Hypernormalization, Collaborative Analytics, and the Making of “American Stiob”

2021 ◽  
pp. 151-163
Author(s):  
Alexei Yurchak ◽  
Dominic Boyer
Keyword(s):  
The Political ◽  
Central Channel ◽  
Collaborative Process ◽  
Analytical Process ◽  
The Daily Show ◽  
Daily Show ◽  
Academic Scholarship ◽  
News Source ◽  
Colbert Report ◽  
Political Spectrum

This chapter reviews a collaboration that chronicles how an article project comes into being. It provides an analysis of how a collaborative process impacts the conceptual tools and analytical process that have been developed. It also mentions anthropological insight that often has meager beginnings — a hunch, a slight puzzling, an observation or moment of recognition that happens to ramify. The chapter cites that Jon Stewart's The Daily Show had emerged as a rare channel of political insight and sincerity despite being broadcast on the Comedy Central channel and was becoming a go-to news source, especially for many younger Americans. It discusses academic scholarship on The Colbert Report, which revealed that viewers from across the political spectrum found the show funny and thought that Colbert's political sympathies corresponded to their own.

Satire and Journalism

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Peifer ◽  
Taeyoung Lee
Keyword(s):  
News Media ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Cultural Practices ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
The Daily Show ◽  
Daily Show ◽  
Academic Scholarship ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Research Orientations ◽  
The Public Sphere

Satire represents a form of public discourse that invites critical judgment of some sociopolitical folly, absurdity, or contradiction. Through devices like exaggeration, irony, and imitation, a satirical text aspires to cut through spin, deception, and misrepresentation in order to spotlight a given state of affairs as they are or could be. That is, satire is propelled by an impulse to elucidate; to highlight some truth. In many respects, journalism’s normative aspirations are similar to that of satire. Journalism’s guiding principles are commonly discussed in light of a central mission to seek and report the best obtainable version of the truth. Though satirical and journalistic endeavors are often carried out with contrasting tones of sobriety, both forms of discourse exhibit idealism in offering unblinking assessments of social realities. Accordingly, it is hardly surprising that satire and journalism have an extensive history of interplay, dating back to some of the earliest venues of modern journalism. Given satire’s penchant to freely draw from the conventions and norms of a wide range of cultural practices in its pursuit of mounting social critiques, it follows that satire would frequently leverage the tools of journalism for its purposes. The journalism profession has long laid claim to privileged legitimacy in the public sphere, positioning itself as a voice of authority in interpreting public affairs events and issues. Journalism’s traditional (though certainly not uncontested) position of privilege has proven useful to satirists. Likewise, satire’s entertaining and attention-getting qualities have long enticed news media actors. Academic scholarship centered on the interplay of satire and journalism emanates from a variety of research orientations, employs a diversity of methods, and focuses on a wide range of topics and cultural contexts. The bulk of this body of research highlights satirical work that draws from journalism-based conventions and practices (for example, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart), but pockets of scholarship also consider conventional journalism’s engagement with satire. Still other scholars focus more on how the convergences of journalism and satire spawn hybrid forms of discourse that contribute to public culture in meaningful ways. Building on the insights afforded by these diverse lines of research, future satire–journalism scholarship would be well served by continuing to draw from across these multifaceted research streams.

scholarly journals Comedic News

Communication ◽  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Fox ◽  
Edo Steinberg
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Political Information ◽  
New Host ◽  
Related Field ◽  
The Daily Show ◽  
Daily Show ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Colbert Report ◽  
The Colbert Report

With the new millennium came a new source of political information–comedic news. Though it existed prior to the 21st century–indeed, its roots can be traced to 17th-century English country fairs–the genre came into its own during the 2004 presidential election, when young voters in particular began to rely on comedic news as their primary source of political information. The rise in popularity and influence of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and its first spin-off, The Colbert Report, raised a number of concerns and consequently research questions for scholars to examine. How do comedic news shows compare to serious journalism? What questions and concerns do comedic news shows raise about serious journalism? Can comedic news shows serve as a gateway to greater attention to serious news? How is comedic news viewership related to attention to politics, political knowledge, and learning about politics? Does viewing comedic news influence attitudes toward politics and the media, particularly cynicism, and does partisanship moderate these effects? Is there a relationship between viewing and political participation? More broadly, what is the role of comedic news in the political system? This bibliography provides a comprehensive, though not exhaustive, collection of mostly empirical studies addressing these research questions that uphold standards of good social science. For example, experiments should include multiple messages to instantiate study conditions and random assignment to conditions. Thus this bibliography should be particularly useful for those interested in scientific evidence about the influence of these shows. Empirical studies in this emerging area come primarily from political science and communication and thus draw on a number of different theories, and not all studies in this area include explicit theoretical underpinnings. While there is no common theoretical thread running throughout the studies included here, perhaps as this literature matures we will see more, and more common, theoretical grounding to studies of comedic news. In the meantime, although The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and its first and second spin-offs, The Colbert Report and The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore, are no longer running, The Daily Show with its new host, Trevor Noah, is, as are new shows by two former Daily Show reporters, Last Week Tonight with John Oliver and Full Frontal with Samantha Bee, giving viewers plenty more comedic news to enjoy and scholars more material to explore as this emerging genre and related field of study evolve.

