• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2007 "But seriously, folks...": understanding the political effects of late night television comedy Danielle Lynn Sarver Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the Mass Communication Commons Recommended Citation Sarver, Danielle Lynn, ""But seriously, folks...": understanding the political effects of late night television comedy" (2007). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 2264. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/2264 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. “BUT SERIOUSLY, FOLKS…”: UNDERSTANDING THE POLITICAL EFFECTS OF LATE NIGHT TELEVISION COMEDY A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In The Manship School of Mass Communication by Danielle Lynn Sarver B.S.C., Ohio University, 1997 M.A., Ohio University, 2000 December 2007 © Copyright 2007 Danielle Lynn Sarver All Rights Reserved ii This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, William B. and Patricia A. Sarver, for humor in the face of exasperation, patience in the face of anxiety, and, most importantly, persistence in the face of apathy. Thanks for being so amazing; here’s to the third verse. And in loving memory of my grandparents: John Anthony and Mary Zepko Alexander Carl Bennett, Sr. and Orpha Irene Sarver I think they would be really proud of this. We miss you. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS No dissertation that takes this long to write can possibly have a succinct acknowledgements section; without all of the people listed here (and others who remain uncredited), I probably would have given up on this four years ago. Luckily, I have been blessed with a multitude of supportive, patient and— perhaps most importantly — incredibly kind people in my life, and thus have an extensive list of individuals to thank. First and foremost, I would like to recognize the contributions of Dr. Timothy Cook, my original dissertation chair, who helped shape this project and my thinking. Sadly, Dr. Cook passed away while I was still on my “anti-sabbatical,” but his influence can be found throughout this document. I also owe a huge debt of gratitude to “my lieges,” Dr. David Kurpius and Dr. James Garand. Dr. Kurpius generously offered to take up the reins and direct this dissertation, keeping the faith that I would, in fact, get this done before the clock strikes a metaphorical midnight (since it’s 11:45 p.m. under the most generous of estimates). His good humor made this process more pleasant than I had thought possible. Without Dr. Garand, there would be no quantitative component to this dissertation; while time and again I tried his remarkable patience, he would always help me with a laugh and a smile. Thanks, guys—lunch at The Chimes is on me. Dr. Anne Osborne, thanks for reminding me that, no matter what, I can always make it to the Moon—muchas gracias. Dr. Emily Erickson, supporter extraordinaire, thanks for keeping me sane and going with me into the lions’ den when necessary. Dr. Yoshinori Kamo, you showed great tolerance for dissertation (re-) defenses—thanks for sticking around. I would also like to thank the three Associate Deans of Graduate Studies at the Manship School who worked with me over the past seven years: Dr. Louis Day, who brought me in, Dr. Ralph Izard, who brought me up, and Dr. Margaret DeFleur, who brought me back into the fold. You all are fantastic—thanks for supporting me when the chips were down and for not giving up, iv despite the odds. Dean John Maxwell Hamilton, your vision is what made this program happen, and I’m so proud that I can finally close the chapter on the first Manship Ph.D. cohort. Linda Rewerts and everyone else in the Manship School, thanks for always welcoming me back with smiles and hugs—you guys make it a pleasure each time I return to Baton Rouge. Two people worked harder on this dissertation than I had any right to ask: Patricia Sarver, my main “research rat,” spent hours transcribing tapes, attending focus groups, and doing whatever else was needed to get this done. Christine Alexander, proofreader/editor extraordinaire, was willing to slog through pages and pages (and pages) in draft after draft (after draft), offering savvy recommendations as well as witty asides about my writing proclivities (turns out, commas shouldn’t be used just for decoration!). While all remaining mistakes are mine, this dissertation belongs to them as well. And, of course, I have to thank my dad, Bill Sarver, who lovingly and willingly transcribed five words before giving up on the youth of today. I am so lucky to have your support, especially when I’ve painted myself into a corner. Special thanks go to those who made the qualitative research possible: in Athens, Dr. Sean McGann, Ryan McGann, and the women of Alpha Omicron Pi. Sue “Dirthead” Olenik, thanks for your expert assistance with interview transcriptions—we could not have done it without you. Finally, a huge thank you has