After reading my classmate’s blogs I have seen the consensus that satirical news reports are generally viewed as important sources of information through various means. The way they convey their messages and critiques appear to have more of an impact on my classmates because of their use of how they provide a more personal atmosphere, humour, and telling the truth.
In order to capture the attention of today’s youth, media broadcasters must realize that traditional ways of conveying news are not effective. As Natalie Kit mentions “reporting are useful sources of entertainment that provide relief and a sense of voice for viewers of the public sphere who choose to indulged” (http://nk13ps.wordpress.com/2013/11/20/is-the-fake-news-the-real-news/). From this one can see that through Jon Stewart, or Rick Mercer’s personal connection to their stories, people find them easier to watch, and thus they will become a more watched source of news. By adding a personal touch, people will empathize more easily with their news stories than just stating the “facts” of the story. Through this action they effectively help facilitate the public sphere by having people be more in tune with how they feel about the current state of affairs.
Likewise they increase discussion made in the public sphere through their actively challenging dominant ideologies which are wrapped around humorous insights. Britney Shannon states “By using humour to explain current events…also brings awareness to those who do not enjoy watching the news” (http://britshannon.blogspot.ca/2013/11/is-fake-news-real-news.html). Using humour as a means of conveying the news has its strong and weak points. By having humorous content wrapped around heartbreaking news stories will show that they are not taking it seriously, like the ever serious CBC news or something. However using humour draws in people because everybody loves to laugh, and by laughing and using humour, one is able to put a different perspective or shed some light on an otherwise dark story. Therefore these programs use humour may decrease their credibility a little with other news stations, but would increase their viewers and ratings, which would allow them to continue producing content that helps facilitate the public sphere opinions and discussions, and bringing awareness to darker issues.
Lastly, these non-traditional news sources are a reliable source because through their humour they are able to tell the truth in a non-threatening way, which is exponentially a better way than lying to make people feel better would do. Nicole Hough says “Yes comic relief can be too much sometimes and yes it can offend certain people, but lying doesn’t” (http://nhough95.wordpress.com/2013/11/20/cpcf-1f25-blog-entry-4/). From this one can see that the general populace feels that comedy is better than being lied to, which is the way it should be. I mean why people think it is better to not tell the truth and not offend anybody then it is to crack a joke and maybe offend somebody, people get too damn offended at everything these days. These programs use humour to convey messages that speak the truth and report the truth, ohh but since they told it as a joke they can’t be a reliable source. Luckily this is only a problem with the older generations. Therefore using humour to tell the truth helps increase their reliability if they are around the younger demographic, but older ones would see it as malicious or mean.
In the end, my classmates and I personally think that satirical news reports are important sources of information because of their expertly crafted reports based off of their personal experiences, humour and truth.