Jon Stewart Is America's Most Trusted Newsman: TIME Online Poll

This is truley a sad comment on the state of the American brain.  From Walter Cronkite to a not-that-funny talking head comedian.  The end must be near.

Anyone who has read any of JS's books knows that he is no fool and as things stand, he is never going to be short of material, especially since other "newscasters" provide him with so much fodder for his craft.

This is definitely true for most real Americans, Jon Stewart is the man. I believe the pope announced recently that anyone who didn't like The Daily Show was not getting into heaven.

What amuses me is how some of you already think this a negative detail, when the fact is the reason he's trusted is that he's not merely what most "news anchors" are anymore:  a parrot.

If there's anything that's a sad fact, it's that people watch Fox News for credible reporting.  All I ever see in Fox reporting is "debates" where it's nothing but people shouting over each other and interrupting each other and absurd sensationalism reminiscent of supermarket tabloids.

I think that it is important that its not just the news he brings to light, but how.  Many news organizations should learn from his style and rapport he has with the audience.

And his interviews are great.  If he gets on a serious topic, there is no stopping john.  You should watch the video on youtube where he is interviewed on a CNN show called crossfire and tore them a new asshole.  It was rather entertaining.

First I need to say I have never seen the show, but I understand it is a comedy designed commentary of the news similar to the political humor of other late night talk show hosts. 

If this is in fact the only "news" program some people chose to watch, it's better than nothing.  Not that I agree with the sarcastic/critical/cynical point of view, but it's better than spending television time watching wrestling or those crime shows. 

With Walter Cronkite's passing I realized that some of the people who anchor the news are more celebrities than jounalists.  In an interview Walter Cronkite did with Larry King some years ago he talked about this and was glad his training was grounded in news reporting here and abroad before he accepted the achor position.  But times were different then, and now with the stations competing in the same time slots for the same audience, the anchors have to have charisma, not just expertise.   Therefore, it's not surprising that the celebrity and uncommon humor of Mr. Stewart are appealing to some. 

I guess what I am trying to say is there is room on the tube for all kinds of news interpretations, and it's just like any other show, you can chose to watch it or not.    

I don't think this shows any negativity towards the American character and intellect but instead is a statement about the current state of the news industry. American have become disgruntled with their CNN and FOX and have turned to a more honest source of news. What I mean by that is the Daily Show is honest with its viewers, it says 'this is what I am, this is our bias, here is the news'. The mixture of humor with trustworthiness is refreshing to many Americans myself included. Daily Show and BBC is where I get my news.

I don't think this is a sign of the downfall of American culture.  The vast majority of viewers of the Daily Show are well informed of the topics being reported through other news outlets by the time the show airs in the evening.  You have to be familiar with the the topics for the jokes to be funny.  It's also important to understand that most of Stewart's comedy on the show is usually pretty dark comedy, rather than light and whimsical.  What he and his writers are successful in doing is distilling the the news into a format where the absurdity of the stories covered by major networks is put into the light.  In an era where the network news is more like political theater and nonsensical shouting matches than news reporting, Stewart is the one of the only guys consistently calling them out on it.  There is truth to all good comedy.  Under the chuckles there is a very serious side to the show.   

Political satire has ancient roots, and the satirists today are not unlike their ancient counter parts. The acients used the written word exclusively, whereas today they have electronic media including television in addition to the written word.   

The first satirist was the Greek Aristophanes (445-380 B.C.E) who wrote comedic plays that functioned as satirical conscience and addressed the issues and personalities before the public.  In his plays he attacked the education system, political policies, and prominent leaders of the era.  The Peloponnesian War was one of his most popular subjects.  His plays confronted controversial issues using satirical comedy, and not even king Creon escaped his criticism.  

Juvenal the Latin satirist in Rome (55-135 A.D):  Almost no one was exempt from his bitter prose.  He says, "It's hard not to write satire with a town [Rome] filled with vicious persons who enjoy high places [politicians], unscrupulous lawyers, informers who abound, and legacy hunters who are unabashed."  His satire constitutes a picture of Roman society that is uncompromisingly critical.  His views are more often than not darkly interpreted and just about no one escaped his caustic pen.

Political satire has a long history, and the examples of it in our time are not much different, and are even tempered with what some might call "political correctness."  For example, in Juvenal's sixth satire he excoriates women. "Who would so foolish to marry." He continues on to attack faddish women, self-rightous women, athletic women, and intellectual women.  Some of these topics would be unaccepable today.