Big News shocked the comedy television world this week when it was announced that Stephen Colbert will be leaving Comedy Central to take over David Letterman’s show over on CBS.  As everyone knows, Stephen Colbert is the host of the highly satirical show The Colbert Report, a show covered in class often.  The move was unexpected certainly, and now Comedy Central needs to act fast to replace a big late-night comedian in Colbert.  In my opinion, these people would be great replacements for Colbert, not necessarily in the same format as the Colbert Report.

Aasif Mandhvi

Aasif Mandhvi is a correspondent on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and often partakes in hilarious reports on the show.  If Comedy Central wanted to stick with a political themed late-night show, Mandhvi would be the right choice.  As everyone knows, Colbert once started out as a correspondent on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

Nick Kroll

Nick Kroll is currently the host of his own show on Comedy Central called the Kroll Show.  His show is relatively funny but perhaps a move to a late night slot and change of format could be a good thing.  Kroll is a stand-up comedian who hosts a sketch comedy show, so the late-night scene would not be totally unique for him.

Extending The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Currently, The Daily Show With Jon Stewart airs on the timeslot before The Colbert Report.  It is only a half-hour long so the possibility remains, although unlikely, of Stewart’s show increasing in time.  As everyone knows, Jon Stewart is quite hilarious and I am sure nobody would have a major problem with this move.

Dave Chappelle

This idea is by far the most farfetched out of any idea mentioned.  Chappelle, former host of Chappelle’s Show years ago, had a dispute with Comedy Central regarding their use of some jokes.  If Comedy Central could somehow convince Chappelle to return, ratings would be insane and just about every comedy fan would rejoice.

The General Education program at Penn State certainly needs tweaking.  As it currently stands, a lot of good comes out of the program.  People can take classes about interesting topics that they desire and they can really learn some information that may help beyond college.  However, this system is fundamentally flawed for various reasons.  Gen Eds depend entirely upon which major one were to choose and simply there are too many restrictions and requirements that one must go through or fulfill.  If the Gen Ed system sought to improve, they would have to reform many things.  Mainly, the Gen Ed system needs to be more consistent across majors and not have as many requirements for graduation.

Basically, as mentioned above, Gen Eds have way too many requirements that really inhibit one’s ability to take classes they would like to take.  With graduation requirements including Arts, Humanities, Natural Sciences, and others, not everybody is interested in all of these topics.  Because of this lack of interest, students tend to care less and less and instead of actually learning the material and trying to gain an understanding of a topic, they take short cuts and intentionally select Gen Eds that were deemed as “jokes” by other students who had previously taken the class.  Being interested in the specific class can go a long way, which is an important point for those trying to reform Gen Eds.

A way to fix the problem of uninterested students taking Gen Eds would be to, as mentioned above, eliminate any type of Gen Ed requirement needed for students to graduate.  A student who has little interest in art should not be required by the university to take art classes.  The same thing goes with just about any class subject.  Essentially, what needs to change is that all classes that someone takes not having to do with their major should count towards a “Gen Ed” credit.  Students would then need only a certain number of “Gen Ed” credits before graduation.  By using this methodology, students are free to pick just about any class they desire.  Students would hopefully be more inclined to pick interesting classes instead of the “joke” classes, thus creating a scenario where Gen Eds are somewhat meaningful.

Another huge problem that needs to be addressed in regards to Gen Eds is the inconsistency among majors.  According to various deliberations, it became evident that certain majors had much more room for Gen Eds than other majors had.  Because of this, students with more rigorous majors are often devoid of taking many classes that less rigorous majors can allow.  Essentially, what needs to happen is that each and every student needs a baseline number of Gen Eds needed in order to graduate.  By doing this, every major is guaranteed a certain amount of credits of exploring Gen Eds.  It would also lighten the course load for those who have a rigorous schedule.

Overall, Penn State’s General Education program is in need of a complete overhaul.  Not only does the current model contain way too many restrictions, it also places students into classes that they simply do not want to be a part of.  Creating a generic graduation requirement of “Gen Eds” would not only simplify the current system, it would also make everything fair for those across various majors.

The General Education program at Penn State certainly needs tweaking.  As it currently stands, a lot of good comes out of the program.  People can take classes about interesting topics that they desire and they can really learn some information that may help beyond college.  However, this system is fundamentally flawed for various reasons.  Gen Eds depend entirely upon which major one were to choose and simply there are too many restrictions and requirements that one must go through or fulfill.  If the Gen Ed system sought to improve, they would have to reform many things.  Mainly, the Gen Ed system needs to be more consistent across majors and not have as many requirements for graduation.

