One "nation," under stephen? The effects of the Colbert report on American youth

Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 622-643

  Baumgartner, Jody C ^a   Morris, Jonathan S ^a  

^a EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 57349189081     PISSN: 08838151     EISSN: 15506878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08838150802437487     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S. (1995). Going negative: How political advertisements shrink & polarize the electorate. New York: Free Press.
2. Barker, D. C. (1998a). Rush to action: Political talk radio and health care (un)reform. Political Communication, 15, 83-98.
3. Barker, D. C. (1998b). The talk radio community: Nontraditional social networks and political participation. Social Science Quarterly, 79, 261-272.
4. Barker, D. C. (1999). Rushed decisions: Political talk radio and vote choice, 1994-1996. The journal of Politics, 61(2), 527-539.
5. Barker, D. C. (2002). Rushed to judgment: Talk radio, persuasion, and American political behavior. New York: Columbia University Press.
6. Baum, M. (2005). Talking the vote: Why presidential candidates hit the talk show circuit. American journal of Political Science, 49, 213-234.
7. Baumgartner, J. (2007). Humor on the next frontier: Youth, online political humor, and the Jib Jab Effect. Social Science Computer Review, 25(3), 319-338.
8. Baumgartner, J., & Morris, J. S. (2006). The Daily Show effect: Candidate evaluations, efficacy, and the American youth. American Politics Research, 34, 341-367.
9. Berg, E., & Lippman, L. (2001). Does humor in radio advertising affect recognition of novel product brand names? Journal of General Psychology, 128, 194-205.
10. Brewer, P. R., & Cao, X. X. (2006). Candidate appearances on soft news shows and public knowledge about primary campaigns. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50, 18-35.
11. Brigham, J. C. (1975, September). Ethnic humor on television: Does it reduce/reinforce racial prejudice? Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Chicago.
12. Brigham, J. C., & Giesbrecht, L. W. (1976). "All in the Family": Racial attitudes. Journal of Communication, 26(4), 69-74.
13. Brinkman, D. (1968). Do editorial cartoons and editorials change public opinion? Journalism Quarterly, 45, 724-26.
14. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
15. Elliott, R. C. (1962). The definition of satire: A note on method. Yearbook on Comparative and General Literature, 11, 19-23.
16. Farley, C. J. (2005, May 14). Dave Speaks. Time, Retrieved June 17, 2008, from http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1061418,00.html
17. Feinberg, L. (1968). Satire: The inadequacy of recent definitions. Genre, 1, 31-37.
18. Govani, S. (2005, April 23). Nearly everyone but the Pope was there: Time honours the world's most influential 100. The Financial Post (Toronto Edition), p. WP6.
19. Gruner, C. R. (1965). An experimental study of satire as persuasion. Speech Monographs, 32, 149-153.
20. Gruner, C. R. (1996). Wit and humor in mass communication, In A. J. Chapman & H. C. Foot (Eds.), Humor and laughter: Theory, research, and applications. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
21. Iyengar, S., & Ansolabehere, S. (1996). Can the press monitor campaign advertising? An experimental study. Harvard International journal of Press/Politics 1, 72-86.
22. Jamieson, K. H., & Cappella, J. N. (1997). Setting the record straight: Do ad watches help or hurt? Harvard International journal of Press/Politics, 2, 3-22.
23. Karlin, B. (Executive Producer). (2005, October 17). The Colbert report [Television series]. Episode No. 1. New York: Comedy Central.
24. Karlin, B. (Executive Producer). (2006a, September 18). The Colbert report [Television series]. Episode No. 147. New York: Comedy Central.
25. Karlin, B. (Executive Producer). (2006b, September 27). The Colbert report [Television series]. Episode No. 153. New York: Comedy Central.
26. Karlin, B. (Executive Producer). (2006c, October 5). The Colbert report [Television series]. Episode No. 158. New York: Comedy Central.
27. Kinder, D. R., & Palfrey, T. R. (1993). On behalf of an experimental political science. In D. R. Kinder & T. R. Palfrey (Eds.), Experimental foundations of political science. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
28. Kreuz, R. J., & Roberts, R. M. (1993). On satire and parody: The importance of being ironic. Metaphor and Symbol, 8, 97-109.
29. Lyttle, J. (2001). The effectiveness of humor in persuasion: The case of business ethics training. Journal of General Psychology, 128, 206-216.
