Politics, Television

Slouching Towards Politics: What Jon Stewart Has Spawned

Jon Stewart worked hard to get it right, according to Tamara Tabo; what he may not have counted on is what his effort would spawn.

By  
on

You might think that whether one watched Thursday night’s GOP Presidential Debate or the final episode of Jon Stewart hosting The Daily Show serves as a handy litmus test for political orientation. Nope. Not in my case, at least. Not unless “does not have cable” counts as an ideology these days.

Fox News made the debate available only to cable subscribers, even online. The unwashed, un-paying masses had to survive on out-of-sync clips and play-by-play texts from friends. I felt like a Jew on Christmas. Which sucks because I also feel like a Jew on Christmas on actual Christmas.

Comedy Central, on the other hand, will let everybody watch for free.

So, while I’ve stitched together only a sloppy mental patchwork of who said what when in Cleveland, I have listened to Stephen Colbert thank Jon Stewart for saving him from “Dung Lung” multiple times.

As Stewart closed out a 16½-year-run as the host of The Daily Show, retrospectives of and tributes to his work abounded. Daily Show fans from the hacker collective TelecomixCanada hacked Donald Trump’s website, posting a message thanking Jon Stewart (though misspelling his name nevertheless). Arby’s, the restaurant chain at the heart, or in the bowels, of one of Stewart’s running gags, aired special commercials thanking him “for being a friend.” Apparently, either all press is good press, or Arby’s just proved that corporations can get Stockholm Syndrome.

I disagreed with Jon Stewart on many issues — presidential power, tax policy, campaign finance law, nearly every major Supreme Court case decided in recent history. Still, I like him. He hosted a show that I could (mostly) enjoy with my liberal friends and family, unlike Bill Maher, who descended into a blind biliousness a few years ago and hasn’t made me laugh since.

What I dislike more than Jon Stewart is what Jon Stewart has spawned.

Sponsored

He made people who didn’t necessarily talk about politics want to talk about politics, which is good. He also made people who didn’t necessarily think much about politics want to talk about politics, which is very, very irritating.

Things Fall Apart; The Center Cannot Hold

Jon Stewart’s charm sprung from an authentic mix of curiosity, wit, and relatability. He could have alienated a lot of viewers by sticking to strictly highbrow material. Political humor can be arcane, geared toward making Bill Buckley types chortle through their Locust Valley Lockjaw. Stewart avoided that quagmire by dabbling in the delightfully bawdy, naughty, and silly, even while asking pointed questions of powerful people, bantering with bestselling authors, and demonstrating time and again that he was truly paying attention to not only the guests on his stage, but also to the wide world beyond his studio’s walls.

Jon Stewart’s dick jokes offset his wonkishness perfectly.

Stewart used this skillful Everyman technique in individual interviews, not just as his show persona generally. He would often frame his preliminary questions as the unsophisticated queries of a bashful non-expert. “Could you explain that to me? I must be misunderstanding you. But what do I know? I’m just a comic!” Then he’d go in for the kill. Calling out guests for bullshit, asking them to disentangle their rhetoric or GTFO.

Sponsored

The tactic was effective.

The problem, though, comes when Stewart, or more commonly his followers, aren’t really listening for a meaningful response. They have neither the patience nor desire to entertain what the other side has to say. There’s a flourish of indignation, then a cut to a commercial, or a last zinger to lighten the mood before making clear that the conversation is done.

For Jon Stewart himself, this is fine. Really. If he is more than simply an entertainer, he is a commentator. He’s allowed to be breezy, even a bit sciolistic. His show is a stylized performance.

For hordes of Daily Show devotees, however, Stewart’s take is their take. News and information come piecemeal throughout the day, as they reflexively glance at their phones while waiting for the elevator, flip through countless cable channels, or skim the links shared by their buddies on social media. Our news consumption habits lend themselves to the quick take, not the deep think.

Jon Stewart pre-masticated political current events. He curated an artful collection of stories, digested them according to his own system of beliefs, then spit up a blend of news and opinion. Lots of Stewart fans treated the Daily Show as though it was a source of unvarnished news. To the extent that it was a bit chewed up, well, so much the better. All the hard work of chewing was already done for them.

Conservative radio and TV hosts have employed a similar schtick for eons. (Or at least until 1987, when the feds dropped the Fairness Doctrine.) Conservatives and liberals both can take comfort in being spoon-fed opinions by whomever they consider to be a trustworthy, like-minded, entertaining source. Jon Stewart and Rush Limbaugh aren’t so different from one another.

“The Best Lack All Conviction, While The Worst Are Full of Passionate Intensity”

Jon Stewart may have done more to increase the political engagement of young people than anyone else in recent memory. I’d rather watch even the most nakedly partisan Stewart monologue again and again rather than see Lena Dunham dance in her panties to a Lil Jon remake in a Rock The Vote video. But, at my age, I’m hardly their target demographic.

Under Stewart’s leadership, The Daily Show made politics fun. It made politics accessible.

By making current events funny, Jon Stewart also spawned some dreadful offspring, a certain type of viewer who tends to confuse being funny and being right.

You can spot this variety of Stewart fan by their tendency to make cracks, sometimes even good ones, at, say, Republican leaders or anti-abortion protestors or opponents of the Affordable Care Act. But what distinguishes this breed of fan from other liberals with a sense of humor is that these fans falter if you follow up. With questions. With counterpoints. With facts.

What makes a political view right is more than just its potential to win a comedy slam. Sometimes the analytical steps required to get to an accurate answer to a difficult question are tedious. They are sometimes no fun. Smart people, liberal and conservative, know that a sick burn can’t replace a cogent argument.

(Note: A sick burn backed up by a cogent argument, however, remains pure gold.)

“And What Rough Beast, Its Hour Come Round At Last . . .”

Amusing an audience while discussing which branch of the government jacked things up the worst today is harder than it looks.

Be too solemn or eggheaded and you’ll bore the s**t out of people who have plenty of other options. Be too dogmatic or forceful and you’ll seem like a blowhard. Be too even-handed or equivocal and you’ll come off as a nebbish. Simplify too much and you risk sounding stupid to anyone who knows the nuances behind the issue.

I believe that Jon Stewart worked hard to get it right. What he may not have counted on is what his effort would spawn.

Tamara Tabo is a summa cum laude graduate of the Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University, where she served as Editor-in-Chief of the school’s law review. After graduation, she clerked on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. She currently heads the Center for Legal Pedagogy at Texas Southern University, an institute applying cognitive science to improvements in legal education. You can reach her at tabo.atl@gmail.com.

Topics

, , , , , ,