Making Sense of News by Making Fun of It
Williams was punished for misrepresenting an episode that happened to him in Iraq during his coverage of the 2003 invasion. Although he reported it accurately at first, the truth apparently was not entertaining enough for him in his retellings, so over time he embellished the story. His own fake news may cost him his TV news career.
Stewart got around that quandary by coming at the news from the other side, as an entertainer with no obligation to be accurate, as long as he got laughs.
Yet, to his credit, he took his role as a political satirist seriously. He walked that thin line between news and entertainment and respected the intelligence of his audience -- too much, some cynics might say -- to be able to tell the difference.
By 2009, after Walter Cronkite died a Time magazine poll asked who is America's "most trusted newscaster," an unofficial title that long belonged to Cronkite. Stewart received more votes than Williams and the other regular network anchors, who, in fairness, probably split the vote between them.
Why is "fake news" more "trusted" than real news? Freed to show as much sarcasm or delight as he wishes, Stewart conveys a sense of straight talk that connects with viewers. Whether you agree with him or not, you know where he stands.
Or as the late comic George Burns used to say, the secret to success in life is "sincerity -- fake that and you've got it made."
Stewart didn't just mock the newsmakers and newscasters. He openly advocated for better news coverage and for more accountability from newsmakers, especially politicians.
For example, a classic "Daily Show" technique of twinning video of a politician's current positions with what he or she said in the past has been popping up with greater frequency on conventional newscasts, it seems. If so, we may have "The Daily Show" to thank for it.
We may never see any newscaster win the respect we used to associate with Cronkite. Those were different times. In an era in which every major institution has let us down beneath the relentless scrutiny of growing media coverage, real subjectivity may sound more credible than the faked objectivity of conventional newscasts.
Instead, it may be the "fake news" that strikes us as more believable, simply because its cynical view seems so closely to match our own.
Still, I don't expect conventional news to disappear. News consumers still want fairness and balance.
But we may be a lot less willing these days to believe fairness and balance when we hear it. In those instances we may be more willing to appreciate those who help us to make sense of the news by making fun of it.
========
E-mail Clarence Page at cpage@tribune.com.
(c) 2015 CLARENCE PAGE DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.
