We all watch shows such as Late Night with Jimmy Fallon and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart in order to get our comedy fix. Even though these are just seen as simply fake news there are many aspects that can be considered more real about them than our "real" news outlets are. What do you think?
What do you mean by "fake" news? I like this idea, but maybe there's a better way to put it. Totally agree though- I'd take my news from John Oliver over Fox news any day. Maybe some discussion of exactly what sets the two apart in terms of censorship and third-party interest, including political agendas, would be an interesting vein of discussion? – dprogosh7 years ago
I think it is also worth noting the degree to which comedy programs take responsibility for what they promote vs traditional news outlets. Jon Stewart has stated numerous times that the daily show is a comedy program and therefore has a responsibility to entertain rather than to inform (I believe he said this in his infamous Crossfire appearance). Fox News reps simultaneously have stated that much of their programming constitutes "opinion news" and likewise does not have as much of a responsibility to be factually accurate or restrained. Comparing these defences certainly seems like it would be worthwhile. It's a very interesting topic and I would love to see more about it myself. – Wolly7 years ago
Many satirical news outcasts are taking relevant topics in our society but forming their news cast in a way that mocks them. this is done within popular subject areas such as politics, and in the entertainment/pop culture universe that so many people are aware of. I would not call it fake, because the topics are relevant but at the same time i would not go as far to call it real. its an interesting idea but i do not believe it has one definitive answer. – nicolewy7 years ago
crikes that's a bad title. -- [To what extent is satirical news satire and to what extent is it news] -- that's the basic idea you're asking. There's numerous interviews with John Oliver whose program [Last Week Tonight] should be counted more than Jimmy Fallon. No one gets news from Jimmy Fallon. But Oliver often maintains the stance that he's not part of the new production industry. Here's merely a comedian with the news as his topic of derision. Stewart has said as much himself. And yet their audiences would see it differently. There are many who get their breakdown of the news from The Daily Show and John Oliver's Last Week Tonight has been so meticulously researched that were it on more regularly people would do the same with his show. This article should also explore the ways we consume news and how it's changed. There was a time when the best way to get news was from a newspaper and reading for an hour or two. Then from listening to a trusted source soberly delivering the news in a way that was always serious and rarely jovial. You can look at how news programs have changed from serious to the current jovial morning programs. The article can explore the way younger generations have even less patience for televised news getting their news from online articles which they can skim and summarize. You can note how the new currency of articles is "Time to Read" and how shorter and more consise articles are more valued now than meticulously laid out article that would take longer to read. With a note obviously considering whethere this is due to a lessening of patience or an increase of workload (more news to know than ever before). The article can explore How after that social networks have become the new platform for news. Even more filtered and summarized than anything else. In an environment where social networks often with limits implied (no one reads long facebook posts) or explicit (twitter has char – wolfkin7 years ago
I truly do not understand what you are trying to say here. If they are satire, they are not "true." But what do you mean by "true"? – T. Palomino2 months ago