LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.  
November 14, 2009
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Most Read

'Daily Show': Hannity's Apocalyptic Apology

Marc Cooper on the Fate of Cesar Chavez's Dream

Where Are the Real Deficit Hawks?

A Response From UFW to Marc Cooper

Getting Out of Afghanistan With Grace

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Freedom’s Fight

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101
Vetting Sarah Palin

Truthdig Bazaar
Whose Toes Are Those?

Whose Toes Are Those?

By Jabari Asim
$6.99

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Study: ‘Daily Show’ as Informative as Broadcast News

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on Oct 18, 2006
Jon Stewart
Norma Jean Roy

It has often been said that “The Daily Show” is the major source of news for many Americans, but a recent study found the comedy program to be just as informative as nightly news broadcasts.  The only difference: While Jon Stewart and Co. dilute the news with humor, the networks fill their broadcasts with hype.


Partial transcript from On the Media:

BOB GARFIELD: As we consider the media coverage of election 2006, we might consider the coverage of the election in 2004. That’s what Indiana University assistant professor Julia Fox and her students did. And, after developing criteria that distinguished real information from fluff, she went about quantifying exactly how much hard news was communicated per story in the nightly news broadcasts compared with Comedy Central’s Daily Show. What she found was roughly the same level of serious content across the board. But, as Adam Ragusea reports, she did find one small difference.

ADAM RAGUSEA: The only difference was that where the Daily Show’s information was diluted with humor, network news was equally diluted with hype.

JULIA FOX: So for people who are worried about, you know, the growing reliance on the Daily Show as a source of news, it’s at least as substantive as the source that people have relied on for decades. On the other hand, neither one of them are particularly substantive in an absolute sense. So I think that should give pause to people who are relying on either of those sources.

Link

More Below the Ad

Advertisement


Elsewhere: .

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!







Number of characters remaining: 4000

Notify you when others comment on this article?


Are you a human?
Retype the word you see here.


Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.


 
Click here to learn more about Truthdig
 

 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.