The Problem with Satire
Satire seems like a pretty amazing thing, so what exactly can be wrong about it? Well, satire can go wrong in two very important and interconnected ways. The first is when the audience does not realize that something is satirical. The second is when the author or performer does not give the audience context or cues that something is satirical.Let's consider the first issue. In Mel Brooks' Spaceballs, a wonderful parody of the Star Wars movies, there is a scene where one of the main villains, Dark Helmet, gets angry at one of his subordinates for not reporting something to him, but going instead all the way up to the main villain.
Dark Helmet: [appearing in the room, lifting up his visor] I can't breathe in this thing.
Colonel Sandurz: We're approaching Planet Druidia, sir.
Dark Helmet: Good. I'll call Spaceball City and notify President Skroob immediately.
Radio Operator: I already called him, sir. He knows everything.
Dark Helmet: What? You went over my helmet?
Radio Operator: Well not exactly over, sir... more to the side - I'll always call you first, it will never happen again, never, ever.
Colonel Sandurz: We're approaching Planet Druidia, sir.
Dark Helmet: Good. I'll call Spaceball City and notify President Skroob immediately.
Radio Operator: I already called him, sir. He knows everything.
Dark Helmet: What? You went over my helmet?
Radio Operator: Well not exactly over, sir... more to the side - I'll always call you first, it will never happen again, never, ever.
While the above scene is not about people's ability to get or reaction to satire, it certainly fits what can happen. The joke or point goes over their "helmet," which means that the satire failed to either inform or entertain their audience. Most people get frustrated when they feel like they are not in on the joke. Worse still, because satirical writing often ratchets situations up to "11" to make their point, when the audience fails to identify satire they can react to it as if the author or performer was being earnest. In other words, they get angry.
The second issue is created when the author or performer does not let
us in on the joke. The first problem is contextual. What is context? To
be honest, this is a question that is difficult to answer, which is
probably why so many academics spend so much time thinking and writing about it. Context in this instance is the additional information that
the audience needs to understand what is being said. Returning to
Spaceballs for a second, a person who has not watched the Star Wars
films will miss many of the jokes in the film because do not "get" what
the jokes are referencing. What about those of you who have never
watched Star Wars or Spaceballs, you need to understand this stuff too.Let's consider people who wear t-shirts "ironically" as another example. One day you see a person walking across campus wearing a Justin Bieber shirt. How do you know if they like Justin Bieber or if they are wearing the shirt "ironically"? Unless you already know that person and their views on Justin Bieber or ask them directly then your do not have the contextual understanding to know for sure. This leads directly to the second part of this issue: the person in the shirt assumes that people will get the "joke" without providing any clues about their intent. If you don't like Justin Bieber but are wearing a shirt with him on it then you better be prepared to spend most of your day explaining your "joke" to people.
Missing the Joke
Surely, this cannot be that much of a problem. Surely, people can easily identify when they are presented with satire. First, don't call me Shirley. Second, people failing to identify satirical content and reacting to it as if it were factual is a problem that seem to only grow each year.The Academy Speaks
In 2009, researchers from The Ohio State University published a study on audience reaction to The Colbert Report. They found that whether the people they polled thought that Stephen Colbert was funny or not, that "conservatives were more likely to to report that Colbert only pretends to be joking and genuinely meant what he said while liberals were more likely to report that Colbert used satire and was not serious when offering political statements. Conservatives also significantly predicted perceptions that Colbert disliked liberalism" (LaMarre, Landreville, and Beam, p.212). In other words, despite the amount of information available that Stephen Colbert was a satirical character some people, likely due to their own political opinions, believed that Colbert's political opinions were earnest.
Obvious jokes are often a great indicator that something is being presented satirically, but what happen when the obvious humor is removed from the equation? While most people can properly identify The Onion as a satirical site because of its use of humor, there are a great many satirical sites on the Internet that use a more decidedly low-key approach. Of course, some people still fall for an Onion article on occasion despite its prominence.
The Press Speaks
In June 2014, New Republic published an article called "The Great Satirical-News Scam of 2014" which examined many of the newer breed of satirical news sites that have gone out of their way to ditch obvious jokes and transparency. Much of the article focused on the Daily Currant, a satirical newsite that was used as a legitimate source by several real news agencies. The article explains that these class of sites purposely hides their true nature so that it is easier for them to generate traffic from outraged people. That traffic equals money for the sites as they get paid every time a user views the plethora of ads on their websites. The end of the article sums up the problem as follows:
"For those who have
fallen for these stories, the consequent humiliation can inoculate them
against making the mistake a second time. But you can’t vaccinate
suckers as fast as they’re born. Unless Google and Facebook change their
algorithms—or humans suddenly become less gullible, and less prone to
confirmation bias—these sites will likely persist, metastasizing across
the internet like a profoundly unfunny cancer" (Link).
Facebook, beginning in August 2014, began testing a system that will tag posts posts from satirical news sites as "satire". These tags will appear in front of the link of items that appear in users' newsfeed. The system is not yet live but there are images of it running that appear from time-to-time. A spokesperson for Facebook the reason for this feature is "because we received feedback that people wanted a clearer way to distinguish satirical articles" (Link). This is similar to a feature available in Google News: "To offer a diversity of opinion and content Google News does contain some satire, often humorous or hyperbolic stories with the intention of social commentary. We identify these types of articles with the tag (satire), so that you'll know when you're reading a satirical article" (Link).
Now What?
Yes, it appears that social media site are making attempts to help clarify a problem that plagues both casual readers and journalism professionals. But is that the only opinion? I'm glad you asked because the answer is a resounding, "No!" Your local or campus library is a great place to learn more about Information Literacy skills. Additionally, it is important to remember to evaluate who wrote something before excepting it at face value. If you find a news story in your social media, follow up on it. Do a Google search for the publication, go to the site and look for links to an "about" or "disclaimer" page, or use a specialized tool like Real or Satire?.
Additional Sources
Gray, J., Jones, J. P., & Thompson, E. (Eds.). (2009). Satire TV: Politics and Comedy in the Post-Network Era. New York and London: New York University Press.
Lamarre, H., Landreville, K., & Beam, M. (2009). The irony of satire: Political ideology and the motivation to see what you want to see in The Colbert Report. International Journal Of Press/Politics, 14(2), 212-231. doi:10.1177/1940161208330904
Image from: http://literallyunbelievable.org/post/113594893209/this-is-what-wrong-with-country
No comments:
Post a Comment