In a time where university professors question, or in fact scorn the legitimacy of conventional news such as FOX or CNN, you can be fairly certain that it’s for good reason. Since these channels don’t report whats important in the news, every major media outlet, for several weeks covering the story of some poor individual whose been kidnapped rather than something that actually affects the population (e.g discussing a major legislation that is being passed behind closed doors or the horrendous environmental and corporate crimes that occur on a daily basis locally and across the globe.)
The news we see seems to be more for entertainment and distraction, even fear mongering. Where’s all the good news gone? Paradoxically, it is in satire that we may find a bit of a cure, comedy news programmes such as The Daily Show use parodies of current news headlines and political statements to expose underlying messages and the irony of how artificial and ignorant these people are that run and/or report to the major population. In retrospect (I’m sure the originators of this genre of programming didn’t necessarily identify with the term,) one can describe these shows as a form of mainstream culture jamming. “A mode of resistance to the norms and conventions of mass culture that exposes and opposes the media’s underlying power structures and ideological messages.” (213) In this case using a “more playful, spontaneous form of improvising and engaging with the media” (213) to effectively comment on and provoke some sort of thinking about the issues at hand. While we may not get the most accurate news out of these productions either, they definitely create a much needed discourse about current topics but also concerning the sad state of conventional news. To watch these shows is a great way to get a second opinion of what is being reported and even a more truthful depiction of political characters. Is this useful to the public sphere? I’m curious to see from other classmates blogs whether anyone can argue that is isn’t! If anything, we need more people in the public sphere with the cajones to go against the grain and generally accepted public figures.
Maybe the reason that we can have a form of media in the mainstream which can make fun of and attack these public and political figures which dictate our world is that it isn’t in fact the status quo that gives these clowns their position. Since it is only about 20% of the population that votes for politicians who in effect control the media to some extent, but more than that number watch television (in North America anyhow), it is understandable that shows like The Rick Mercer Report would be commercially successful for going against this unrealistic demographic. On that note, maybe producers should get on the hunt for further truthful representations of the powers that be, maybe it would inspire people to do something about it. Lets face it, even when referencing satire in today’s day and age, if it was on national television you will still be deemed more credible than when quoting a Youtube documentary about these same entities. Of course the majority of viewers are most likely not watching these shows for an honest window into politics, humorous entertainment is what brings them into the public sphere so it’s a bit of a back door for a solid culture jam. Either way, upon these musings I feel like I should watch more late night satire…
Works Cited:
Michael O’Shaughnessy and Jane Stadler. Media and Society. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1999. Print
An Insight to Media and Culture 