Comedy. You either love it or hate it, but it’s a phenomenon nonetheless, capturing Youtube feeds, small talk, and Saturday nights. For over 40 years, Saturday Night Live has been a centerpiece of American culture, reaching audiences far and wide regardless of socioeconomic class, age, gender, or (to an extent) political beliefs. Over the course of it’s exciting history, SNL has changed the game, providing an alternate route for millions of voters to obtain crucial information or impressions about candidates, whether they watch the show for this purpose or simply saw a five minute sketch by chance. In reference to the 2016 presidential election, Dean Obeidallah of SNL reflected, “eighty million people watched the debate, 130 million people will vote, 50 million others are still looking for places to get their news, and comedy can fill that gap."
In class we talked about the cost of knowledge and the fact that there is an ideal balance between knowledge and ignorance, based on the costs of obtaining said knowledge, which may not be the same for each person. In many cases, the cost of building in time to learn about the candidates (information that would be useful in voting) prevents voters from doing so, especially given the comparatively high cost of voting as compared to marginal benefit. Spending a few minutes watching SNL or something similar provides a quicker alternative to reading the Wall Street Journal or watching CNN, and it captures a sector of comedy-inclined voters who wouldn't necessarily be engaging in these additional activities anyway.
In class we talked about the cost of knowledge and the fact that there is an ideal balance between knowledge and ignorance, based on the costs of obtaining said knowledge, which may not be the same for each person. In many cases, the cost of building in time to learn about the candidates (information that would be useful in voting) prevents voters from doing so, especially given the comparatively high cost of voting as compared to marginal benefit. Spending a few minutes watching SNL or something similar provides a quicker alternative to reading the Wall Street Journal or watching CNN, and it captures a sector of comedy-inclined voters who wouldn't necessarily be engaging in these additional activities anyway.
It should be noted, however, that obtaining information about the candidates from an artistic standpoint rather than a supposedly completely factual one could have further implications. As is noted in the NBC News article, voters were potentially influenced by Ferrell's positive rendition of George W. Bush on SNL before the 2000 election. Backlash against SNL for being "too liberal" could also influence potential voters, and over-the-top renditions of candidates on the show could even lead to higher levels of expressive voting, depending on the views of the viewer. However, one thing is for sure--SNL has changed the game in terms of how we learn about our current events and how we decide which way to vote.
No comments:
Post a Comment