I’ve never really liked Jay Leno.

Maybe it’s the retro-skunk hairdo. Or maybe I just have a soft spot for cigar-puffing Rottweiler puppets. I don’t know.

At any rate, when fondly reminiscing about an era before predatory i-bankers, Jersey fist-pumping, and the growing possibility of being blown up by an Underwear bomber, I’m more likely to recall Coco’s whip-smart witticisms and Triumph’s trashtalk over any jokes delivered by  Leno.

Two decades later, both talk show legends wander the annals of anachronism. Young Millennials – once cosseted by the 90s bubble – are more fluent in market toxicity than Sir-Mix-A-Lot. And the lose-lose scuffle between Coco and Jay Leno has NBC struggling to reconcile a generational schism that may swallow them – and their quarreling stars – whole.

As the Aughties sunset, exiling both Kings of Prime Time television, a next generation of torch-bearers prepares to ascend the throne.

Enter Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart – television’s “Golden Boys” of tomorrow.

In a cyclical business that advanced CBS’ “Survivor Era” and the ensuing “Rise of Fox”, the two political satirists have staked their claim as the beaming faces of America’s next tele-cultural milestone.

While the median age of Daily Show and Colbert Report viewers is approximately 41.4 and 38.3 respectively, both hosts attract the youngest viewers of late night talk shows. The median age for The Late Show with David Letterman, for instance, is 54, with Tonight Show watchers hovering around 55. Big 3 news viewers – worse for wear – have already peaked at 60.

Energized by a loyal following of Gen-Yers – many disillusioned by mainstream news outlets and Capitol rhetoric – the dynamic duo may define the next phase of television entertainment in the Age of Obama.

An impossibility? Many think otherwise.

Regardless of their faux-news roots, both Stewart and Colbert have become sources of authority for Americans who feel the “fair and balanced” folks at Fox and MSNBC have failed to promote political accountability among public officials. It isn’t, after all, that Milennials confuse entertainment with reality – just that they’ve realized the two mens’ positions as social jesters gives them full license to air the ugliest of political truths without consequence.

So they do. Amidst wacky one-liners and scripted exchanges, they’ve woven threads of truth that’ve supplied the most biting political commentary on everything from birtherism to Barack Obama’s Presidency. Through thick and thin, we’ve learned we can rely on them to defend the interests of the American collective both as Washington outsiders and modern day vigilantes who sting back when bitten.

Just ask Jim Cramer.

Yet their rising prominence is also a product of political circumstance. Pegging generational disenchantment with unfulfilled Presidential and Congressional promises, the programs capture changing social attitudes towards old Washington politics and the untapped rage of young, marginalized Millennials.

According to a study conducted by Jody Baumgartner and Jonathan S. Morris of East Carolina University, young Daily Show watchers were more likely to develop a negative perspective on politics and politicians than those who watched regular news sources like the CBS Evening News. According to the Baumgartner and Morris’ article – printed in a 2006 issue of American Politics Research – they also expressed distrust in both the American electoral system and the mainstream media, leading them to conclude that “ultimately, negative perceptions of candidates could have participation implications by keeping more youth from the polls.”

Governmental distrust may be the greatest motivator for disenfranchised birthers and anti-establishmentarians to participate in the electoral process. But if public sentiment ever breaches the razor-thin line between hate and disillusionment, can the same be said for Millennials?

Time will only tell.

Popularity: 3% [?]