Research Article

Global Media Journal 2017 Vol.15 No.29:86 ISSN 1550-7521

Are Late Night TV Shows in the Polarizing Society? Examining the Ambivalence of New Version of Politcal Partsanship in the United States? Gregory Gondwe*

University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, USA *Corresponding author: Gregory Gondwe, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, USA, Tel: 303-492-5007; E-mail: [email protected] Received date: Nov 07, 2017; Accepted date: Nov 27, 2017; Published date: Dec 04, 2017 Copyright: © 2017 Gondwe G. This is an open-access artcle distributed under the terms of the Creatve Commons Atributon License, which permits unrestricted use, distributon, and reproducton in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Citaton: Gondwe G. Are Late Night TV Shows in the Polarizing Society? Examining the Ambivalence of New Version of Politcal Partsanship in the United States? Global Media Journal 2017, 15:29. large diferent outlooks between the Democrats and the Republicans; red state voters and blue state voters; religious Abstract vs. secular, and involve a large segment of the public incorporatng most informed, interested, and actve citzens. This study examines the role of Late-Night Television Unfortunately, such a trend has equally taken precedence in shows (LNTV) play in the United States and their today’s media as refected in Late Night Television Shows. contributed towards the politcal polarizaton society. The study used qualitatve content analyses to generate It is, therefore, the objectve of this study to examine the theme emerging from 87 questonnaires that collected infuence of Late Night TV Shows in the polarizaton of the US from an online survey conducted with 23 LNTV show society. It further seeks to fnd out the ethical commitments of hosts in the United States. The fndings indicate that many the LNTVS and how much they base their programming on LNTVS hosts have a partsan afliaton that they politcs while ignoring pertnent issues afectng society. contagiously infuse into their audience. On the other Overall, the study seeks to reinforce the inital objectve of hand, the fndings indicate that LNTV hosts have less traditonal media such as late-night TV shows in service the freedom to create their own content, therefore, providing general public and not dividing people through politcal less ethnical consideraton for their audience. Most of all, afliatons. the fndings indicate that LNTV shows rank politcs as providing most newsworthy content than any criteria. The study used qualitatve content analyses to generate theme emerging from 87 questonnaires that collected from an online survey conducted with 23 LNTV show hosts in the Keywords: Late-night-television; Polarizaton; Media- United States. Findings indicate that LNTV shows in the United content; Partsanship States are frst a main news source of a young generaton, and are increasingly widening the gap of politcal partsanship.

Introducton Ratonale of the study The 2016 United States presidental campaigns and Studies that have sought to understand and contextualize electons presented a more polarized society [1]. Current media polarizaton in the United States have studied the debates in media and communicaton research are peppered phenomenon in a broader perspectve. In similar studies, with the noton that social and politcal polarizatons are media is taken as a whole without characterizing it to either rapidly increasing [2-4]. Critcs atribute this rise to the 2008 traditonal or non-traditonal. Prior [4] study employed a Presidental campaigns. According to the 2014 Pew data, the similar approach, therefore encountering challenges in percentage divide of polarizaton has skyrocketed from 10% to quantfying the causal link between partsan messages and over 21% since 1994. In its survey of 10 thousand partcipants changing attudes. Therefore, the signifcance of this study lies natonwide, the study found out that while 92% of the in the examinaton of the phenomenon from a narrower Republicans were to the right of the median Democrat, 94% of perspectve of LNTV, hence giving us an opportunity to the Democrats were also to the lef of the median Republican. understand this polarizaton from a key, yet overlooked This implies that while there has been a decrease in the standpoint. The three overarching questons the study ideological overlap between the Democratc and the addressed were: Republican Partes, their ideological thinking has become more aligned to politcal partsanship. Abramowitz and Saunders [2] RQ. 1: To what extend do LNTV host safeguard balanced conclude in their detailed survey analysis that the increase in reportng that accommodates various opinions and feelings of ideological polarizaton in the United States are refected in other politcal partes?

