Colbert's spinoff

The difference between political satire and political jokes in general is that you can learn something from satire, when it's done right. A political joke, on the other hand, is just a joke--even if it flatters your side and shafts your opponents, it's still just a joke. Satire always requires some connection to the truth. That's why viewers of "The Daily Show" on Comedy Central are generally better informed on issues than are Leno and Letterman fans.

A study by the Pew Research Center study found it a toss-up, whether young viewers got their news on political matters from late-night talk shows or from "real" network news shows.

Moreover, a study by the Annenberg Public Policy Center found that "Daily Show" viewers better informed on candidates' positions on issues ranging from Social Security to banning assault rifles.

("No Spin Zone?" Or No Irony Zone? Here's Bill O'Reilly's shocked--shocked!--reaction to all this: "You know what's really frightening?" O'Reilly asked Stewart. "You actually have an influence on this presidential election. That is scary, but it's true.")

That's especially ironic, since the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) found that viewers of Fox News (where O'Reilly draws his paycheck) were worst informed of all media consumers.

All of which adds up to the following bit of news having greater significance for the health of the American republic in 2005 than it might otherwise: Steven Colbert, faux senior correspondent and shameless scene stealer on "The Daily Show," will be getting his own show this fall. The new show, produced by Stewart's production company and scheduled to follow "TDS," aims to do for the talking-head pundit shows what "TDS" has done for the standard half-hour news report--which I assume to mean "skewer them ruthlessly."

The Times reporter clearly doesn't get Colbert--his funniest stuff isn't the interviews; it's the conversations with Stewart (often while he's standing 10 feet away, in front of a blue screen, pretending to be on location somewhere--a bit of shtick the studio audiences love). Colbert's smug know-it-all-ism plays perfectly against Stewart's politely appalled demeanor in their exchanges (strongly suggesting that Colbert needs to get the right people around him on his new show--on his own, he has trouble carrying a "Mr. Goodwrench" commercial). Also, his exuberantly irreverent "This Week in God" segments are must-see. I'm a little surprised that Viacom lets it happen.

Along those lines: There was a rumor several weeks back that "The Daily Show" might move to ABC after Koppel leaves "Nightline." That would be such a shame. Had Bill Maher stayed on HBO, rather than moving "Politically Incorrect" to ABC, he might well have had safe haven during the 9/11 flap that ultimately cost him his job (as well as, if subsequent performance is any indication, at least one of his balls--regular viewers are welcome to their own opinion). The FCC--to say nothing of the Disney culture (see here, here, and here, just for examples)--would never be able to keep their hands off of "TDS" if it moved to ABC.

Network TV has its attempt at satire--it's the 'Weekend Update' section of "Saturday Night Live," and even with Tina Fey as head writer it's still showing every single one of its 30 years. Let's hope that the Comedy Channel's green-lighting the Colbert spinoff signals that Stewart, et al, will resist the siren call of moving from a small audience but a great and slightly dangerous show on cable to a huge audience with a safe but mediocre product on ABC.