Friday, December 10, 2010

Assignment 3

(1). How does Stewart and Colbert explicitly and/or implicitly parody the four biases as described and outlined by Bennett in this chapter?

I believe that both Colbert and Stewart use the four biases in their shows. Their shows are made famous by their informational bias, or the way their stories are told on their respective shows. They choose to utilize things like cyniscm, parody, and sarcasm when discussing political issues during their shows. It is their trademark and why people watch. They are expecting this, but what the average viewer may not realize is that both Colbert and Stewart are specifically utilizing the four biases of personalization, dramatization, fragmentation, and Authority-Disorder. I'll start with how I feel Colbert uses the biases.

Colbert is famous for taking a very hands on, cynical approach to the news. In my opinion, there is a very explicit use of these biases within Colbert's show. His whole goal is to mock and ridicule the current political issues facing the country. Personalization is used throughout the show focusing on specific political figures such as Obama, and McCain. The whole segment involving the search for King Tut's penis is a perfect example of how these biases are used. We have personalization again with the use of first person interviews, and expert opinions by Dr. Silverman and by Colbert. There is a singling out of the issue of the penis which in my opinion is a parody of the fact that focusing on such specific items and individuals in a story takes focus away from bigger, broader, issues that get lost. He uses personalization by making other specific attacks at the Secretary General of Antiquities claiming that their is a conspiracy with the disappearance of King Tut's penis. I think Dramatization is fairly obvious in this scene. Colbert's whole conspiracy theory is an example of the bias of dramatization. Picking only the stories that will excite people, or focusing on parts that keep people interested is key in the news. Colbert does this by beating a dead horse so to speak by consistently coming back to the issue of the missing penis and making it a big mystery. Fragmentation is used in his jumping around from story to story within the investigation of the missing penis. He focuses on the cartouche box for a while and asks if they had "cartouche bags." Then shifts his attention to the metal hinges on the box. Fragmentation is the tendency to treat stories as unrelated events and isolated incidents. He is jumping from story to story to demonstrate the unpredictability of the news and wants to make it appear chaotic. Finally, Authority-Disorder is used to give a sense of tension or conflict. His conspiracy theory shows a disconnect with the people in charge of King Tut's tomb and the people "Searching for the truth" about his "missing penis."

In the Daily Show, I think a great example of the use of personalization was the Clinton montage. Stewart uses name association to focus on Clinton as an Individual. The first montage was very positive for Clinton. It focused on past clips of precious political figures and news anchors praising Clinton. This makes you think Clinton was a great guy and great president. It is taking clips out of context to build the character and legitimacy of Clinton while showing the legitimacy of his candidacy and the government under him. Another montage did the exact opposite. They took a lot of previous clips out of context to besmirch Clinton's character. Stewart did this exact same thing again with Ronald Reagan. I think dramatization is best demonstrated with the video of how his presidency will be remembered with the series of images like Jaba the Hutt, the White House Exploding, and dark, scary music to represent his legacy as a villain. This is the strategy of Stewart to focus on one famous president, in this case Reagan, while giving a biased opinion in a dramatic way to catch people's attention and make them laugh. I feel a good example of fragmentation comes with the story of the "Don't Ask Don't Tell Campaign." Stewart stops and focuses on the good looks of Mrs. McCain who was advocating for the rights of gays within the military. This takes the focus off the actual story which is a common strategy of fragmentation. This is done throughout the show when they talk about Mrs. McCain being hot or referencing women's "gozangas". I think Authority Disorder was prevalent in this episode. He uses the Don't ask don't tell campaign to single out McCain and show him out of touch with his military leaders, and the studies done involving the campaign. He uses conflicting statements and clips from McCain to prove his point. He sets up his arguments by proposing questions like "What kind of study did you want?" He then shows McCain talking about a study and Stewart emphatically claims that was the name of the study. This is done to make McCain look like an idiot. It is a clear way of using Authority-disorder.

2 comments:

  1. Pretty thorough analysis, Dominic! I don't know if I agree with your claim that Colbert's "whole goal is to mock and ridicule current political issues." Although he does mock and ridicule, his goal is more informational or persuasive, don't you think? And, is he mocking the issues or the politicians/media people who mess around with those issues? Just something to think about . . .
    Here's a few writing suggestions that should help your message come through even stronger. Rather than starting a sentence with "I think" or "I believe" or "In my opinion," just go ahead and state what you think or what you believe. Cut to the chase, so to speak. Also, whenever you get the urge to use the word "very" or "extremely" or "unique," just walk away and shoot those words til they die. Rarely do they help a sentence.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow, we agreed on a lot in our posts!
    For Colbert I focused on the King Tut story as well. I think that since we can find all four biases in just one segment really goes to show how talented the writers are, and how well they understand the media.
    In your analysis of The Daily Show, you mentioned that clips about Clinton were taken out of context. I'm not really sure if they were, though. Some, maybe, but for the most part I think the statements the politicians were making were probably pretty blunt. And I hadn't even thought of his comments about Mrs. McCain as an example of fragmentation, but I think you're right!

    ReplyDelete