This article is available from: globalmediajournal.com 1 Global Media Journal 2017 ISSN 1550-7521 Vol.15 No.29:86

Ratonale: Research done on Late Night TV shows mostly However, the 1947 Hutchins Commission’s dissatsfacton presents a positve vibe about its role in accommodatng free with reportng facts truthfully began to purge away the speech and mitgatng hegemonic narratves. While this might commitments to accuracy and objectvity in their literal sense. have been true in the past, LNTV shows are becoming a new According to the Hutchins Commissions report, “it was no version for Politcal partsanship. longer necessary to report the facts truthfully, but the truths about the facts”. This meant that journalists or rather RQ.2: How would the LNTV hosts describe their freedom to reporters were given room to infuse in opinions and biases in create their own content for the show? their stories as long as they brought out the truth about the Ratonale: In a common parlance, editorial freedom is a stories. Notably, Television Stars such as Edward R. Murrow, terra incognita. Since the LNTV shows are now a few face for New York Times columnist, James B. Reston, and many others, journalism, the logic of self-censorship would apply to them as began to exercise this privilege as early as the 1950s. This gave well. power and authority to journalists as sources and custodians of truth and informaton; reinforced Edmund Burke and RQ3.2: How would you describe your commitment to Thomas Carlyle statements that the Media was the “Fourth safeguarding professional journalism ethics that renders trust Estate”. While this trend gave power to the media and all those and respect for your undefned audience? that reported the news, worries about objectvity and biased Ratonale: The fact that Late Night TV shows are known for reportng became a mirage. Journalists started serving their their adult rated content makes it imperatve to assess the interests and those of the organizaton. This misstep deliberate measures that LNTV hosts put forth to ascertain exonerated professional ethics in the media, therefore paving ethical standards in their broadcasts. With the proliferaton of way for journalism into a profession for grabs. the online access, LNTV shows’ audiences have become Around the 1950s, ‘infortainment’ became a virtue. undefned in all demographic characteristcs. Advertently, Late Night TV shows began to emerge with Steven Allen as among a few pioneers. Nonetheless, David Leterman Media and Politcal Partsanship in the and Conan O’Brien revolutonized LNTV into what we know them today. The main objectve was to convey informaton or United States news to the public in a more digested and entertaining way. Despite the growing challenges of societal and Politcal Essentally, it involved discussing emerging issues within polarizaton, the US media has always been on a rollercoaster society in a way that concurrently entertains and educates. In of objectve reportng. The earliest Mass Media developed other words, they were designed to ‘infortain’ [8]. While some under the revolutonary theme with an intenton to champion LNTVS have emerged and disappeared, the recent trend shows the cause for independence from England. Bailyn and Hench a plethora of them competng for the same platorm. [5] assert that, during that tme, only one of the seven papers Although the main objectve is not only to discuss and in Boston were neutral. Four of them were ‘loyalist’, while the analyze politcs, the current situaton proves otherwise. remaining two were ‘patriotc’. Such a trend was perpetuated Politcs, and especially in the era of Trump has become a even afer independence in 1776. Newspaper contents were defning feature for these shows [1]. Other politcians and characterized by ‘neighborhood gossip rags and occasional those with politcal agenda have also taken advantage of the police bloters that exposed local criminals and their actvites conventonal wisdom of traditonal media to air their views [6]. through such platorms [9]. As their spotlight increases with Politcal partsanship in the media was especially politcal events, the shows tend to cling to politcs alone; pronounced afer Martn Van Buren concretzed the disregarding other events that society is facing. Since politcs Democratc party with an imperatve of being elected survives under competng views, The Late-Night TV shows are President. His campaigns changed media formats into inclined to stcking with a single perspectve, so as to win and propaganda fedged organs, with editors being under the maintain their audience [10]. In this way, those opinions that payrolls of politcal partes. Such an afront to media credibility are not represented tend to shun away from the show and the bred a journalism that sought to serve the general public with publics that do not support their view; thus, contributng to a facts, and not politcal partsan propaganda and thus, the birth schism in opinion between society. of the ‘Penny Press’. For Carter [7], it was the American Civil War of 1861 that brought a revoluton to the media. During Literature Review and Theoretcal the tme, people become less interested in sensatonal stories, but facts about the war. This brought sanity in the feld of Framework journalism; demanding accuracy and concise unbiased Although there is a plethora of studies about media informaton sent from the batle felds through telegraphs. The infuence on society, very few have discussed media and hectc transmission process also paved a way for the polarizaton. Most of all, scanty research discusses Late-Night Associaton Press (AP) to create a hub for new sourcing. This TV shows. However, other than Pew Research studies, media hub had rules and guidelines that called for brevity and pundits, politcal scientsts and other communicaton scholars newsworthy stories, thus ruling out the possibility for as a whole, have begun to raise debates on the noton of unprofessional journalism and therefore creatng a way for persuasion and the ramifcatons of selectve exposure in the ethical reportng. 2 This article is available from: globalmediajournal.com Global Media Journal 2017 ISSN 1550-7521 Vol.15 No.29:86

