Tom Brokaw: Jon Stewart's Role Is "Important"

Tom Brokaw gave The Daily Iowan an interview, and one of the subjects they discussed was the role of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert in disseminating news to a younger generation. Brokaw said he has spoken to Stewart about this and reassured him that "what he is doing is important":

DI: A lot of the younger generation are getting a lot of their news from "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report." Is that eroding into the nightly news?

Tom Brokaw: Jon Stewart and I have talked about this a lot, and it troubles him a lot because he is a very serious consumer of news. I keep reassuring him, because I don't think he really needs to be reassured, that what he is doing is important because what he is doing is bringing people to the subject matter, and they can't watch Jon for half-an-hour, and they can't watch Stephen for half-an-hour, without having some interest what else is going on in the world.

Watch the full interview here.

Related: Tom Brokaw: Evening News Today Is "A Struggle"

Comments

[fzriely]

If you watch The Daily Show even one time, you can never look at TV news programs the same way again.

[Durango]

After watching Samantha Bee do an interview it ruined me from watching any female reporter. No matter how grime the subject I couldn't help getting the giggles.

[filo]

There have been many times that Jon gets away with saying things that I'm sure Brokaw wishes he could get away with saying. With Stephen you have to pay a little closer attention and read between the lines. Both of them contribute to the political conversation while bringing information to some people who won't watch MSM.

[azyuwish]

Years ago, in the Publishing world, it was the political cartoonist who used his/her rapier wit and brilliant ability to summarize in a one dimension visual, a stinging commentary which, yes "cut through the crap".

This being the day of the TV and internet, it is the likes of Stewart and Colbert who now take on that important responsibility.

Even further years ago, it was the court jester who poked fun as the monarch (and got away with it) who was "keeping it real".

Every empire needs theirs; we've now got Stewart and Colbert. Add to that, they DO raise the issue for many who otherwise would eschew politics altogether. At least they've got young people thinking about more than their iPods, next raise or their GPA.

[CaseyBabes]

Uh huh, the unfunny, grotesquely mugging Stewart is a serious presence on the political scene. So, presumingly, Al Franken is a law abiding politician. Sheesh, democrats.­..........­.....

[Vermontah]

Unfunny? lol.
Oh, I guess you're right, we should be getting our news from Bill O'Reilly.

[Bozwellian]

...uh, well and er, was figuring the bombastics played out by many over a Faux were blantant comedy acts...WOW­, like who can REALLY take them as presenters of issues without bombastic biasness shoved onto the viewers so blatantly ? Surely the audience is NOT all that guillible or non able to THINK or DISCERN at bit...or OMG, you mean folks take FAUX FOX SERIOUSLY ? No wonder this country has wallowed in the all things Bushlerized these last 7 years plus....wo­w, always gave us so much more credit for intelligence and more !!! AM simply SHOCKED !! SHOCKED AND DISMAYED !!! Perhaps we should indeed rethink this nonsense of of NO oversight, deregulation and of course , the issues of "free speech" altogether and then too, MANDATE some rules that would prevent wrong thoughts !!!

[pkafin]

One cannot effectively mock something without a thorough understanding of it. Nor can one appreciate the mocking without understanding the subject matter.

If you think Stewart is unfunny, it is most likely because you do not understand the subject matter that he is making fun of. If I remember, fox tried a conservative faux news show and it was a very unfunny flop. Why? Because they, and their watchers, lack a basic understanding of what news and news reporting is.

Stewart is grotesquely hilarious. But to understand that, you need to have an appreciation for both the historical basis for his style of comedy and for the historical basis for the news.

Incidentally, if I understand it correctly, Al Franken paid the proper amount of taxes; just not to the correct states. He had to pay $70,000.00 to various states recently, but he is entitled to that money back from the state that he did pay his taxes to. I'm not aware that anyone is considering bringing him up on charges over what he did. So, yes, Al Franken is a law abiding politician.

[CaseyBabes]

Hi zealot....­......Stew­art is unfunny 'cause he has unfunny writers, and he "mugs," not your word, "mocks." So Franken is honest, eh? How come he avoided following workers' compensation guidelines. (Guess your understanding of guidelines is in the same vein as humor.) The FauxNews show was unfunny yes, dumb actually, and unwatchable a second time.

[LeeinJax]

I'm no kid, and I love-scratch that- I rely on Stewart and Colbert. If I could find commentary that cuts through the cr@p so incisively ANYWHERE else I would watch that, too.

As it stands, there is simply no substitute for these shows as a source for seriously insightful news commentary.

As an added bonus (which I seem to need more and more nowadays), both shows make me laugh sometimes!

[lafrance]

Stewart and Colbert have the roles as truth tellers of the real news while the entertainers are the cable news people.
I find I get more real news and perspective and truth from Stewart and Colbert. I find the mainstream news to be more like Hollywood reporters then hard news journalists.

[HumanitiesProf]

Jon Stewart is a blessing. He makes what he does....sa­tire and serious interviews­....appear easy. He is a tall drink of water in a wasteland.

[dolberg]

Jon Stewart provides the echo to the echo-chamber. And he's not funny anymore. Not sure if that's especially important.

