The Substance of Fake News

Last week I wrote about 'authenticity' and how that is a larger topic today than it was in the past. Today, I read an article in AdAge (sorry, subscription required) that demonstrates just how little information exists in network news shows.


The study, by julia R. Fox, assistant professor of telecommunications at Indiana University, is titled "No Joke: A Comparison of Substance in The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and Broadcast Network Television Coverage of the 2004 Presidential Election Campaign." It will be published next summer by the Journal of Broadcast and Electronic Media.

I had to read it because I like Jon Stewart - though I get most of my news from reading.

I summarize the report's conclusion this way: while Jon Stewart has an ample amount of comedy on display, it also makes and reports news. If you compare that to the serious (cough) network news shows, there is not all that much more substantial news reported than Jon Stewart's show! Instead of comedy, the news shows simply have more puff pieces and hype.

"Interestingly, the average amounts of video and audio substance in the broadcast network news stories were not significantly different than the average amounts of visual and audio substance in 'The Daily Show with Jon Stewart' stories about the presidential election," the study found. "It should be noted that the broadcast-network-news stories about the presidential election were significantly shorter, on average, than were 'The Daily Show with Jon Stewart' stories," Ms. Fox added. "The argument could be made that while the amount of substance per story was not significantly different, the proportion of each story devoted to substance was greater in the network-news stories. ... On the other hand, the proportion of stories per half-hour program devoted to the election campaign was greater in 'The Daily Show.'"