By Nick Bond
Much like the genre prototype “The Simpsons and Philosophy” and tomes such as “Freakonomics” and “Blink,” the book “The Daily Show and Philosophy” attempts to take highly academic concepts through the lens of pop culture and make them more palatable to the masses. Unlike its predecessors however, the book does not make understanding of these concepts significantly easier to digest. Since this book is essentially a collection of academic papers, as opposed to an interpretation of them, it still has an air of esotericism that makes for a translation that feels forced in a way roughly akin to one’s parents talking about rap music.
That is not to say this is a bad book. In fact, even with its somewhat dry language it does do a good job of explaining the concept contained within. If students were to find this on their course reading list, they should be filled with a sense of relief, because the readings are more enjoyable than, say, Eliot Sober’s “Core Questions in Philosophy.” Again, a problem does arise because of the composition of the book. Its disparate topics range from the initial reading “Amusing Ourselves to Death with Television News,” which discusses the relationship between The Daily Show and the Neil Postman axiom of the “medium [being] the message,” to a discussion on Stewart’s position as a modern day Socrates. As a result of this variety, it is unlikely that this would be found in a pure philosophy class, but rather in a First Year Connection cluster or a class on the role of mass media in society, although, even that has its issues.
But the greatest flaw of this book is that it has a tendency to speak of “The Daily Show” and its sister show, “The Colbert Report,” in an exceedingly reverent light. This is an enormous problem when discussing the role of something as a lens to view the world through. A lack of acknowledgement of the occasional blurriness of the image, in this case, the show’s somewhat obvious liberal bias, undermines the entire goal of the book in a way that brings into question the academic validity of the book, though that should probably be left to individual professors to decide.
All in all, though the book does have some serious flaws, it is fundamentally good idea, if only to be used as a tool to develop a student’s interest in philosophy or sociology, and can be used as an effective textbook for professors. However, for those looking for a light hearted, fun read that looks as society through the veil of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, “America: The Book” and “I Am America (And So Can You!)” are better choices.
