The Daily Show and Philosophy: Moments of Zen in the Art of Fake News

By Jason Holt

An entertaining and insightful examination of the Emmy-award winning American satirical news show, broadcast on Comedy Central in the US, and (in an edited edition) on More4 in the UK and CNN International around the world.

• 
  
• Includes discussion of both The Daily Show and its spin-off show, The Colbert Report
  
• Showcases philosophers at their best, discussing truth, knowledge, reality and the American Way
  
• Highlights the razor sharp critical skills of Jon Stewart and his colleagues
  
• Faces tough and surprisingly funny questions about politics, religion, and power head on

• Language: English
• Publisher: Wiley
• Release date: Feb 9, 2009
• ISBN: 9780470766132

Book preview

Reviews for The Daily Show and Philosophy

[squeezeboxriley · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

I have read other books like this one -- books using elements of popular culture to illustrate philosophical principles -- and none of them are essential reading material. The essays included in each book tend to be repetitive and only a few are outstanding critical pieces. Nevertheless, these books -- and The Daily Show and Philosophy in particular -- support the argument that certain pieces of pop culture are valuable not solely for the entertainment they provide but also for the contemplations they elicit.In regards to The Daily Show, I must admit I'm biased. I'm a young liberal; it's not difficult for me to like The Daily Show. Still, I think that the show provides an intelligent voice for rational discussions, which allows both sides to recognize the truth in each other's arguments. One of the points that several essay authors make often in the book is that the show requires its viewers to be at least aware of what's going on in the world. The audience cannot come to the show with no outside information and expect to understand and appreciate the humor of the show on more than the most superficial level. The book touches on some of the criticism that the show receives from people like Bill O'Reilly, Geraldo Rivera and Joe Scarborough. These people claim that viewers of The Daily Show are uninformed children and thus the show has no relevance to adults with real responsibility.But to believe their criticism with no investigation of your own is to fall into the traps that The Daily Show serves to point out. The authors of the essays analyze how the interactions of Jon Stewart and his "senior correspondents" are actually traditional Socratic methods for seeking truth about the world. I use quotes to distinguish the term "senior correspondents" because, as shown in several essays, the correspondents are shown to be ignorant buffoons with no true knowledge of the field they are purported to be experts on. When Stewart calmly points out their ignorance through a series of questions, he is employing methods that Socrates developed to expose the folly of the supposed experts of his era. These exchanges between Stewart and his senior correspondents are used often to discuss some of the most important topics affecting people today: the religious right and its influence on American politics, conflicts in the Middle East and, during Bush's time in the White House (the era covered by the essays), the War on Terror. There is the danger that reading The Daily Show and Philosophy will make the show less funny, but the laughs you lose will be replaced by the ability to defend your 'almost) nightly reliance on The Daily Show as a source of world information.

[princemuchao · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

In truthiness, this should have been called "The Daily Show and The Colbert Report and Philosophy", since Colbert and his show are the main subjects of several of the essays. Topics include the Media and the DS's critique and effect on it, political rhetoric, Bullshit, religion, evolution, irony, and wordplay and neologizing. Philosophically, Stewart is most often compared to Socrates and the Cynics of ancient Greece.I've read six or seven of these "popular culture and philosophy" books now, and this is the best so far. Aside from the inevitable repetitiveness that results from having 19 different authors treat the same subject (Stewart's Crossfire appearance was addressed many times), there were no bad essays in this collection - all were engaging and interesting.