Lessons for Science? AU Colleague Studies Impact of Late Night Comedy on Viewers' Engagement with Politics
Matthew C. Nisbet, Ph.D. is Associate Professor of Communication Studies, Public Policy, and Urban Affairs at Northeastern University. Nisbet studies the role of communication and advocacy in policymaking and public affairs, focusing on debates over over climate change, energy, and sustainability. Among awards and recognition, Nisbet has been a Visiting Shorenstein Fellow on Press, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, a Health Policy Investigator at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and a Google Science Communication Fellow. In 2011, the editors at the journal Nature recommended Nisbet's research as “essential reading for anyone with a passing interest in the climate change debate,” and the New Republic highlighted his work as a “fascinating dissection of the shortcomings of climate activism."
This past year, in the School of Communication here at American University, we were lucky to add to our faculty Lauren Feldman, a newly minted PhD from the Annenberg School of Communication at the University of Pennsylvania.
Lauren (whose office is across the hall from mine) studies the impact of opinionated news shows, such as the O'Reilly Factor, Countdown with Keith Olbermann, and the Daily Show on perceptions of political issues and candidates.
She recently appeared on CNN's Wolf Blitzer to discuss the implications of a forthcoming study on the impacts of late night comedy on viewers' interest in the presidential campaign (video.)
Her conclusions should sound familiar to readers who have read my articles or seen my talks about the importance of using late night comedy shows and entertainment media to broaden the audience for issues related to science, technology, and the environment. (A topic I will be revisiting in a number of upcoming presentations.)
From a news release that AU has put out on the study and Feldman's research:
"We have this fragmented media audience today," says School of Communication professor Lauren Feldman, who studies, among other things, the political impact of late-night comedy. "It's not the case that candidates can necessarily reach [voters] through conventional ways. Twenty years ago if you wanted to watch television at 6:30 you could pretty much only watch the news, and you would hear news of the campaign. Now it's so easy for people to tune that out, that I think it behooves candidates to go on these entertainment programs . . . to present their nonpolitical persona, which is more likely to resonate with people who are not following the campaign as closely as others."
But do these Daily Show and Colbert Report devotees get their news exclusively from their favorite TV personalities, or do those who chuckle as David Letterman quips "John McCain looks like the guy who thinks the nurses are stealing his stuff" also pay attention to more serious political coverage?
Feldman, who arrived at AU this fall, is set to publish a paper later this year that examines the interplay between exposure to late-night comedy and attention to politics.
"There's been a lot of concern in this narrative constructed in the media that young people are abandoning traditional news and getting all of their information from late night comedy, and we know that's not true," she says. "My study looked at whether exposure to late night comedy during a campaign might actually lead people to pay more attention to the campaign in traditional network news or cable news. We found that to be the case as a result of watching either Jay Leno or David Letterman. People who watched during the 2004 primaries were more likely to tune in to and pay attention to the campaign in traditional network and cable news sources."
That's a positive development, Feldman argues.
"It's brought a lot of attention to the candidates among people who might not otherwise have been paying that much attention," she says. "The more people pay attention to politics, the more likely they are to go to other information sources and go and vote on election day--that's great."
Both schizophrenics and people with a common personality type share similar brain patterns.
- A new study shows that people with a common personality type share brain activity with patients diagnosed with schizophrenia.
- The study gives insight into how the brain activity associated with mental illnesses relates to brain activity in healthy individuals.
- This finding not only improves our understanding of how the brain works but may one day be applied to treatments.
It's a development that could one day lead to much better treatments for osteoporosis, joint damage, and bone fractures.
- Scientists have isolated skeletal stem cells in adult and fetal bones for the first time.
- These cells could one day help treat damaged bone and cartilage.
- The team was able to grow skeletal stem cells from cells found within liposuctioned fat.
Gut bacteria play an important role in how you feel and think and how well your body fights off disease. New research shows that exercise can give your gut bacteria a boost.
- Two studies from the University of Illinois show that gut bacteria can be changed by exercise alone.
- Our understanding of how gut bacteria impacts our overall health is an emerging field, and this research sheds light on the many different ways exercise affects your body.
- Exercising to improve your gut bacteria will prevent diseases and encourage brain health.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.