[bugsbonzai]

People who don't like something a comedian said or did will inevitably end up claiming he's "used to be funny" or he's "not funny anymore". Sour grapes. Funny is subjective; it has been and always will be. What's more likely in a situation like this is that your point-of-view has changed, so you identify less with the comedian than before. Jon Stewart is still as funny as he was in 1998, if not more so. If you don't think he's funny, fine. But he's still relevant, and that's probably what irks you more.

[Counterglow]

The problem is that increasingly, Stewart is finding himself saddled with the responsibility of presenting a balanced view of the news instead of simply mocking current affairs and getting the big yucks. When the "real" news shows present a wide range of political opinion all the way from right to further right to Hitler Youth to Fox, it's bound to affect his content and coverage.

[creedo]

i like stewart and colbert but their shows are just too short.

on the daily show the interviews usually end before they get substantial. colbert's interviews are complete hit or miss and are seldom informative.

i prefer bill maher. real time has much more substance.­..

[HmblDog]

i figured out a long time ago that the purpose of the interview is to promote someone's new book. that's strictly business. all of the talk shows do it. i also believe there is an agreement not to trash the guest's book during the interview but stewart has often times called a bullshit book a waste of everyones time and money right to the author's face.

[Durango]

The only time I remember seeing that is Chris Mathews and Jonah Goldberg. Who both had it coming.

Otherwise he is generally nice and polite. Even when he doesn't agree with the guest.

His mother raised him well,

[mamacat]

Is there any way Comedy Central could be flexible enough to give him more time once in awhile, like when he has a really important guest on?

"Seriously", he and Colbert can do a better interview in 8 minutes (approximately) than most of the MSM does in a half an hour. Or, how about letting him moderate a debate, and let him and Colbert and their writers ask the questions, for a whole two hours?
It would be something worth watching and/or listening to. I think the ratings would be through the roof, and people would have something to talk about besides how absurd the debate was.

I know its been said before, but what does it say about our media when the comedians are better than the so-called serious actors (aka reporters)?

[BMBTHC]

Wow! Excellent idea. Let Stewart moderate a debate. That would be great. And to be "fair and balanced" let O'Reilly or Hannity, or better yet, Rush, moderate another one on the topic of flag pins or some other relevant issue.

[Hare]

I not only like the idea I endorse it.

[verlaine]

Jon Stewart is to satire and political humor as muzak is to music.

Stewart can't shine the shoes of Lenny Bruce, Mort Sahl, Mark Russell, Stan Freberg, David Fry, Bill Hicks, Bill Maher, Will Durst, Barry Crimmins, The Onion, or Not Necessarily the News.

The mainstream news media (ie Brokaw, Koppel et al) are infatuated with Stewart because their profession is the subject of his jokes and they all have super sized egos.

Stewart is an irritating bush league satirist. The fact that he is celebrated to such a ridiculous level just proves how low our standards have fallen.

[CrankyCurmudgeon]

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Much of Jon Stewart's (and his writers') humor is pointed at politicians, not journalists. Frequently, his stuff is hilarious and pointedly deflates those "super sized egos" you assuredly don't have (it's your humility that gives it away).

I suppose if I want haute culture, I need merely wait breathlessly for the posts of verlaine, whose prose is to literature as bloviating is to polite conversation.

[indypete]

Boy, Cranky, I wouldn't want to be on the wrong end of one of your barbs... I'd have to read it three times to figure out if I'd been zapped! Keep giving us that literary style that I only wish I could use!

[DELICIOUS]

MAYBE IT IS YOU WHO HAS THE LOW STANDARDS.­..CAN'T STAND THE HEAT...GET OUT OF THE KITCHEN.

[w&cheneysuck]

You are an IDIOT! Jon Stewart is a COMEDIAN! His job is to make fun of the blatantly ridiculous (easy pickings these days). You are taking this WAY too seriously; you need to get over yourself.

[Ragtime]

Bill Maher is not a satirist in that satirists are humorous. He's a self important, self-absorbed little man. His "storming into the audience" (safely behind security personnel) was pathetic. Jon Stewart is intelligent AND extremely witty!

[biglover]

Ragtime I think you are right. I watch maher all the time and I used to like him more than I do now. I think you may have hit the nail on the head.

[kipmartin]

yeah, Maher is a waste of time. Mr. Libertarian sure has flip-flopped lately. i prefer Stewart, Colbert, and Olbermann. and the Simpsons.

[zannamar]

Granted Jon Stewart has skyrocketed into stardom with the Bush era(made his job very easy). He has been doing the Daily Show longer and he makes fun of who ever is in office. No one is sacred and that is what makes him a breath of fresh air.

[zigzag1]

Stewart asks intelligent and probing questions in between great comedy. The MSM press could learn a lot from Jon.

[swift goat pet for truth]

The Corporate Press does not want to learn anything.

They want to push their agenda and make money without regard to the health of the country.

Look at their actions. What else can anyone conclude?

[Durango]

I don't know how anyone could possibly come to any other conclusion.

[brainlego]

Stewarts comedy has been a bit lacking for quite some time, he seems overworked and/or even fed up with everything that is politicis.
Perhaps I'm projecting on the last part since i can't really become excited at all...

[clintfatigue]

I think Stewart is in the bag for Hillary.