The document discusses the relationship between comedy, social empathy, and democracy in New Zealand television programs. It argues that comedy programs like Eating Media Lunch and The Unauthorised History of New Zealand cultivate social empathy and inform citizens by analyzing political events and issues from different perspectives. This helps uphold principles of public service broadcasting like providing access to information and multiple viewpoints, as outlined by Graham Murdock. The programs examine New Zealand politics, history, and culture in a satirical and comedic way to engage viewers and increase their understanding of issues.

1. Media and politics are linked and intertwined. Politics is just a shadow of itself, as it only exists through second-hand accounts retold by the media (Louw 2005: 31). Media have an important job of showing political deliberation, this demonstrates a field of political viewpoints that can increase an individuals understanding of interests not of their own. It was with this in mind that Graham Murdock claimed that fiction, drama, and comedy are supple for analysing the circumstances of others, allowing greater social empathy and understanding. There are two shows that have been screened on Television New Zealand (TVNZ) that exemplify the connection of comedy to understating, Eating Media Lunch and The Unauthorised History of New Zealand. Although not wholly a comedian, New Zealand television presenter Jeremy ‘Newsboy’ Wells hosts these shows in a satirist fashion by analysing New Zealand society to comedic effect. The question that has to be asked is, what is the relationship between comedy, social empathy, democracy and the above mentioned theory, as well as weather this is applicable to Eating Media Lunch and The Unauthorised History of New Zealand.<br />In “Building The Digital Commons” Graham Murdock argued that the quality of professionalism of Public Service Broadcasters is how much they concern themselves with information to keep the individual informed of important details that may or may not effect them (Murdock 2004: 2). This is in order for the individual to be able to base their political decisions on quality reporting of the issues, this same quality is then reflected in democracy (Bennett 2004: 140). The types of information that is required to inform individuals can be broken down into two groups, the first is the ‘political public sphere’, in which the behaviour of the political process is reported and debated. The second is the ‘literary public sphere’, in which people gain common knowledge through fictional accounts “by imagining themselves in other people's shoes” (Habermas 1989: 231, & Murdock 2004: 5). The ‘literary public sphere’ is often deemed unimportant compared to the ‘political public sphere’, however it can subtly effect the views of the individual where they would otherwise reject the likes of a message encouraging social empathy. This social empathy is the ability to comprehend and sympathise with other people in their circumstances and in their realities (Segal 2007: 75). The foundation and main goals of a Public Service Broadcaster is to foster the culture, values and standards of the civil society, develop national identity and encourage the participation in state democratic intuitions (Norris et al 2003: 14-5). In order to up hold this foundation Murdock also listed five elements, or ‘Cultural Rights’, that would allow individuals to be properly informed of issues in order to create both a higher quality of democracy and better understating of others through social empathy. These ‘Cultural Rights’ include the right to have access to in-depth and unbiased information about events and issues, partially those that may effect the socio-economic position of individuals; the right to digestible and interpretable information; the right to a multitude of individual perspectives; the right to appropriate non-stereotypical representation of personal differences and right not to be treated as a commodity and consumer but rather as a Participating citizen (2004: 5-7).<br />As stated, Eating Media Lunch was a satiric show which looked at media, politics, and celebrities in a sociological light; that is, it looked for humour in the intertwined relationships between them. (The Press 2003). The host Wells, is well known for his dry deadpan presentation of Eating Media Lunch; all whilst commenting outrageously, ludicrously and often at times offensively on events or issues being reported in the ‘political public sphere’(Monk 2003). Eating Media Lunch itself had an important place in the ‘political public sphere’ in New Zealand. The show can help individuals who might not have any contact with criticism of the media and political realms become informed of these ideas, in the same manner as similar political satire shows in America such as the Daily Show with Jon Stewart (Cao 2010: 26). An example of the whetting of political understanding can be seen in Wells’ handling of the majestic and eminent coronation of the King of Tonga in 2008. On the one hand he showed the expensive and grandiose celebration that was only for the foreign political and media guests; and on the other hand, the abject poverty of Tongans that was in sharp contrast to the royal coronation (TVNZ 2008). In light of Murdock’s ‘Cultural Rights’ the reporting of the coronation is a base part of the individuals right to be able to access and be informed of information about events and issues. Wells’ reporting on the socio-economic juxtaposition in comparison to the perspective shown by rest the of the media, shows a fostering of the individual’s right to a multitude of individual perspectives.