current non-traditonal popular media environment [1,4]. data. Therefore, they hold that most Americans have moderate Initally, non-traditonal and popular media were perceived as views on most issues. This study also refects the fndings of positve and championing the negatve propagandist roles of Glaeser and Ward [17] who held that the noton of American the media. Hall and Gramsci’s hegemonic understanding of the Politcal polarizaton was merely a myth of American politcal media called for a panacea that required the general public to geography. While this debate remains inconclusive questons partcipate in setng the agenda for society. Popular media as to whether politcal polarizatons is a myth or are stll and culture were considered one among a few of the imperatve. As expressed by Gentzkow [1], the champions for media hegemony. inconclusiveness could be the result of diferences in how scholars and the American society as a whole summarize their The case is diferent in today’s media where the elites have own views. These perspectves are rooted in the way they taken over both non-traditonal and popular culture. The identfy a politcal party and describe its ideologies. recent past has witnessed the proliferaton of many politcians taking control of non-traditonal platorms such as Late-Night TV Shows, music, movies, etc., so as to reach a populaton that Method they might not reach through mainstream media [11]. As the Pew Research’s 2006 Biennial Media Consumpton dataset As noted earlier, the study’s purposive and convenient revealed, many young Americans get their news from non- sample was drawn from 23 recognized Late-Night TV show traditonal media in compensaton for their apathy toward the hosts. At frst, the study employed a standard ‘Survey mainstream media. As such, the importance of Late Night Analytcs’ questonnaire designed with a total of 27 questons. shows has become conventonal wisdom for politcians and all An atempt was made to incorporate a representatve sample that share a politcal agenda to audiences that are less of all the current Late-Night TV shows in the United States. interested or knowledgeable about politcs than the typical Television Networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, TBS, Comedy Central, audience for traditonal news [12]. In their fndings afer HBO, PBS, Showtme, and TV One) that run the LNTVS were analyzing the 1992 and 1996 electons, Owen and Davis [13] identfed. The frst approach in identfying the host and the concluded that many politcians utlized non-traditonal media show they run. The actual sampling was carried out in stages. in their campaigns. Sarver [11] asserts that this phenomenon The frst stage was to create a list of all Late-Night TV shows is accelerated in the Late-Night world where politcians are in the United States. Because of the diferent genres that the turned into a monologue punch line and are willing to put shows run (e.g. Trevor Noah’s show vs. Oprah Winfrey show), themselves up for potental embarrassment in an efort to the paper employed Holbert’s nine-part typology for the study reach voters. of entertainment and politcs. Of the nine-part, we focus on one category he calls, Traditonal Satre. Traditonal Satre LNTV shows and the politcal hegemonic includes all late-night talk show monologues that run politcal narratves messages predominantly implied by the very nature of being grounded in humor. Although the trend for politcians to take control of the Late- The data collecton was carried out from May through Night TV shows has existed since the 1960s (as observed in August 2017. Questonnaires designed through the Survey Nixon, John Kelly, etc.), Niven, et al. [14] observed that politcal Analytcs sofware were sent to the 10 television networks via jokes were consistent among the TV shows regardless of the email. Our hope was that the main host of the show and their politcal afliatons of the candidate at stake. According to the supportng hosts fll in the questonnaires. However, our three authors, comedians had generally developed a template questons were accommodatve to representatves hosts as of ant-politcian humor that drew upon whichever politcian well. However, only 87 respondents were able to respond, regardless of their politcal afliaton. However, afer the 2008 therefore, yielding a response rate of 67% percent. This was electon, as Schweikart [6] claims, the TV shows and their rendered inadequate for quanttatve data analysis. hosts began turning into partsanship; giving opportunites and less scrutny and embarrassment to a party they afliate Nonetheless, since the questons on the survey were themselves with. This has divided the society especially into designed with a qualitatve perspectve, the responses were Democrat or Republican with no room to opening up to other made relevant for a qualitatve study. Therefore, the party’s opinions among the audience. It is no wonder Gitlin researcher generated themes from the 87 questonnaires [15] and Waxman [9] argued that today’s Late-Night TV shows returned. The themes generated were designed to refect and are a new version of politcal partes. This implies that an avid answer the overarching research questons for the study. viewer or subscriber for a certain LNTVS automatcally Below are the main themes designed from the questonnaire: characterizes one and makes them partsan for the party that • Value of covering politcal news other than other pertnent show propagates. issues Such sentments are however refuted by other eminent • Hosts’ percepton of their freedom to create content politcal science scholars such as Fiorina, Abrams, and Pope • Hosts commitment to safeguarding media ethics [16] who argued that increasing polarizaton was largely a • Hosts’ percepton of the value and motves of their TV myth. In their book, “In Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized networks. America”, the three authors conclude that studies that have argued for the polarizaton of the US society have misreading 3 Global Media Journal 2017 ISSN 1550-7521 Vol.15 No.29:86

