“Culture jamming” is the process through which a familiar media image or concept is co-opted, deconstructed, demystified and turned against itself. I recently read four articles dealing with various aspects of supposedly “fake news” shows such as The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (TDS) and The Colbert Report. Both are hugely popular satirical TV news programs. Culture jamming is a revolt against mainstream marketing and corporate control. According to Jamie Warner, TDS is a prime example of effective culture jamming.

In the article ‘Political Culture Jamming: The Dissident Humor of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,’ Warner examines this phenomenon. The article focuses on the ways in which politics and political ideas can influence the masses. An important example from the text was the concept of “political branding.”

Politicians use this model to market themselves in the same way corporations use brand recognition to sell products. The idea is to gain un-reflected and automatic trust: “Politicians perform their roles with a smirk and a wink,” according to Lisa Colletta. By creating a brand, the public is essentially able to choose between a Democrat and a Republican – even though there is little difference between the two. Warner argues that political branding works because consumers are “busy people,” thus obliging them to quickly brand themselves without actually understanding why or questioning their own motives. She points to studies which confirm that citizens are not “rational shoppers”: they are basically too lazy to do any comparative research on their own. Furthermore, politicians use pathos, an emotional appeal, to manipulate their audience. According to Warner, the goals of commercial and political branding are virtually identical: “the creation of such unquestioning trust in the brand that the citizen/consumer allows the brand to do the ‘thinking’ for him or her.”

As a faux-news program, TDS employs three specific methods which allow it to simulate legitimacy: 1) the format parodies traditional news broadcasts; 2) it makes strategic use of edited video; and 3) Stewart employs a Socratic interview style from behind his authoritative news desk. A viewer watching the show for the first time might easily confuse Jon Stewart with a “real” anchorman. The set looks identical to a TV studio one might see on the major networks. Like other news programs, video clips are played as Stewart reads the “news.” And, most importantly, he projects an air of objectivity by clever cross-examination, which never seems to express any of his own opinions.

Jon Stewart’s change in status from a fake anchor on a news show parody into a reliable news source was a concern to Aaron McKain in his article from the Journal of American Culture, but he can envision a positive outcome as well. In ‘Not Necessarily Not the News: Gatekeeping, Remediation, and The Daily Show,’ He concludes that “the increased ‘newsiness’ of TDS will have a positive impact on general news reporting itself. Pessimists may see that TDS will be incorporated into the News medium.” McKain claims that “the News takes its cue from TDS and incorporates more comedy and more entertainment into its broadcasts, even at the expense of its own ethos.” According to McKain, TDS is turning the serious business of journalism into entertainment, to the detriment of an increasingly uninformed public. Duh.

McKain examines the complex ways in which TDS parodies official news by exposing what is presented as real to be fake. One of the show’s most effective contributions to TV journalism was the way it exposed the Bush administration’s prepackaged VNRs (Video News Reports), where sound bites were delivered to news outlets with no mediation whatsoever. By playing the clips in tandem, TDS revealed what had not been presented to the public through an unmediated, deceptive process.

TDS and The Colbert Report operate as political culture jammers, disrupting political branding messages. Stewart and Colbert rhetorically sabotage politics and stretch journalistic standards as a foundation of their programs. While both are based entirely on making fun of political messages, the shows are not a joke. TDS has won several awards, including the Television Critics Award for Outstanding Achievement in news and Information, beating out established news programs like 60 minutes, Frontline, Meet the Press, and Nightline. Besides gaining credibility among young people, the show has also been influential in the way that traditional news is presented. The Colbert Report has also been showered with critical accolades.

The format is similar to other news broadcasts. Just like “serious” news programs, TDS features anchor Jon Stewart as he presents the top stories of the day, complete with canned video over his right shoulder.

What’s different between TDS, Colbert and other newscasts is the way in which Stewart and Stephen Colbert satirize the news. TDS in particular serves to lighten the harsh rhetoric of politics, although some critics argue that the show is ideologically based and has the potential to distort the truth. Fans of the show would no doubt insist that Stewart is fair and objective. Others who find themselves the victim of his satire might disagree. I personally think that a lot of Americans don’t understand satirical humor, so they don’t really get the joke. But whatever one’s opinion of the show, it has clearly achieved remarkable success.

By playing the Court Jester, Jon Stewart is able to proclaim many unofficial truths. A good example of this tactic is the way TDS was able to mock the official lies about weapons of mass destruction leading up to the invasion of Iraq (“Mess-O-Potamia”).

In ‘Political Satire and Postmodern Irony in the Age of Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart,’ Lisa Colletta examines the concepts of satire and irony, and their effects on television viewers. What is satire, she asks, and how does it use irony?  These terms are misused today and widely misunderstood in entertainment media. Both indicate mockery, and the author argues that today’s political satire is more cynical and promotes a reality based on the viewer’s interpretation of reality rather than what is really going on behind the scenes. Colletta refers to political satire on TV as a “pastiche” which she defines as a “neutral form of mimicry.”  Television mocks itself, she explains, but it entertains us at the same time. Shows like The Colbert Report and TDS often use more facts in their criticism of the news and political opinions than the “real” news, and in doing so they demonstrate how fake these institutions are becoming. In the end, it appears that this satirical, ironic approach is what’s causing the biggest paradigm shift in news coverage.

Due to the innate power of television, politicians and news anchors have themselves become performers and the focus of the story, rather than the actual reporting. Colletta asserts that the staged antics of politicians and news reporters make it less important who is in power, since all of the players on both sides are just as bogus as the news itself. That is an important contribution to the future of American journalism.

Such as it is.