Basically, as mentioned above, Gen Eds have way too many requirements that really inhibit one’s ability to take classes they would like to take.  With graduation requirements including Arts, Humanities, Natural Sciences, and others, not everybody is interested in all of these topics.  Because of this lack of interest, students tend to care less and less and instead of actually learning the material and trying to gain an understanding of a topic, they take short cuts and intentionally select Gen Eds that were deemed as “jokes” by other students who had previously taken the class.  Being interested in the specific class can go a long way, which is an important point for those trying to reform Gen Eds.

The world of television is a large and vast one.  Many popular shows dominate prime viewing times, while others simply fly under the radar.  Today, I want to especially discuss those shows that may not receive the hype that they deserve.  The following shows may not have a huge national audience, but they are still great in their own right and probably deserve more attention than they receive.

Impractical Jokers

Impractical Jokers is a show that currently airs on TruTV and has slowly but surely gained a larger national following.  Essentially, the show consists of four pranksters who give one another challenges that normally include interacting with unsuspecting bystanders.  Challenges often consist of the pranksters telling the other what to do through an ear piece.  Other times, the challenges consist of the pranksters working at various restaurants and performing unexpected tasks.  The most realistic comparison for this show would probably be Jackass, except not nearly as dangerous, or funny for that matter.  Regardless, Impractical Jokers is definitely a show worth checking out, if not for a couple of laughs.

The Eric Andre Show

The Eric Andre Show is a late-night talk show spin off that airs on Adult Swim.  The host, Eric Andre, pokes fun at late-night show hosts like David Letterman and Jimmy Kimmel.  The show is not a serious talk show, as Eric Andre performs many dangerous stunts and often times just loses it on the set.  Andre also occasionally walks the streets of New York City, performing tasks similar to that of Impractical Jokers, except way more bizarre.  Andre’s co-host, Hannibal Burress, is also hilarious and complements Andre well.  The show airs on Thursdays at 12:30 and definitely is worth a look, especially for a 15 minute long show.

Adam Devine’s House Party

Adam Devine’s House Party is a show that airs on Comedy Central.  The show takes place in the mansion of Adam Devine and basically is a combination of various party scenes and up-and-coming stand up comedians.  I have never seen a show attempt to blend the two before, so this was a welcome surprise.  Because the comedians are up-and-coming, some are better than others, which makes it that much more important to give the show time.

Community

Community is a show which airs on NBC and stars Joel McHale of E’s The Soup.  Joel McHale’s character was a successful lawyer who was later caught for not receiving a bachelor’s degree.  Because of this, he had his certification removed and was forced to go to a Community college.  He later met up with six people in a study group and would later go on to become best friends with them, despite how different each individual person was.  Community was much funnier in earlier seasons, but still continues to make me laugh.  It is definitely worth watching, especially using Netflix to view earlier seasons.

Political parties.  If you have not joined one, you are missing out.  There is so much positive with both Democratic and Republican parties, it is simply is foolish to not join one.  You donate a ton of money to people you have never even met, have pretty much no voice at all as to who gets the nominee, and still the government takes advantage of you.  Because of these awesome political parties, Congress has an amazing 13% approval rating and seemingly can make compromises with ease.  Political parties are a must for anyone not in one yet.  When it comes down to it, both parties have their ups and downs, but who can really go wrong with either?

Starting off with the Grand Ol’ Party, or the ever-so-popular G.O.P.  If you like religion and only religion, this is the party for you.  Theocracy is a term that the G.O.P refuses to use, but everyone knows they really strive for one.  Nothing like a highly Christian government with a population similar to a melting pot of different religions.  The G.O.P logic is flawless in this aspect.

Everyone’s favorite past-time is getting bullied by big-business, right?  A vote for the G.O.P would pretty much make this a reality.  With some nice tax-loopholes and business friendly policies, big businesses would thrive like they never have before.  This certainly is an ideal environment, right?  Companies who have all the power over consumers, driving the price of every day goods up.  Who would not want to live in a country like this?  Even more important than business-friendly policies, the G.O.P strongly supports income inequality, everyone’s favorite.  Who does not love one-percent of the population holding ninety-percent of the nation’s wealth?  The G.O.P certainly loves it and will try as hard as it can to ensure that this is possible.

Perhaps the Republicans’ favorite topic to totally ignore is the complete myth of science.  Not only do the Republicans refuse to fund science, they actually attempt to discredit any finding of science.  Science is not that important, however.  Although it has cured diseases, sustained human life, and solved mysteries about the earth that are previously unknown, it seriously can not be that important.  If you do not find science important similar to the Republicans, the G.O.P may be worth a look.

