by Jessica Reed
The New York Times recently published a very interesting Q&A with Jill Abramson, its managing editors. Readers sent her excellent questions to which she extensively answered to, but one in particulat caught my attention - when asked about capturing younger demographics as the nature of journalism is drastically evolving due to the rise of Internet usage, she replies:
When I taught a class at Princeton in 2000, the students in my seminar all read The Times, but also mainly on the Web. Few turned on the network news. But they were extremely well informed, especially about politics. When I asked them how they knew so much about what was happening on the campaign trail, they responded, "The Daily Show." So they taught me all about Jon Stewart. (...)
Erm... So Princeton's youth learns about politics via cable-satire, and not reading the New York Times. I would certainly argue that a lot of young people also read about global affairs via blog, forums and their involvement in global grassroots movement, and that it is a bit insulting to be refered to as "those kids who like to learn, but only if they can have a big laugh while at it". Likewise, if Stewart had such importance in the media landscape that he was the only channel via which a top Ivy league institution's students learned about politricks from, then maybe Jill Shermann should have known about him before her class pointed his existence out.
But should we worry about the overwhelming importance of satire when trying to reach out and woo young audiences? In France most high-school and college students learn about politics via Les Guignols de l'Info (the News Puppets) - whose team was accused of having influenced the 1995 presidential elections' results by portraying Jacques Chirac as a big hearted, cool but idiotic liar (1). In Italy, satirical shows are hugely popular, if sometimes also censored by the ex-Berlusconi government. These shows, just like centuries-old satirical plays once were, became hubs aiming to spread a political knowledge which is also deeply rooted in pop culture. But while they are a great way to denounce our policy makers' misdemeanors, but they're also limited when debates need to be taken further morecomplexity to be more constructive.
(1) ... And for their views on US politics, watch this sketch in english.
