Monday, April 23, 2012

The Online Persona of Jon Stewart According to the Media

After watching the video on Jon Stewart and his criticism of CNN’s Crossfire, I watched another video of an interview of him on Fox News with Chris Wallace.

Jon Stewart represents himself as a comedian, a satirical commentator that sheds a different perspective on the state of American media not for a political agenda, but to expose the absurdity that surrounds the body of politics and representation of media. 

Fox News, on the other hand, believes that Stewart represents himself as a political commentator trying to be an expert on what they believe he isn’t an expert in.

Even though we, as consumers of media,  are given the materials to determine how his representation affects our views on politics, through logical arguments and evidence presented on both sides, I think  our decision to form an well-informed opinion would all come down to how the argument is presented.  Stewart carries himself through very simple logical explanations, while Fox New’s commentator, Chris Wallace, instead of critiquing the argument at hand, puts his focus on Stewart and tries to classify him as a certain identity.  Chris Wallace uses the fallacy of the Straw Man for his argument.  Instead of dealing with the issues, he presents information to try and discredit Stewart and create an image of Stewart that is not what he represents himself as. 

There is obviously a mismatch in what is being argued between Stewart and Wallace.

So how do these views of Jon Stewart’s persona appeal to the public and how do we really see Jon Stewart?

Like what was reiterated in Stewarts interview with Crossfire, Jon represents the voice of many citizens that are displaced.  He says “I represent the distracted center….My comedy is not the comedy of the neurotic. It comes from the center. But it comes from feeling displaced from society because you’re in the center. We’re the group of fairness, common sense, and moderation…We’re clearly the disenfranchised center…because we’re not in charge. (Stewart quoted in Jones: 114-15)” (Boler).

His words are not far from the truth to me.



  1. I think you do a good job connecting specific evidence from the Stewart Crossfire appearance (with a link to the actual video) and a specific passage from the Boler article, but I'd like to see you develop a stronger thesis in your blog posting, with a more focused beginning, middle, and end. You also want to provide more specific links to material and more framing of the story for currency and timeliness. And don't forget to add tags!

  2. I feel this is a very effective and engaging critique of Jon Stewert and Wallace of FOX to show that this interview needed to be read in between the lines in order to get the full gist of what was happening. However, I feel this story has little connection to our class discussions, maybe relate this analysis to how digital journalists portray themselves generally in media?