<br />The political satire of Eating Media Lunch can help to inform the individual of political events and issues, in order to understand further details in a traditional news context. An example was prior to the 2008 New Zealand election, when National Party leader John Key embarrassingly forced “an unhappy non-Maori-speaking Maori teenager” along with him to the Waitangi Day celebrations in a political stunt (Great Southern Television 2009), to show that unlike his predecessor, he was “down with the brown” (Eml54321 2007). Although in this case Eating Media Lunch did not change events, it nevertheless still was political commentary. As commented before, Murdock argued that comedy, drama and fiction are more “flexible” than other types of media, allowing the programmes message to easily create social empathy (Murdock 2004: 6). In discussing this research of a similar American political satire programme, Professor Cao continued along these lines when he stated that the basic understanding of political acts and events gained “in turn reduces the cost of paying attention to additional information about the topic” in the likes of traditional news sources (2010: 31). Using the claims given by both Murdock and Cao, analysis can be given to the John Key example. An individual who watches Eating Media Lunch can then take the information given by the show, and use it to further understand it in traditional news context, such as a six o’clock news bulletin, with greater relevance. In light of Murdock’s ‘Cultural Rights’, this example’s coverage of John Key’s actions on Waitangi Day, expresses the individuals core rights to have coverage of an election that could have changed the social and economic position of the individual, and to have access to political analysis such as pointing out that it could be seen as mere a political stunt.<br />Another comedy programme hosted by Wells is The Unauthorised History of New Zealand, which looks back on the history books and both the television archives of the government and Television New Zealand. The show does not cover the history of New Zealand chronologically, but rather each episode will explore a topic and will look at different events related to the topic and to the changing viewpoints over time. The shows main aim is to find out just what it means to live in New Zealand, and what it means to be a New Zealander (The Press 2005). The Unauthorised History of New Zealand helps the individual become better informed about the history and culture of New Zealand, and the values of the diverse people who make up the nation. An example is in the first episode which examines the nation’s reaction to visitors and their impact on New Zealand, and where wells argued that New Zealand was strongly “shaped by visitors” (ibidem). The episode examines the impact of sheep, The Beetles, American president Lyndon Johnson and Muhammad Ali on New Zealand. Wells questions why such visitors make New Zealanders feel uneasy and insignificant, and ponders that New Zealanders feel repulsed by the visitors foreignness due to feeling the need to abase themselves to foreigners (ibidem & Cws82us 2008). Not only does Murdock’s argument on the befit of comedy, drama and fiction to democracy and social empathy apply here, but also the message of The Unauthorised History of New Zealand is in line with the goals of the Television New Zealand Charter. This Charter is given by the New Zealand government to TVNZ as set of goals to keep and to uphold; the ideas behind the goals that are comparable to Murdock’s ‘Cultural Rights’, that is encourage social empathy and quality reporting of issues and events (Dunleavy 2008: 809). Some of the core goals of the TVNZ charter is to have programmes covering New Zealand's history and heritage and feature comedies and documentaries, that show the diversity in who New Zealanders are (Norris et al 2003: 149-50).<br />Murdock claimed in ‘Building the Digital Commons’ that the usefulness and quality of a public service broadcaster is based on their ability to be an institution that cradles and fosters the public sphere and thus civil society. He also argued that there is a connection between the message of a television comedy programme and social empathy and understating, which in turns promotes the public sphere. The show Eating Media Lunch helps the individual by reporting on media-political events and issues; thus through the medium of public service broadcast the individual can gain the “cultural rights” proclaimed by Murdock. These ‘cultural rights’, sparked by Eating Media Lunch, can aid in the cultivation of democracy in the civil society. The show Unauthorised History of New Zealand can be seen to add to the ‘cultural rights’ of the individual, defined by both Murdock in his claims and by the New Zealand government in their TVNZ charter.<br />Bibliography <br />Bennett, W. Lance (2004) Global Media and Politics: Transnational Communication Regimes<br />and Civic Cultures. Annual Review of Political Science 7(1), 125-148.<br />Cao, Xiaoxia (2010) Hearing it from Jon Stewart: The Impact of the Daily Show on Public Attentiveness to Politics. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 22(1), 26-46.<br />Cws82us (2008) The Unauthorised History of New Zealand. Retrieved 25 March, 2010, from <br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY2_I1Wu3OU<br />Dunleavy, Trisha (2008) New Zealand television and the struggle for “public service”. Media Culture Society 30(6), 795-811.<br />Eml54321 (2007) Eating Media Lunch - S07E01 - Part 1. Retrieved 25 March, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4L3Aw-nBno <br />Habermas, Jurgen (1989) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Culture. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.<br />Great Southern Television (2009) TV Review: Eating Media Lunch. Retrieved 24 March, 2010, from http://www.greatsoutherntv.com/news/tv-review-eating-media-lunch/<br />Louw, E. (2005) The media and the Political process, London: Sage.<br />Monk, Felicity (2003) Felicity Monk eats media lunch with Jeremy Wells. Listener New Zealand, 191(3317), 10-11.<br />Murdock, G. (2004) Building the digital commons: Public broadcasting in the age of the internet. 2004 Spry Memorial Lecture, University of Montreal.<br />Norris, P, Lealand, G R, Pauling, B & Zanker, R (2003) The Future of Public Broadcasting: The Experience in Six Countries. Wellington: New Zealand on Air, Retrieved 24 March, 2010, from <br />http://www.nzonair.govt.nz/media/6956/pb%20exp%20in%206%20countries%20nov%2003.pdf<br />Segal, Elizabeth A. (2007) Social Empathy: A New Paradigm to Address Poverty'. Journal of Poverty, 11 (3), 65-81.<br />The Press (2003) Critiquing the news, pp 9. 18 November.<br />The Press (2005) Wells tells it like it might have been, pp. 3. 20 September. <br />TVNZ (2008) About The Show: Eating Media Lunch. Retrieved 24 March, 2010, from http://tvnz.co.nz/view/tv2_story_skin/427620 <br />