The Profle of the Respondents almost complete freedom, but with 10.34% concluding that they have no absolute freedom. On the other hand, only While considering other forms of gender, this queston was 21.83% of the respondents indicated that they had complete specially designed to determine what gender dominates Late freedom to decide what aspect of the story to emphasize. Night TV shows in the United States. Of the 87 responses However, a relatvely high percentage of 24.26% falls under received, 51.62 percent came from respondents that identfed the ‘somewhat’ degree of freedom. Overall, if one adds the themselves as male, and 32.48 percent from female positve responses, statstcs suggest that a larger percentage respondents. 14 respondents (16.09) chose not to register of the respondents feel that they have a high degree in their gender. Therefore, the fndings indicate that most of the deciding what aspect of the story should be emphasized. Late-Night TV shows that base their comedy on politcs in the Regarding the ability to get the idea they thought need to be United States are male dominated. Educaton background of covered, 46.09% of the respondents indicated that they had the hosts was not considered as relevant in this study despite the opportunity to set the agenda of the subject as opposed to the fact that it plays a vital role in understanding the 12.62% that thought they did not have any freedom at all. knowledge possessed by those creatng content for us. This Similar studies on Journalism freedom support these fndings. topic will be saved for a diferent study. Hosts’ commitment to media ethics Results The commitment towards ethical and moral standards of One among the key questons in this study was to determine the media was central to this study especially that the hosts the motvaton of the Late-Night TV show hosts for the job use mainstream media for their comedy. The proliferaton of they do, and why they work for their network. Below is the media access has led to a diverse demography in age and summary of their response. Dominant in the narratves of opinion. With this in mind, the theme was created to LNTV show host was the descripton that the love for comment determine the host’s consideraton of ethical standards given was their strongest motvaton. Many of them described their the fact that their audience could include teenagers. One motvaton as being driven not driven by fnancial incentves, respondent had this to say, “Comedy is a creatve art, and it’s but by the love that they have developed throughout their impossible to talk of ethics in creatvity…We do comedy, experience. Nonetheless, in spite of ‘the love for comedy’ therefore our main objectve to entertain”. A number of being the main motvaton characteristcs, their narratves respondents shared the same sentments although they did were also ted into remuneraton. This expression of rather acknowledge that ethics was necessary. They argued that they idealistc motvatons correlates with what similar studies have do make an efort to balance their content through the revealed [11,13]. Late Night TV shows provide the opportunity inclusion of a multplicity of sources or perspectves to the to partcipate in the major issues of public life in the United story. Nonetheless, many of them justfed their circumstances States and infuence public opinion. as necessary and a refecton of our current society. Surprising percentages, depending on the issue, think that these practces (widely. A relatvely large number were not sure, Percepton of hosts’ freedom to create content didn’t know or refused to commit to the statement. Three central indicators were used to gauge the perceptons The only ethical violaton that got considerable rejecton of the autonomy the hosts had in creatng content: autonomy was the practce of taking a bribe to censor or kill a story. in selectng the stories to run, Autonomy in deciding aspects of Many of them contended that it was impossible to do that the story to be emphasized, and the ability to get the subject unless that story was from the inside and tarnish on the or idea that one thinks is important. It is not surprising, show’s image. “Its common knowledge, you cannot or rather however, that the autonomy to create their own content it’s hard to self-critcize”. recorded a low motvaton index. For many hosts, while they had the opportunity to create content, their messages were Value of covering politcal news other than not always accepted. To this, many hosts described how it was important to create content that refected their goals; which in other pertnent issues practces are the goals of the owners of the television The set of questons regarding public afairs were designed networks they work for. Most surprisingly, the opportunity to to test the degree of awareness of important issues and also to contribute to natonal development did not come out as test what the TV hosts considered newsworthy for their absolutely important to many hosts. Many respondents programing. In their narratves, a number of hosts believe that described their freedom as centered on the mission, goals and issues of government and politcs in the United States rank objectves of the television network. However, a number of frst in what was newsworthy for the public. They went to an them described their desire to add content beyond what they extent of questoning whether it was possible to separate present. society from politcal issues. For many, they indicated that In quanttatve terms, most of the hosts for the Late-Night politcal issues were characterized by government issues. TV shows have a high autonomy to select the stories they wish Other related issues of ‘farming potatoes in Idaho’ were not to run. This is indicated with a percentage of 43.70 of important for politcal discussion. ‘somewhat’ freedom. A 20.68% indicates that the hosts have

