Outrage was kindled this past week as Jimmy Fallon, the iconic “Late Night Show” host, ran his comedic fingers through Donald Trump’s well-known hair. Donald Trump was the first nominee this cycle to appear on his show, and the antics produced waves of criticism, mainly asking the question: Why did Jimmy Fallon not take Donald Trump seriously?
This question has been a recent theme in the media. Matt Lauer, “Today Show” host and public figure, was chosen to host the Commander-In-Chief Forum, a quick ‘debate’ where nominees answered questions from both Lauer and audience members pertaining to national security issues. Lauer eagerly questioned Hillary Clinton on her email debacle, hardly allowing for actual responses to audience member questions, while allowing Donald Trump to verifiably lie about his support for the Iraq War. Lauer received blowback from this night because he was reported as harboring “unfairness, sloppiness and even sexism in his handling of the event.”
Thus begins the Fallon fiasco. As a comedic entity, Jimmy Fallon isn’t typically held to the standards of journalistic integrity that Matt Lauer is, but that doesn’t mean that those concerned with the election weren’t eager to press Fallon for taking a “kids-gloves approach” to the evening. Other late night talk show outlets, such as “Full Frontal with Samantha Bee,” “Late Night” with Seth Meyers and “Late Show” with Stephen Colbert, took to scolding Fallon by airing their own investigations into the birther issue, slyly subverting Fallon’s own unwillingness to research the issue.
“Why do so many Americans think playing footsie with fringe hate groups is a disqualifier from polite society, much less presidency?” asked Samatha Bee on her show, “Full Frontal.” She went on to state that comedic celebrity appearances such as ones on the “Late Night show” “gladly nurtured Trump’s celebrity.”
This brings up a difficult issue. Do hosts like Jimmy Fallon, renowned for taking celebrities out of their comfort zone and humanizing them through impromptu games, owe a debt to America to besiege Donald Trump’s policies? Or are actual journalists like Matt Lauer, now emblazoned on the pages of twitter for his “Today Show” antics (dressing like Paris Hilton for one), becoming too entertainment based?
John Oliver, host of “Last Week Tonight” and another zesty, comedic and political personality on TV, recently studied the efforts that print media and traditional news organizations go through to produce popular content. What he found was that multiple storied, historical organizations are now pushing to create pop-culture themed stories—those that are typically featured in Buzzfeed, centering on celebrity gossip and things like puppies.
This is the difficult aspect of media today. What has resulted from this election specifically are a media that makes critiques of candidates and yet embrace the insanity of the circumstances. The election cycle is punctuated by a hopeless humor of what should be political debate, but is instead sensationalist entertainment.
Modern journalism can’t be faulted as it finds itself trapped in an era having to compete with detailed, investigative counterparts and viral pop culture themes. The transition to online delivery forces news organizations to fight with viral home videos and click-bait headlines, which in the elective cycle has led to more conspiracies (and the continuation of others). Conversely, Obama’s hit with younger generations comes not from his campaign’s taxed efforts, but with his effortless style and sly comedy.
The question then becomes, what is the right answer? Should comedy icons be expected to parlay their personalities and ask ‘hard questions,’ or should figures like Fallon, who gave the same treatment to Donald Trump that he would anyone else, continue to groove in their niche. The lines between politics-as-entertainment and politics-as-history-changing-decisions seems blurred, and hard hitting, investigative journalism seems washed away in a surf of speculation and annoying incredulity. The sardonic approach to this election and these televised gaffes seems to only relay the message that the division between the serious and playful are more and more erased, and that the entertainment value of a Donald Trump—whether that is outrage, devotion or comedy—is too much to pass up.