The Daily Show: How Do We Know What We Know?

After reading and analyzing John Stuart Mill's On Liberty and Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France, I began thinking about the media and its communication to the masses, how such communication influences or may even dictate what we know. One form of such communication that intrigued me was that in the realm of political communication, specifically in the context of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. With the show's ever growing audience, it seems that, especially when considering Mill's arguments, such a form of communication is coming to heavily influence what we know about the political sphere.

I came across this article, written by Geoffrey Baym from the University of North Carolina Greensboro, "The Daily Show and the Reinvention of Political Journalism" in one of my other classes this semester and I began thinking about how Baym's analysis of the show seems to apply directly to Mill's writing on freedom of thought and discussion and how we come to know what we know. Baym juxtaposes Jon Stewart's "fake news" with the mainstream media throughout his article. It then became very interesting to view this juxtaposition through the lens of Mill's tyranny of the majority and tyranny of thought and feeling- Baym sees, as I think is almost indisputable, the mainstream media and news sources as "commodified," as merely puppets to governmental big wigs, out only to make a profit, and trying to remain patriotic by not questioning what is happening in our without-a-doubt messy political world. The show forces a conversation: it doesn't foster this notion that we can achieve anything in politics by screaming at each other why we are right and they are wrong. Baym uses the term "deliberative democracy" to describe The Daily Show, which falls right in line with Mill's idea that we might be able to arrive at some idea of the truth when we test and improve our own beliefs.

While the show obviously has a reputation of being more left leaning, Stewart brings distinguished politicians, journalists, commentators, etc. on the show for interviews from both sides of the Berlin Wall we have built between political parties. While a lot of the show is satire and parody, the interviews force this idea of a marketplace of ideas to learn. Mill writes that "... the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race..." (Mill, 1869) and Jon Stewart and the show work to not silence any opinion, to not silence the criticism of a distinguished politician when they screw up, but all while drawing multiples of  millions to their TV screens because its "fake news" ignores the social pressure put upon the "real news." The show doesn't conform to the expectations of the news which allows the show to, even while it takes a very humorous approach, discover a justified true belief.

Stewart has been called the most honest man in politics, people have rallied around the comedian, even with calls for "Jon Stewart for President." Why do we think this is? Is it because, while the mainstream media and news sources seem to embrace Burke's arguments, that The Daily Show embrace Mill's? The show doesn't view the masses as unable to handle complex issues and arguments- Burke might argue that Stewart's show couldn't be considered a real source of news because it prompts the audience with issues and questions that are way over their heads, that the more mainstream news are the way to go because, just as Burke "puts my foot in the tracks of my forefathers where I can neither wander nor stumble," they play it safe, follow tradition. The news, while it is supposed to be an undisputed, honest to goodness, source of information, it rarely is anymore: they are all too preoccupied with not upsetting anybody to keep those quotes rolling in and never stepping over the boundaries of patriotism. Stewart and the show attract vast numbers of viewers because they like the humor and they like the truth, they like the criticism when it is deserved and appreciate the praise when it is due to any figure, and they like that things are achieved and decisions are reached with conversation.

Politicians will often debut big news on the set of The Daily Show and it is usually a major stop on the campaign trail. The show and its values have become vital to political knowledge and now, most 18-29 year olds get their information from such a source. While it is reinventing journalism, it can also been seen as an "experiment of living," as a source that reveals the grit of politics and of the news: there is no such thing as a sugar coating or flowery adjectives when it comes to Jon Stewart and The Daily Show.