30. McKinnon, L. M., & Kaid, L. L. (1999). Exposing negative campaigning or enhancing advertising effects: An experimental study of ad watch effects on voters' evaluations of candidates and their ads. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 27, 217-236.
31. Morris, J. S., & Baumgartner, J. (2008). The Daily Show and attitudes toward the news media. In J. Baumgartner & J. S. Morris (Eds.), Laughing matters: Humor and American politics in the media age, (pp. 315-331). New York: Routledge.
32. Morris, J. S., & Forgette, R. (2007). News grazers, television news, political knowledge, and engagement. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12, 91-107.
33. Moy, P., Xenos, M. A., & Hess, V. K. (2006). Priming effects of late-night comedy. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 198-210.
34. Nagourney, A. (2007, March 1). In newly usual way, McCain says he'll run. New York Times, p. A16.
35. Niemi, R. G., Craig, S. C., & Mattei, F. (1991). Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study. American Political Science Review, 85, 1407-1413.
36. Niven, D., Lichter, S. R., & Amundson, D. (2003). The political content of late-night comedy. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 8, 118-133.
37. O'Sullivan, P. B., & Geiger, S. F. (1995). Newspaper truthboxes and political attack ads: Does the watchdog bite? Journalism Quarterly, 72, 771-785.
38. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
39. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2006, July 30). Online papers modestly boost Newspaper readership. Biennial Media Consumption Study. Retrieved July 30, 2006, from www.press.org/reports
40. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2007, April 15). Public knowledge of current affairs little changed by news and information revolutions. Retrieved April 15, 2007, from www.peoplepress.org/reports
41. Pfau, M., & Louden, A. (1994). Effectiveness of ad watch formats in deflecting political attack ads. Communication Research, 21, 325-341.
42. Sarver, D. L. (2004, September). No laughing matter: Late-night television talk shows' coverage of the 2004 Democratic Presidential Primary. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.
43. Schaefer, R. J., & Avery, R. K. (1993). Audience conceptualizations of Late Night with David Letterman. journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 37, 253-273.
44. Schmidt, S. R. (1994). Effects of humor on sentence memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 953-967.
45. Scott, C., Klein, D. M., & Bryant, J. (1990). Consumer response to humor in advertising: A series of field studies using behavioral observations. The Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 498-501.
46. Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 515-530.
47. Sternthall, B., & Craig, C. S. (1973). Humor in advertising. Journal of Marketing, 37, 12-18.
48. Storm, J. (2004, August 28). Blah, blah, smile; Late night is loosen-up time for pols on TV. No tough questions, just play movie star. The Philadelphia Inquirer, p. C01.
49. Surlin, S. H., & Tate, E. D. (1976). "All in the Family": Is Archie Funny? Journal of Communication, 26(4), 61-68.
50. Swift, J. (1969). A modest proposal. New York: Grossman Publishers. (Original work published 1729)
51. Tabacoff, D. (Executive Producer). (2006a, September 20). The O'Reilly factor [Television series]. New York: Fox News.
52. Tabacoff, D. (Executive Producer). (2006b, September 26). The O'Reilly factor [Television series]. New York: Fox News.
53. Tabacoff, D. (Executive Producer). (2006c, October 3). The O'Reilly factor [Television series]. New York: Fox News.
54. Vidmar, N., & Rokeach, M. (1976). Archie Bunker's bigotry: A study in selective perception and exposure. journal of Communication, 26(4), 36-47.
55. Young, D. G. (2004a, September 2). The Counterargument-Disruption Model of political humor (CADIMO): An experimental exploration of the effects of late-night political jokes on cognitive elaboration and the conditional effects of partisanship. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.
56. Young, D. G. (2004b). Late-night comedy in election 2000: Its influence on candidate trait ratings and the moderating effects of political knowledge and partisanship. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48, 1-22.
57. Young, D. G. (2006). Late-night comedy and the salience of the candidates' caricatured traits in the 2000 election. Mass Media & Society, 9, 339-366.
58. Young, D. G., & Tisinger, R. M. (2006). Dispelling late-night myths: News consumption among late-night comedy viewers and the predictors of exposure to various late-night shows. Harvard International journal of Press/Politics, 11, 113-134.
59. Zhang, Y. (1996). Responses to humorous advertising: The moderating effect of need for cognition. journal of Advertising, 25, 15-32.