Oh John Stewart....your awesomeness baffles me....

I never really noticed the differences in how news is covered until I watched John Stewarts the Daily Show. I normally do watch political comedies like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report but I have never taken the time to compare and contrast it with the news. First and foremost I have to say that I believe The Daily Show is so much better at getting the news across. Comedy cuts the tension and makes it alright to just say what you are thinking. Using comedy allows the host to not be politically correct and get away with it. In addition to that, it relaxes the viewer and makes absorbing the information easier because it is fun. If you think about it, a news reporter on say ABC, CNN, FOX, NBC or whatever other channel could never get away with putting so much of their opinion in a story because they are supposed to remain impartial (of course we know they do not).
On a Show like The Daily Show, the host has the power to cover any topic they want which is something you do not necessarily find on news channels. For instance, when I watched the Daily Show, John Stewart not only covered Obama’s 100th day in office, but he also talked about congress woman Jane Harman and Senator Arlen Specter. I fell these stories (even if they are being covered by the news channels) have been dummed down to make whatever point the channel wants. News anchors have to attract more viewers so in the end, the story gets lost and whatever brings the most rating in is what gets covered. You can see this with the Anna Nicole story. When she died, her story was covered on every news channel for about a month while other more important stories were pushed aside. It has become so bad that to get news that is not necessarily repeated on every channel, one must go out of their way to watch a world news channel (which does not always cover more). With issues like that, a program like the Daily Show is amazing. It covers a wide spectrum of issues and I feel a lot of times, John Stewart simply wants to draw attention to a story that is not being covered adequately.
I would like to say that the news balances things out by being more factual, or simply less one sided, but unfortunately I cannot say that. In that aspect as well, I feel the Daily Show is triumphant. The problem with news casting is that every channel wants to be the first to cover a story so they will jump on anything, report it, and then research it. Alas, a lot of people do not analyze what they hear on the news and will go on believing a lie. For example Apple’s shares fell dramatically because of a rumor that Steve Jobs was rushed to the ER. [1] There is no reason why we as a society should not critically analyze the information we are given before believing it. It is said that the world has become untrusting and cynical, but this to me is an indication that we are still naïve.
On the Daily Show, John Stewart never ceases to amaze me. He is so educated about all the topics he presents to the point that he can pick out discrepancies in the news coverage. Sadly, I feel at certain times John Stewart brings up unknown or misunderstand ideas that he is not given the due respect for because he is a comedian. I feel people who do not understand the stories may just watch the show for laughs without realizing the fundamental importance of the story.
I think a comparison between the news and the Daily Show can and most definitely should be made. After all, both are covering news stories. So I watched the Daily Show and the first story covered was Obama’s first 100 days in office and whether or not he is doing well. What I loved is that John Stewart covered the frenzy over this because it is entirely too early to judge Obama. He was wonderful at showing how every channel feels the necessity to grade not only Obama but also the first lady. I loved this because I was getting confused by all the news Shows making report cards in light of 100 days when the same was not done for any other president. The rest of the show was very eye opening. Congress woman Jane Harman was covered. I remember vaguely hearing about her but the news channels do not report on her at all anymore. Also Senator Arlen Specter was covered in a way I have never seen. I enjoy it when there are clips about one person shown to make a point because I feel it shows any discrepancies and that is exactly what the show did. John Stewart is so much more effective in reporting the news to me and the reason why I respect his opinion is that he makes sure he educates himself on topics before covering them.
I think I trust the Daily Show because John Stewart has“no obligation to deliver the day's most important news” as Rachel Smolkin stated in her article “What the Mainstream Media Can Learn From Jon Stewart”[2] . That, in my opinion makes the news more truthful. I completely agree with Smolkin about the idea that the Daily Show is forcing us to become less traditional when it comes to news. I feel people are more apt to trust an anchor if the anchor gives them a positive feeling like Stewart does for many people.
In the end, news is news. Anyway we get information is better than having no information.

[1] http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/04/MNIV13B9E4.DTL
[2] http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4329