Since my first Mad Magazine at age 6, I have always been a huge fan of satire. A variety of satirical sources have become incredibly popular, more prominently The Daily Show, The Colbert Report and the Onion. These programs and publications, humorously illustrate the inadequacies of our news sources, while drawing our attention to the absurdities of our society. ‘How to write about Africa’ is a satirical piece that is able to address the overabundance of problematic representations of Africa in literature and print. Binyavanga Wainaina’s piece may not have received such attention if it had been written in a journalistic or academic style of writing. Perhaps appealing to the shared human experience that is humour and laughter makes satire so popular, compared to appealing to intellect.
Satire may be great for a good laugh, and to numb the anger that Fox News or The Star can so easily induce. However, there are those that contend that satire is another source of misinformation and results in cynicism rather than action. If this is the case, then we are breeding many sceptics and cynical individuals. In the United States, more people are currently watching ‘fake news’,
“In the US, a poll for Time magazine asked who was America’s most trusted newscaster following Walter Cronkite’s death. More than two fifths said Jon Stewart, the host of fake news show The Daily Show. Stewart beat more established news anchors including Katie Couric. Stewart’s show attracts 1.8 million viewers a night compared to 1.2 million for CNN’s highest-rate politics show’.
It is difficult to differentiate whether The Daily Show’s popularity reflects Jon Stewart’s likeability, or citizens’ fatigue of the awful news sources in the US, or an inability to take current issues seriously. Whatever the case, with so many people consuming political satire, it is worth pondering the implications.
- Is political satire’s main value merely its humour and in order to be ‘effective’ it must be supplemented with ‘real’ news?
- Is satirical news replacing ‘real’ news?
- Does satire spread misinformation to a population who does not have adequate news sources?
- Does a source that ridicules the current state of affairs lead people to be cynical and complacent or does it challenge them to think about the world in more creative ways?
For myself, I find satire is a means of illustrating that at the basis of the many crises in our society are deep routed systemic issues. While the Daily Show ridicules the individual actions of politicians and news commentators, it also more profoundly attacks the current state of journalism, politics and education in the United States.
As a viewer of satire, I no doubt bring my background into my viewing experience, and thus satire obviously resonates differently with various individuals. Perhaps what irritates critics of satire is that no solution, or avenue for action is offered. But quite rightly there is no single solution, to the multitude of national and international issues we. While we are barraged with complex issues daily, sometimes it is necessary to laugh at how screwed up everything is.
To end this blog post I would like to include a bit of satire. Please enjoy the following video from the Onion that challenges the ultraistic nature of development work and the role of celebrities in development.
How Can We Let Darfur Know How Much We’re Doing For Them?