as well as 18 Primetime Emmy Awards. However, earlier this year Jon Stewart said that he was thinking of leaving the program. The reactions from his audience speak for the show's success as well.
As the show gained momentum throughout the years, it became clear that more and more people tuned in not just for satire, witty remarks or "gotcha journalism" but also actually followed the news itself. In fact, even though Stewart himself declared over and over that he is hosting a comedy show and not anchoring a news program when he was facing criticism of bias, it seems clear that especially younger generations find him more credible than any anchor on the biggest TV channels in the United States.
But what made Jon Stewart more relevant for the purpose of this article was about his role as a watchdog of the mainstream media. His constant criticism towards the mistakes of news programs and his team's keen eye catching ethical breaches in the sector also gave him the role of a media ombudsman. In fact, for all intents and purposes he was acting as one when bashing, for example, a favorite nemesis of his: "FOX News." He also showed many that even if we think a shady or shabby story gets past readers or viewers, we should think again. Because even if we do not care about ethics and principles of journalism, there are people who do, and sooner or later we will be subject to profound criticism that in time whittles away our credibility, one bite at a time. Therefore, all media organizations should prioritize handling these breaches internally if they wish to maintain their audience. And by handling it, I certainly do not mean "sweeping under the rug." As Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot said, "The truth, it has the habit of revealing itself."
Another lesson we must learn from the show's success lies in its demographics. Perhaps while transforming journalism and newspapers in order to prevent them from being obsolete, we might take a page from Stewart's book and add a little bit of satire to the ingredients.
On that note, I am saddened to see that there are no counterparts to "The Daily Show" in Turkish media; other than caricature magazines and an Onion News counterpart, "Zaytung," there isn't much satire at all. You might think it is about a difference in cultures or a shortcoming; nonetheless, I would cast my vote with the latter.
Last Update: March 01, 2015 20:10