to go to my peeps at Insight Research Group, especially Boaz Mourad and Stacey Matthias. Without my Insight experience, I could never have successfully completed this caliber of research. Your guidance and expertise are invaluable, as are your friendship and support. Erin, Jason, and Peter, who helped me put together the now-lost content analysis chapter, you’re coding rock stars—thank you! While I am a fan of hyperbole, I can honestly say that I am blessed to have the greatest family in the world. Missie, Jason, Johnny, and Kyle, you mean the world to me—I am so lucky to have you as my siblings. Mackenzie, you are the smartest, sweetest, most remarkable child in v the world, and you fill me with joy (this sentiment is extended to all future nieces and nephews as well). Many thanks and much love to the Heckels (Scott, Connie, Kevin, Angela, Adam, Todd, Laura, Rob, Sara, Baby Snyder, Jeremy, Sarah, and Lily) and James “Sonny” Pappas— without all of you harassing me, who knows where I’d be right now. Mary Josephine Alexander, Estelle Murawski, and Sr. Kay O’Malley, thanks for keeping me in your prayers and your hearts. Dave and Jan Troutman, thanks for being both remarkable godparents and political inspirations. I am equally blessed to have an excellent group of friends, most of whom have put up with me for more years than I would have thought possible. Linda, Heather, Chris, Kim, Mike, Dena, Colleen, Celina, Amy, Lisa, Erik, Alison, Tracey, and all others who I don’t have room to list—thanks for keeping me company, encouraging me to finish, and generally annoying me until I got this done. A special “shout out” goes to my Louisiana/Quantum Kitten family (Tom, Brandi, Simon, Sarah, Nick, and Jason)—I love you guys. To the fine gentlemen at Consolidated Graphics Group, especially Wally and Lenny, thank you for both your printing capabilities and your rock star friendships. And while I don’t actually know her, I also have to thank the incomparable Angela Lansbury for providing me with countless hours of enjoyment. Finally, I want to thank my great-uncle, Frank Alexander. In the late 1980s, Uncle Frank let me interview him for a social studies project on World War II veterans. His wisdom and humor made for an excellent story, and it was through this that I had my first glimpse at the joys that come from uncovering new information and sharing other people’s experiences. Uncle Frank encouraged me to write, and I can’t thank him enough for that. Uncle Frank, here’s to you—I know you’re toasting Grandpa in Heaven, with red zinfandel all around. Salud. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION……………………………………………………………………… iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………… iv LIST OF TABLES………………………..………………………………………… viii LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………… ix ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………… x CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………... 1 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………….……………….. 14 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY………….………………………………………. 43 CHAPTER 4. QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS……………………………………… 52 CHAPTER 5. QUALITATIVE FINDINGS FOR LATE NIGHT TALK SHOW VIEWERS…………………………………………..……………………………….. 92 CHAPTER 6. QUALITATIVE FINDINGS FOR “THE DAILY SHOW” VIEWERS…………………………………………………………………………… 133 CHAPTER 7. CONSTRUCTIONISM AND LATE NIGHT COMEDY PROGRAMS………………………………………………………………………… 171 CHAPTER 8. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS……………………………… 190 WORKS CITED…………………………………………………………………….. 226 APPENDIX A. DESCRIPTION OF QUANTITATIVE VARIABLES…………….. 232 APPENDIX B. CROSSTABULATIONS…………………………………………... 237 APPENDIX C. INTERVIEW PROTOCOL………………………………………... 257 APPENDIX D. FOCUS GROUP PROTOCOL……………………………………. 259 APPENDIX E. LIST OF RESPONDENT CODES………………………………… 262 APPENDIX F. CONSENT FORMS……………………………………………….. 263 VITA………………………………………………………………………………… 265 vii LIST OF TABLES 4.1. Differences of means of late night talk show viewers and non-viewers for socioeconomic and demographic variables……………………………………... 63 4.2. Differences of means of late night talk show viewers and non-viewers for political engagement variables………………………………………….............. 64 4.3. Differences of means of late night talk show viewers and non-viewers for political interest variables………………………………………………............. 65 4.4. Differences of means of late night talk show viewers and non-viewers for knowledge-related variables…………………………………………….............. 66 4.5. Ordered logit estimates for a model of the relationship between late night talk show viewership and political participation………………………………... 69 4.6. Ordered logit estimates for a model of the relationship between late night talk show viewership and news media………………...………………………... 74 4.7. Differences of means of “The Daily Show” viewers and non-viewers for socioeconomic and demographic variables……………………………………... 78 4.8.

Load more

  277

Copy Link