Not a joke: Watching “The Colbert Report” may leave you better informed about politics and elections than reading a newspaper or watching CNN and Fox News.
Viewers who watched TV humorist Stephen Colbert during the 2012 presidential election were more knowledgeable about basic campaign-financing issues than those who consumed actual news, a university study finds.
The University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center says that Colbert’s elaborate gag of setting up a Super PAC served as “an extended civics lesson” and helped viewers better grasp the convoluted role of money in politics.
Colbert’s Super PAC, “Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow,” accepted unlimited donations from corporations, unions and wealthy individuals. He also established a “shell corporation,” which funneled anonymously donated money to his Super PAC. Former Federal Election Commission chairman Trevor Potter walked him through the entire process on the show and even seemed to hint that there wasn’t much difference between money laundering and the shell corporation’s gifts to the Super PAC.
“It’s the first study actually showing that Colbert is doing a better job than other news sources at teaching people about campaign financing,” said Bruce Hardy, senior researcher at the APPC.
“There were two reasons,” Hardy said. “First was the narrative structure. He walked us through creating a Super PAC and every episode was a continuation of that story. And second was the use of humor and satire.”
The study polled 1,232 adults in December 2012 over the phone.
A similar university poll conducted a few years ago found that people who watched “The Daily Show,” Sunday morning talks shows, listened to NPR or read the New York Times were better informed about the news than those who watched MSNBC or Fox News.
Colbert takes over for David Letterman next year, but he’ll leave his conservative-pundit character behind.