The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

Colbert for president?

Satirist blurs line between news and entertainment

As the 2012 U.S. presidential primary season progresses, the eyes of the U.S. voting public are turning toward the usual array of political pundits, from Rachel Maddow to Sean Hannity. Among television's talking heads, though, no news icon has taken on a more active role than Stephen Colbert. His satirical show, The Colbert Report, allowed him to publicly create a Super PAC with his colleague, Jon Stewart, and to craft an exploratory committee, all for the purpose of pursuing the parodic post of "President of the United States of South Carolina." By subsequently urging South Carolina primary voters to cast their ballots for Herman Cain, Colbert sought to amass attention for his own potential mock presidential run.

While this attempt to garner supporters proved largely unsuccessful, Colbert's scheme did succeed in raising questions about the role of entertainment in politics, as well as the impact of satire upon audiences. Colbert has designed his television program as a "fake news" show, in which he satirizes conservative commentators of the Bill O'Reilly variety.

Rather than approaching daily events in a straightforward or serious manner, Colbert's character manipulates speeches and sound bites and emphasizes minute details in order to, as Colbert explained in a 2006 interview with Charlie Rose, "falsely construct the news."

Although this scheme may seem simple on the surface, the Colbert persona is reportedly interpreted in drastically different ways, depending on the vantage point of the viewer.

According to a 2009 Ohio State University study, "The Irony of Satire," liberal viewers of The Colbert Report tended to think Colbert mocks conservatism through an ironically reactionary persona, while more conservative audiences typically believed that Colbert only pretended to poke fun at the ideological right.

The results of this study point to the potential danger of a program like Colbert's, which appears to simply reinforce the political opinion of those who watch it. If Colbert merely seeks to entertain his audiences with a consistently humorous character, then he has accomplished his goal and should continue in the same fashion. If he endeavors to push a particular political ideology to his viewers, however, then he may want to rethink his strategy.

By blurring the line between news and entertainment, Colbert runs the risk of confusing his followers. Despite the show's satirical intent, the program's title and format could tempt first-time viewers into believing Colbert is simply an entertaining newscaster with passionate opinions and an aggressive interviewing style. Given the extremism of Colbert's character and the deliberate distortion of every story presented, viewing the show as a legitimate source of information could give audience members an entirely unrealistic perspective on current events.

Both Colbert and The Daily Show's Stewart have won the hearts of millions of Americans, but as their South Carolina primary ploy demonstrates, the men represent two distinct and disparate camps of satirical journalism. When the two men collaborate, Colbert has consistently taken on the bolder and riskier positions, albeit behind the mask of his television persona.

While his brazen display of faux super-patriotism and devout Republicanism may give Colbert the leg-up in the entertainment arena, it also makes it more difficult for him to deliver any sort of ideological message to his viewership, at least without risk of confusion. If there's one thing to be learned from Colbert, it is that great entertainment requires both great risk and great sacrifice.

Comments

Latest Podcast

Today, we sit down with both the president and treasurer of the Virginia women's club basketball team to discuss everything from making free throws to recent increased viewership in women's basketball.