4 This article is available from: globalmediajournal.com Global Media Journal 2017 ISSN 1550-7521 Vol.15 No.29:86

Also, of high importance are issues of corrupton and percepton of freedom to create content, their ethical Transparency as well as celebrity news and gossips. The consideratons, and the values they atach to their programs in respondents put Health and Religious issues as well as relaton to the unity or polarizaton of the United Society. The development issues in the lowest category. As they contnued fndings presented infer to the fact that the motvaton of the to argue, their role was to entertain. One respondent narrated hosts are neither rooted in trying to unite the United States that “When we as comedians are looking for ideas for comedy, nor in polarizing society [18]. Their main objectve as we go for something that we believe has humor in it. Human repeatedly described was to present humorous events. interest is our priority. We don’t just go for anything because it However, given the fact that the love for comedy, is pertnent to society, but because it can bring humor to our remuneraton and the chance to infuence their audience rank audience”. frst, we can deduce that these motvatons are directed towards polarizing the US society politcally. Overall, an overwhelming majority (82.8%) of the hosts indicated the necessity for Late Night TV shows in the United When it comes to freedom to create content, it is States to include other pertnent issues outside politcs in their overwhelming to learn that a larger percentage of the hosts programing. They perceived that the actual performance by believe that they have that opportunity to infuence content. many television hosts was only at a level of good to fair. Most However, studies in journalism argue that press freedom is would rate their television network as only fair or weak in mostly regulated by editors and self-interested ownership reportng issues outsides politcs that had direct efects on the [19-21]. It is arguably true that Late Night TV shows are not a public society. one-man show, but a collectve work by the media crew as well as editors. Therefore, other than the censorship that is rooted Hosts’ percepton on the value and motves of in the policies of the network the hosts’ work for, editors their TV networks equally play the role in gatekeeping through the sifing of what comes in and goes out of content. It is, therefore, a litle Respondents were also asked to indicate their assessment wonder that many hosts supported the goals of the media of what consttuted the goals and motves of their television they work for despite the fact that they did not agree to some networks. Despite the fact that the Late-Night TV show of the objectves and guidelines of the media. For example, if a comedians are not necessary considered as professional host worked for a network owned by FOX news, they will in all journalists, they identfy themselves with the market model of ways try to align to the values and principles of that insttuton professional journalism and agreed to the fact that audience despite the fact that they might disagree with some grounding research was essental for bringing about the adaptaton of the values. It is unfortunate that even private media have joined programing to contemporary and pertnent contexts. One this afliaton trend, emerging to support either republican or respondent argued that it was important to contnually democratc party. Purcell, et al. [22] therefore argue that improve the professional quality of their shows. This almost all LNTV shows have fallen under the spell of respondent asserted that the shows were dependent of their partsanship. audience, so as much as their TV networks objectves were a Most of all, it is revealing that a commitment to ethics was priority, they were in no way supposed to confict with the not the hosts’ main issue in the category. Unity, as opposed to objectves of their audience. However, many could not answer polarizaton, in any form and state, requires at least a whether that statement implied even in confictng situatons deliberate consideraton of ethical values. In unitng the United where the demands of both the republican and democratc States society, hosts need to consider how their programing partes were fulflled. might harm the society in diferent ways. This includes the way Nonetheless, the fact that 45.97% of the respondents stll their messages that they might not fully believe in, but stll think that marketng/promotons were more important than have to disseminate because of the goals of the insttuton professionalism is a revealing factor. This fnding counteracts they work for, could afect society. As custodians of truth (at the 39.08% that believes that proft supersedes least as many audience members think) they have the duty to professionalism. It is not surprising to note that many present not only facts but also balanced ones with diferent comedians that work for television networks are excluded opinion views. Otherwise, LNTVS have to revert to their from the positon of professional journalists. Above all, it is not original objectve of critquing all politcians with no sides to surprising that 29.88% of the respondent believe that the 2016 take. In that way, they would be able to present entertainment presidental campaigns have improved or increased the and educate their publics without bias, thus concurrently viewership of their program. In the same way, 32.20% agree to meetng the objectves of the insttutons and that of comedy. some extent, giving a positve response total of 62.08%. This will in other ways increase their viewership since everyone will feel at home, and not as being atacked. Discussion Conclusion The fndings in this study present many pertnent issues that could explain how the media in the United States has led The current study, like many, is obviously prone to to a politcal polarizaton of its society. A number of themes limitatons. The frst limitaton is common to this type of were developed, but more importantly, those that looked at research. While we were able to categorize diferent types of the motvaton of the hosts of the Late-Night TV shows, their Late Night TV shows using Holbert’s nine-part typology, we 5 Global Media Journal 2017 ISSN 1550-7521 Vol.15 No.29:86