However great the Republican Party may seem, the Democratic Party offers just as many benefits, if not more.  Currently, our President hails from the Democratic Party, which seems to be working out fabulously.  What Democrats seem to love more than anything else are taxes.  Taxes, taxes, and more taxes seems to be the Democrat way.  Who does not love a nice, healthy tax?  Working hard every day and trying to make a living, with a good portion of it being taken away from you.  Even better, if you earn more money, work much harder than an everyday person, you get even more money taken from you, which makes complete sense.  Where exactly is the money going, though?  Social Security is where most of it goes.  What Social Security essentially is is a glorified, legal Ponzi Scheme.  Too bad all of the money tax payers give may never come back to them, thanks to the “Baby Boomers”.  This is all a great reason to vote for the Democratic Party, however.

The Democratic Party does an even greater job of handling financial situations once they take over major cities.  The emerging Metropolis called Detroit is currently thriving.  Under Democratic control, has the city ever seen better days?  Doubtful.  Even bigger than a city is a state, which Democrats control the most populous state, California.  California has thriving cities left and right, with few facing any type of economic crisis at all, except for a little something called bankruptcy.  Regardless, examples exist in the current United States landscape that show-off just how successful the party is at running a city.

As mentioned last week, Comedy Central has been on fire with their newest shows.  @ Midnight is one of those shows that fuels this fire.  @ Midnight is a show airing at midnight, obviously, and is a game show format.  The show is hosted by Chris Hardwick, who is absolutely genius in this role.  It is centered around Chris Hardwick giving points based off of various categories with challenges that involve social media.   @Midnight has a panel of three comedians who are the ones competing for these points.  The show has various challenges including Hashtag Wars, Craigslist Challenges, and other social media related activities.  The Twitter Universe is also highly encouraged to participate in the activities, as many of the show’s challenges actually use tweets from people around the world.

The show does a great job of remaining fresh because of the various forms of social media used and unique challenges.  As mentioned above, the show is a game show, but that is not the primary focus of the show.  Funny punchlines and hilarious comments are really what drives @Midnight and the comedians rarely care about their point total, although some do.  Overall, the show does an incredible job of adding a late night laugh to Comedy Central, something they have been lacking for years.  I won’t say that @Midnight is the funniest I have seen, but I have laughed many times at it and compared to the rest of the television landscape at midnight, @ Midnights thrives in comparison.

Comedy Central has been on a hot streak lately with new shows in their lineup.  This streak continued with their latest creation “Review”.  “Review” is a show starring Comedian Andy Daly, who plays the role of Forrest MacNeil.  Basically, Forrest is a “critic” and gives reviews based on his experiences.  His reviews do not consist of movies or video games, however.  Forrest reviews events that occur in life, or essentially, he reviews life.  Although the show is only two episodes into the series, he already has reviewed such topics as stealing and other topics not for blogging.  He rates these tasks on a star scale of one to five stars.  The show sounds rather dry but Andy Daly’s comedian spin pretty much makes the entire show.

His persona of a “nerdy” guy makes his reviews that much funnier, as he performs tasks that you would never expect him to perform (like robbing a bank for example).  The show also features Forrest’s wife and her reaction to his latest endeavors.  She normally is not happy with what lifestyle change he makes for the review, which adds to the hilarity.  The show, as mentioned before, is only two episodes into the season and already has me cracking up.  The show can definitely improve as well (since it is about life), but is off to a great start.  I guess if you are wondering what my review of “Review” is, it is something that I highly recommend checking out.  The new episodes air on Thursdays at 10 on Comedy Central.

The first satirical piece I decided to analyze was via The Onion, and was called Obama Not Ruling Out Military Action in Congress.  This particular piece of satire making fun of the United States Congress.  Basically, the article uses fake quotes from Obama and states that the United States is fully prepared to launch a military strike on their own Congress, calling the floor a “tumultuous warzone”.  With the latest US-Russia hostilities with regards to Ukraine, much debate has been centered around possible military interactions on both sides.  The Onion basically makes fun of this latest tension, except using Congress as the “warzone”.  Congress has been divided as of late and both parties seem to never agree on anything and the Onion pokes fun at this fact.  Perhaps the funniest line from the article comes at the end, when the author states, “Are we really prepared to risk American lives for what could be a lost cause?”  This particular line is quite comical and somewhat true in a way.  Regardless, the Onion makes it clear that they are not happy with Congress, except they put it in a comical satirical piece.

Another example of great satire lies in the show South Park.  More specifically in the latest season, South Park aired a three part episode that was based off of Black Friday shopping and the show Game of Thrones.  South Park combined the two ideas into one, creating one big satire.  Basically, the kids of the town divided up into two factions, one in favor of a PlayStation 4 and the other in favor of an Xbox One.  Similar to Game of Thrones, they were constantly bickering and fighting over which console was better.  South Park also made fun of the fact that “nothing ever happens” in Game of Thrones, by visiting the show’s creator.  He ordered the kids pizza and explained when the “action” was going to occur, which he said “the dragons are coming” in the show.  Similarly to the dragons, the pizza also never showed up, despite the fact that he also said “the pizza was coming”.  The show also tackled the Black Friday aspect from adults’ point of view.  The crowd waiting in front of the mall was incredibly violent and anxious to get inside of the mall, basically making fun of the “crazy” Black Friday shoppers.  Overall, the three part episode did a great job of creating a satire for not only Black Friday, but for a Game of Thrones.

