Real Fake News: The Daily
Show and New Journalism
Annotated
Bibliography
Baumgartner, Jody. "The Daily Show effect: Candidate Evaluations, Efficacy, and American Youth." American Politics Research 34(2006): 341-367.
This scholarly journal article gave a great amount of information about the audience and the effect of The Daily Show on it. She argues that the show is detrimental to today's youth and thus I use it in my paper as a counterarguement to my own.
Baym, Geoffrey. "The Daily Show: Discursive Integration and the Reinvention of Political Journalism." Political Communications 22(2005): 259-276.
Baym's article was the most helpful for my argument. I agreed with his premise that The Daily Show is a progressive form of journalism that needs to be taken seriously. He was more cynical about the future and longevity of the show, but his arguement that the show is a good source of political discourse was convincing and immensely helpful for my paper.
Colapinto, John. "The Most Trusted Name in News: How Jon Stewart made 'fake news' a hit." Sept 2004. Rolling Stone. 4 Dec 2006. <http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/6539433/the_most_trusted_name_in_news>
Colapinto focuses on Jon Stewart more than The Daily Show itself, but this article was helpful for my understanding of Stewart's goals for the show and his own personal beliefs about what the show should be.
"The Daily Show profiles Bleu Copas, discharged from military under 'Don't ask, Don't tell'". 19 Sept 2006. PageOneQ. 4 Dec 2006. <http://pageoneq.com/news/2006/copas_091806.html>
This article filled in the gaps in my memory about the parody piece in which The Daily Show mocked opponents of gays serving in the military.
Decline of Politics: Superficial Democracy. Videocassette. Golden Dome Productions , 1992.
This video discussed the ways in which today's media is detrimental to democracy. It argues that Americans are setting aside less time for political discussion as a result of the media's coverage. Important political decisions escape analysis due to inventions like the soundbite.
Fox, Julia R. "It's no joke: IU study finds The Daily Show with Jon Stewart to be as substantive as network news." 04 Oct 2006. Indiana University. 4 Dec 2006. <http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/4159.html>
This was my key source because it is the first scholarly attempt to directly compare the substance of The Daily Show and other news shows. Its conclusion essentially proved my thesis that The Daily Show is as substantive as any other source of news.
Fletcher, M.D. Contemporary Political Satire. University of Queensland: University Press of America, 1987.
This book defines political satire as a genre and examines its place in the post-modern literature. It argues that post-modern literature does not conduct political satire well because of different underlying assumptions. It also argues that “Western liberal optimism” puts recent political history out of the reach of satire. It was written before The Daily Show with Jon Stewart was created, but it gives a good background of political satire in literary context. It only examines works of narrative prose and does not address other forms of satire (i.e. TV).
Friedman, Philip. Washington Humor. New York: Citadel Press, 1964.
This is a book full of political jokes from the mid-20th century. It is a primary source and helped me understand that political satire is timeless.
Granger, Bruce Ingham. Political Satire in the American Revolution (1763-1783). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1960.
This book examines political satire throughout every stage of the American Revolution. It will be useful for my claim that political satire has always existed throughout US history.
“Indecision 2004”. The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Mad Cow Productions, Comedy Central, 2004.
This one is in the mail and will serve as my primary source of “The Daily Show”. It is the series of episodes in which Stewart and his partners parodied and satirized the 2004 presidential election.
Kreisler, Jeff. Telephone interview. 09 Nov 2006.
Jeff Kreisler is a comedian and author. He was the 2006 winner of the Bill Hicks Spirit Award for Thought Provoking Comedy. In addition to his already impressive accomplishments, he has interviewed to be a Daily Show writer. He was an incredibly helpful source of information on the genre of political satire and The Daily Show. His perspective was intriguing and immensley useful.
Long, Bryan. "'Daily Show' viewers ace political quiz". 29 Sep 2004. CNN. 2 Dec 2006 <http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/28/comedy.politics/>.
This article was a study that revealed that Daily Show viewers were more politically informed than people who don't watch late night television shows. Its viewers scored higher on a political quiz than people who just read newspapers and watch television news, and they also beat out viewers of David Letterman and Jay Leno.
"News Audiences Increasingly Politicized." Survey Report. 08 June 2004. The Pew Research Center for People and the Press. 2 Dec 2006 <http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=833>.
The Pew survey on the news media had great information and statistics about various news sources and their audiences. It also had helpful commentary and analysis of the numbers and graphs.
Stewart, Jon. America (The Book). New York: Warner Books, 2004.
This book served as a primary source. Presented by The Daily Show, it is a piece of contemporary political satire. It parodies and satirizes every aspect of American government, with a definite lean to the left.
Strange, Mary Zeiss. "The Daily Show generation." USA Today 18 Sep 2006, natl. ed.: 15a.
This article was very useful for information about the audience of The Daily Show. It profiled the audience as young, impressionable, cynical, and moderate to liberal.
Test, George A. Satire: Spirit and Art. Tampa: University of South Florida Press, 1991.
This book examines satire as a whole in an attempt to understand what the “microscope” of authors like Fletcher has missed. Test examines satire in all of its many forms, drawing contributions from anthropologists, psychologists, folklorists, and others, not tying it strictly to literary terminology. It spends four chapters attempting to define satire and describing its roots in myth, ritual, and folk behavior.
Williams, Brian. "What's so funny about this guy?." Time 08 May 2005: 173.
This was an article from Time that described how Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert make fun of broadcast journalists. It analyzed their techniques and the different types of jokes they use.
Wood, Marcus. Radical Satire and Print Culture (1790-1822). Oxford University: Clarendon Press, 1994.
Wood analyzes satire and parody of this specific era. He considers this the high point of Romance parody (which many scholars consider an oxymoron, he acknowledges). He focuses especially on the work of two cartoonists and authors, William Hone and George Cruikshank.