also agree to the fact that it is hard to separate shows that are 7. Carter EL (1971) The Revoluton in Journalism during the Civil politcally inclined from those that are not. In this were, a War. Lincoln Herald 73: 229-234. thorough, and most probably a qualitatve in-depth study is 8. Moy P, Xeno MA, Hess VK (2005) Priming Efects of Late-Night recommended. Comedy. Internatonal Journal of Public Opinion Research 18(12) Second, it is not clear as to who really flled in the survey 9. Waxman S (2003) The Recall Show with Jay Leno. The questonnaires, which we believe might have been flled by Washington Post pp: C01. representatves that might not be comedians. In this case, we 10. Shanto I, Westwood SJ (2015) Fear and Loathing across Party recommend self-administered questonnaires. We believe that Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarizaton. American Journal of although the questons were all encompassing, some were Politcal Science 59: 690-707. more directed towards the hosts themselves. We assume it is 11. Sarver DL (2007) But seriously folks…: Understanding the the reason for some incoherence in certain results. Further, politcal efects of Late Night Television Comedy. LSU Doctoral given some funding and incentves, the study would Dissertaton. recommend that we increase the number of questons in the 12. Baum MA (2005) Sof News and Politcal Knowledge: Evidence survey. 27 questons sufce in a situaton where no incentves of Absence or Absence of Evidence? Politcal Communicaton were given to the partcipant. Therefore, we seek to expand 20: 173-190. our study in diferent ways that range from the sample size to 13. Davis R, Owen D (1998) New Media and American Politcs. New the familiarizaton of distnctons in LNTV shows. York: Oxford University Press. Overall, despite the limitatons, the study presents useful 14. Niven DS, Lichter R, Amundson D (2003) The Politcal Content of informaton in providing evidence regarding issues that have Late Night Comedy. The Internatonal Journal of Press/Politcs current superfcial impressions about the media and politcal 8(3). polarizaton in the United States. A survey of this type is most 15. Gitlin T (1980) The Whole World is watching. Berkeley: useful as a basis for further research. University of California Press. 16. Fiorina MP, Abrams S, Pope CJ (2006) Culture War? The Myth of References a Polarized America. New York: Pearson Educaton. 1. Gentzkow M (2016) Polarizaton in 2016. Mimeo, Stanford 17. Glaeser EL, Ward BA (2006) Myths and Realites of American University. Politcal Geography. Journal of Economic Perspectves 20:119-144. 2. Abramowitz AI, Saunders K (2008) Is Polarizaton a Myth? The Journal of Politcs 70: 542-555. 18. Hart RP, Hartelius J (2007) The Politcal Sins of Jon Stewart. Critcal Studies in Media Communicaton 24: 263–272. 3. Baughman JL (2011) The fall and rise of partsan Journalism. Center for Journalism Ethics: University of Wisconsin. 19. Day N (2001) Censorship or Freedom of Expression? Minneapolis, MN: Lerner Publicaton Group. 4. Prior M (2003) Any Good News in Sof News? The Impact of Sof News Preference on Politcal Knowledge. Politcal 20. Bennet P, Naim M (2015) 21stcentury censorship. Columbia Communicaton 20: 149-171. Journalism Review 53: 22. 5. Bailyn B, Hench J (1981) The Press and the American Revoluton. 21. Abbasi IR, Al-sharqi L (2015) Media censorship: Freedom versus Boston: North Eastern University Press. responsibility. Journal of Law and Confict Resoluton 7: 21-25 6. Schweikart L (2010) Events that Made America, and proved that 22. Purcell D, Heitmeier B, Van Wyhe C (2017) Critcal Geopolitcs the founding fathers were right all along. Penguin Books Ltd. and the Framing of the Arab Spring Through Late-Night Humor. USA. Social Science Quarterly 98: 513-531.

6 This article is available from: globalmediajournal.com