One final example of a satire could be found once again on the Onion, this time called Papa John’s Now Offering 3-Day Home Delivery.  This article is a short, satirical piece regarding the pizza delivery of Papa John’s, obviously.  The author of the article must not be pleased with the service of Papa John’s because this article makes fun of just that, the service.  The author states “for just a $7.95 shipping fee, you can get three medium two-topping pizzas and an order of cheese sticks delivered straight to your door within three business days”.  Obviously, this is not standard for pizza delivery, which makes it that much funnier.  The delivery time for Papa John’s must be outrageously long in the author’s opinion, which would lead to this shipping fee.  The author also states right at the beginning “Aiming to provide their customers with the most convenient options when placing an order”.  Basically, the author states that despite this complicated ideal of shipping fees and flat rates and large shipping trucks, it would still be more convenient than their current method of shipping.  This satirical piece was quite funny about an issue that not many would have thought about.

Revisions and drafts of papers written are vital to improving writing ability.  After careful examination, I see how I can improve both papers vastly in ways I did not originally see.  Beginning with paper one, there was a lot to discuss and revise.  My paper centered around Terry Crews and his Old Spice commercials, and how he displays manliness in each commercial.  Not enough information about the actual commercial was provided in my essay.  Not only that, but I could also add another commercial entirely to the paper.  The Old Spice commercials featuring Isaiah Mustafa are commercials I hope to incorporate in the final draft of the paper.  Both actors, Mustafa and Crews display manliness in their respective commercials.  However, that is where the similarities end.  Both actors display their manliness in different mannerisms.  Terry Crews has an “in your face” persona and essentially tries to scare you with his combination of physique and unnecessary yelling.  Isaiah Mustafa has a much more subtle and subdued approach that still comes off as “manly”.  Incorporating the two in the final draft of the paper are vital.  Also, my thesis statement came off as rather vague and not much of a thesis.  Perhaps adding a whole other series of commercials will help make this thesis statement more concise and specific.

               Paper two also requires revisions that are crucial for the final draft.  It centered around bias surrounding Fox News and their misleading headlines.  The article was about a man who was “turned away” from voting, when this really was not the case at all.  The main problem presented in Paper two is that my style comes off as too editorialized and not scholarly enough.  Part of this may be due to the fact that opinions took over the writing, creating an editorial essentially.  Some changes in word use and overall style may play a huge role in fixing this problem.  Also, not enough from the article was included in the paper, causing the paper to focus on the bashing of Fox News rather than the article itself.  Including more examples from the actual article will definitely improve this.  Perhaps even providing another article may help in further proving the thesis stated.

As mentioned various times in this blog, I am an avid comedy television fan.  If a show is even somewhat funny, I will watch it.  Last week, Comedy Central was airing one of, if not my favorite shows.  That show would be Chappelle’s Show.  Chappelle’s Show began airing in 2003 and only lasted until 2006, but it certainly was not due to a lack of humor.  Anyway, the show was a sketch comedy show, similar to Key and Peele, except it actually is funny.  The main focus of the show was racial related jokes, but tons of other aspects in life were covered in this show.  Dave Chappelle was the host and star of the show, starring in just about every sketch possible.  In just three short seasons, Chappelle managed to captivate America.  His sketches were innovative and groundbreaking and still are remembered today, more than eight years later.  The show has famous characters, including “Ashy Larry” and Tyrone Biggums, who are still remembered today.  Chappelle created memorable TV show knock offs, like “The Mad Real World” and “Fear Factor”.  He made Wayne Brady even more famous than he already was.  He even made Eddie Murphy’s brother, Charlie Murphy, more famous than him for a time.  Chappelle is even featured in Prince’s latest song, “Breakfast Can Wait”, and is on the cover of the album for his sketch regarding Prince.  

 What the show accomplished in three seasons (really only two full seasons) was nothing short of incredible.  Sadly, the show came to an end because Chappelle felt his writers were going a little too far with their sketches.  Chappelle no longer wanted to partake in them, effectively ending the show not long after he signed a lucrative contract to extend the show for a few more seasons.  Despite everyone being upset that the show ended, it was sort of a good thing in the end.  Most shows simply go on for too long and eventually lose their flair.

Chappelle’s Show ended while it was on the top and we still talk about it today.  Still, it would be cool to see one more season of the show.  Regardless, Chappelle’s Show will go down in TV history as one of the funniest shows ever, and I highly encourage anyone who has not seen it to try and watch a few episodes.  You won’t regret it.