Harris’s definition of countering is “bringing a different set of interests to bear upon a subject, look to notice what others have not. Your aim is not to refute what has been said before, to bring the discussion to an end, but to respond to prior views in ways that move the conversation in new directions” (56). Although The Daily Show isn’t a blog I think it acts rather closely to one and does an excellent job of ‘countering’. I like following/watching Jon Stewart for one the entertainment, but also because he talks about a lot about issues that newspapers cover, yet his show is more appealing and easier to understand way. Stewart’s recent show on February 15, 2012 does a nice job in not only furthering the conversation on insider trading but also bringing a different set of interests to the conversation. Originally 60 Minutes brings up how although for regular Americans can be prosecuted for using insider trading information in order to buy/sell stocks it is still legal for congress men and women to use their inside information in order to either help Hedge funds or to buy their own stocks. The reason I think The Daily Show does a good job in countering is because he questions Congress when they say they want to pass a bill that hold Congress accountable like every other American. I think Stewart furthers the conversation by first taking what 60 minutes has to say as well as countering Congress by sarcastically stating, “Oh right, it’s ridiculous to expect that Congress should be held under the same rules as regular Americans.” I think this doesn’t just stop the conversation like most arguments do—it furthers the conversation by looking at another angle. Stewart constantly tries to look at news stories from different angles without just blatantly putting down the opposing argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment