"The Rise of Infotainment and Its Impact on Audiences and Political Involvement"
by Jessica Hanus
Copyright © 2010 by Jessica Hanus
News and entertainment have often been considered different categories of media. However, the line
between these two categories has recently become blurred. This blur is often referred to as infotainment
or journalism as entertainment. One popular way of delivering this entertainment is through political
humor. Late-night talk shows use this method and are becoming more trusted than some traditional news
sources. While some believe that news for entertainment purposes destroys the authority of the news
source and can distract or misinform the public, others think that it can lead to more informed citizens
with higher political involvement. Either way, infotainment is having an impact on viewers that should be
noted and researched.
Hargreaves believes that "journalism has always entertained as well as informed" and that this was
essential for journalism to reach a mass audience (59). This information may lead one to wonder why
journalism as entertainment has suddenly become a controversial topic.
Also, the journalist's task is to find a way to make the significant interesting (Kovach and Rosenstiel
188-89). Therefore, it seems fitting that journalists emphasize what is fun, fascinating, or dramatic about a
story in order to interest the public.
Political humor is being used more and more to attract viewers and inform them about world
happenings. Peterson's opinion is that "the news says the system is broken, our leaders are crooks, and
there’s not a damn thing I can do about it. Comedians tell me the same thing, but at least they do it in a
funny way" (2-3).
Humor can also be used to express opinions that might be too provocative if presented in a
straightforward manner. A comedian can get away with sedition, or even blasphemy, as long as it’s funny
sedition or blasphemy (Peterson 92).
Peterson also believes that to succeed as a late-night host, one must connect with the audience in
addition to providing comedic goods. Since the host appears nightly in millions of homes, "he must also
be seen as welcoming and familiar" (124).
To do this, the host must gain the trust of their audience. In addition to being welcoming and familiar,
they must be relatable, smart, and, as mentioned before, funny. This is not only a task of late-night hosts,
but of news anchors as well.
Peterson points out the similarities between these two different hosts. They both appear on television
every weeknight, address the audience directly and with authority, and depend upon the events of the day
for their material (43-44).
Late-night hosts may now be considered more trustworthy than more traditional newscasters. In an
online poll conducted in July by Time magazine, The Daily Show's Jon Stewart was ranked as America's
most trusted newscaster, obtaining 44 percent of the vote and beating out Brian Williams, Charlie Gibson,
and Katie Couric.
Now we know what tools media can use to draw the audience in and that they have potential to impact
the opinion and behavior of this audience. Next we will consider the possible downfalls of using these
tools and what negative impact it can have on the public.
Hargreaves believes that "the news media are rotting our brains and undermining our civic life" (59)
and there is certainly evidence and argument to back up this belief.
One aspect of infotainment that is often criticized is dramatic framing of news stories. This can call
attention to unimportant aspects of stories and can distract audiences from "more lasting and serious
concerns" (Graber 504). The more important facts of stories are often left out because they lack drama
and cannot hold the interest of the audience. This can certainly be a contributing factor of an uninformed
public.
Kovach and Rosenstiel believe that infotainment will not succeed because it merely engages the
audience. They give three reasons for this belief:
1. If you feed people only trivia and entertainment you will wither the appetite and
expectations of some people for anything else.
2. It destroys the news organization's authority to deliver more serious news and drives
away those audiences who want it.
3. When you turn your news into entertainment, you are playing to the strengths of other
media rather than your own. (194-195)
Another critique more specifically related to late-night news programming is that they may be
preaching to the choir (Moy, Xenos, and Hess 125). The hosts of these programs make jokes about
politics and one must have an understanding of politics to understand the humor presented. Therefore, it is
not providing viewers who have less political knowledge with any valuable information.
Moy, Xenos, and Hess also noted that when candidates appear on these late-night programs, they prefer
to focus their statements on character rather than policy (125). This not only misleads the viewer, but it
may result in uninformed voting decisions or simply fewer voters.
However, not all advice about infotainment is negative. Many people think that providing entertaining
news can actually help the public become more informed and politically involved. Since infotainment is
so widely popular, one hopes that outcomes like these are occurring as a result of this switch in the
presentation of news.
In their research, Moy, Xenos, and Hess found that "exposure to late-night comedy displays clear
relationships to political talk" (125). This shows that there is hope for infotainment after all.
One reason for this relationship may be that it increases emotional involvement. Graber believes that
dramatic framing may actually help keep the public informed rather than distracting them, as mentioned
earlier. This type of framing has the ability to attract viewers who might otherwise ignore these
newscasts. It can also "carry more punch" than the less dramatic information because it engages the
audience's emotions as well as thoughts (504-505).
Late-night programs also attract a different demographic than more traditional news sources such as
newspapers or local broadcast news. Viewers of late-night news shows tend to be younger and therefore
less politically engaged. These shows seem to be gaining in popularity and the younger generation may
watch them purely to stay on top of current discussion topics among their peers.
This may result in more people from this generation turning out to vote in local and national elections.
Whether they are properly informed by infotainment is obviously up for debate. However, they are
capable of supplementing this information with more traditional news media, which has been shown to
enhance various types of political behavior (Moy, Xenos, and Hess 124).
I believe that infotainment has brought politics into the lives of many people who would have
otherwise avoided such information. Whether or not the audience is drawn in by humor or drama, many
stay loyal to the programming for reasons beyond that. They often become more aware and interested in
political, societal, and economic happenings as a result of simply being exposed to it.
If it takes a comedian to get a person interested in news, so be it. As long as the comedian is not
providing false information to their audience, viewers will be better informed after exposure. While this
may not result in higher voter turnout in all cases, it certainly has increased political interest and has the
potential to increase political involvement, especially from younger generations.