РоссияиАвстро-Венгрияв1917г.:дватипареволюции.Поматериаламроссийскойпрессы

2019 ◽  
pp. 78-103
Author(s):  
S.A. Romanenko
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Political ◽  
World War ◽  
Social Democrats ◽  
Left Flank ◽  
Daily Press ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Political Spectrum

The article is devoted to the analysis of representations about AustriaHungary in Russia in political and publicists societies including Bolsheviks, Social Democrats, liberals (cadets), as well as MFA analysts from February to October. On the basis of the materials on foreign policy and the correlation of revolution and world war, from Russian daily press and journalists, which have not been studied before, the author comes to the conclusion that the representatives of the left flank of the political spectrum had neither information nor conceptually built ideas about the situation in AustriaHungary, about the perspectives for the development of revolutionary processes in the multinational state and its direction and aims. On the other hand, this was also largely characteristic of the moods of the AustroHungarian politicians, whether progovernment or opposition,Статья посвящена анализу представлений об АвстроВенгрии в России в политических и публицистических обществахв том числе большевиков, социалдемократов, либералов (кадетов), а также аналитиков МИД с февраля по октябрь. На основе материалов по внешней политике и соотношение революции и мировой войны, из российской ежедневной прессы и журналистов, которые до этого не изучались, автор приходит к выводу, что представители левого фланга политического спектра не имели ни информации, ни концептуально выстроенных представлений о ситуации в АвстроВенгрии, о перспективах развития революционных процессов в многонациональном государстве и его направленности, а также о том, что они не могли цели. С другой стороны, это было также в значительной степени характерно для настроений австровенгерских политиков, будь то проправительственные или оппозиционные, для которых цели национального движения уже в 1917 году играли гораздо большую роль, чем для русских. Для сравнительного анализа на основе архивных материалов приводятся позиции Министерства иностранных дел (Временного правительства) и Петроградского Совета.

Tribunes and Patricians: Fringe Parties in the 21st Century

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry Nedelcu
Keyword(s):  
Financial Crisis ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Debt Crisis ◽  
Party Systems ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Spectrum ◽  
Structural Shifts

The mid and late 2000s witnessed a proliferation of political parties in European party systems. Marxist, Libertarian, Pirate, and Animal parties, as well as radical-right and populist parties, have become part of an increasingly heterogeneous political spectrum generally dominated by the mainstream centre-left and centre-right. The question this article explores is what led to the surge of these parties during the first decade of the 21st century. While it is tempting to look at structural arguments or the recent late-2000s financial crisis to explain this proliferation, the emergence of these parties predates the debt-crisis and can not be described by structural shifts alone . This paper argues that the proliferation of new radical parties came about not only as a result of changes in the political space, but rather due to the very perceived presence and even strengthening of what Katz and Mair (1995) famously dubbed the "cartelization" of mainstream political parties.   Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v7i1.210

scholarly journals Who is the modern ‘traitor’? ‘Fifth column’ accusations in US and UK politics and media

Politics ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmitry Chernobrov
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Social Trust ◽  
The Political ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Modern Politics ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
Political Spectrum ◽  
Opposition Movements ◽  
Western Politics

Accusations of treason and disloyalty have been increasingly visible in both western and international politics in recent years, from Russia and Turkey, to Brexit and the 2016 US presidential election. This article explores ‘traitor’ accusations in modern politics, with evidence from British and American newspapers for 2011–2016. Besides British and American politics, results reveal reported ‘fifth column’ accusations in over 40 countries. I identify three dominant patterns: authoritarian states describing opposition movements as a ‘fifth column’; suspicion of western Muslim populations as potential terrorists; and the use of traitor language to denote party dissent in western politics. Employed across the political spectrum, and not only by right-wing or populist movements, accusations of treason and betrayal point at a deeper breakdown of social trust and communicate collective securitizing responses to perceived threats.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document