Comedy And Social Change : Satirical Comedy On Societal Change

Modern society allows humorists to touch upon offensive topics without receiving much criticism. As Alain de Botton claimed in his 2004 book, Status Anxiety, humorists’ role is not merely to entertain but “to convey with impunity messages that might be dangerous or impossible to state directly.” De Botton’s argument proves legitimate. Many humorists, such as cartoonists and television hosts, decide to use their humor as a tool to prove an idea or express a belief that cannot be voiced candidly in public.

Satire is a literary work that uses irony, humor, or exaggeration to expose and/or criticize a vice. Satire has the capability to take serious matters and ease tension on the entire situation. It has a way of making things easier and lighter even though it brings out hardcore facts. The satirist makes an argument that relies upon the intellect of the audience to pick up on the hidden meaning; and due to its critical and judging nature, satire is sometimes deemed as excessive. However, in Last Week Tonight Show John Oliver (Wage Gap), The Lady’s Dressing Room by Jonathan Swift, and Gary McCoy’s political cartoon, opposing views are brought up with the use of Satire. The “Gender Wage Gap” sketch By John Oliver exposes the inequalities of women

We live in an era where television-show host known for his entrepreneurial background has become president of the United States. With loads of controversy leading his win and constant roulette of employees. Additionally, with an impressive array of tweets, it is no shock that the President and his employees tend to be the end of all the jokes. Especially, in the rain of parodies pored over in the media: from new media to television, all forms are taking advantage to make fun of the government. Specifically, focusing on the well-known show of sketch comedy, Saturday Night Live or SNL for short.

Many shows have followed in the footsteps on Saturday Night Live, such as The Colbert Report and the The Daily Show. Comedic satire offers insight into the current state of affairs to the general

When Jon Stewart announced his retirement from The Daily Show in 2015, headlines lamented the end of reason in the news. A New Yorker article declared that “The last hope for bringing some rationality to the 2016 Presidential field died” (Sorkin). In other instances, Jon Stewart has been compared to Walter Cronkite and Edward Murrow, who are famed for not only their voices that reached out to the nation but also their journalism that changed the tide of the politics of their time. One may ask how a professional comedian ended up in the ranks of such well-respected names in reporting, or how he came to be the “most trusted man in America” in the first place.

However, satire is still a method of writing being published today in order to express opinion and concern to political leaders. A modern work of satire is Saturday Night Live’s “Weekend Updates.” This recurring skit consists of a summary of everything happening around the world during a given week. These news events are approached in a mocking and entertaining way that draws attention and can open the viewer’s eyes to the way their political officials are handling issues, or not handling issues. This essay will explore how these two examples of satire compare to each other and to the definition of a satire.

Through the years many politicians had objected political entertainment and satire, and argued it is subversive. Satire usually differs from political protest and speech because it does not carry an agenda or seek to influence politics. I would like to introduce two cases in which politicians took a strong resistance to satire on television:

In today’s society of heightened fear, anxiety and tensions, some may look to humor as an escape. Humor can ease people’s mind off of the stress-filled modern world we live in. People can’t turn on their television without catching sight of alarming news; thousands of homes destroyed by recent hurricanes, fires burning furiously throughout the west, and North Korea claiming they are capable of sending a missile halfway across the world. Humorists are vital to our society because they are both willing and capable of getting messages across that might be tough to explain, a sensitive topic, dangerous to discuss, or difficult to get people to listen to. Cartoonists and stand-up comedians are great at conveying these messages that most would rather avoid and lighten tensions during troubling times.

While remaining comedic, satires provoke thought and illuminate political and social opinion. As an illustration, Saturday Night Live (SNL) maintains the position of a reporting platform. Creator and Producer of SNL, Lorne Michaels, was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom because he reflects and shapes, “critical elements of our political and national life,” (Source 2) on the show. Due to the recent presidential election, SNL has had ample opportunity to portray political discourse in satires. Karl Bode, writer of TechDirt article said, “satirical news programs do a significantly better job at reporting the news than most of the nation's actual news outlets.” (Source 7) The writers of SNL critiqued both candidates...president elect Trump more so. The skits left room for praise and criticism

Therefore stand-up comedy provides valuable social commentary as it can directly or indirectly change a person’s opinion or inspire them to

Comedy as a Gateway to Traditional News, I will explore this as one reason why political

Satire is constantly evolving in order to maintain with the times. As technology, culture and humanity change and grow, satire is forced to grow with it. Satire of our modern time is more likely to be found on our phones than on print, more likely on a television than a telegram. By merging with pop culture, in forms of Family Guy and Comedy Central news shows, these forms of satire are able to stay relevant. But, despite the change in medium, the purpose of satire and effect of satire holds true. Modern satire, just as that of past satire, sheds light on the problems of our society through ridicule and mockery, without reinforcing and further cementing the stereotypes and prejudices they are trying to expose.

It should be noted that often that the criticism should not be taken seriously and instead give fuel to promote change, just as its purpose suggests. It should be no surprise that satire is able to spark a controversy, especially in the sense of crossing lines and saying things that should not be said, but if a positive change is made, then satire has served its purpose. Satire is an art form which is protected under the First Amendment as a freedom of expression. However, this freedom has slowly become a more dangerous form of art than it had been in the past. In order to prevent these dangers, regulations should be set into place. Though satire is protected by freedom of speech and expression, there should be certain limits put into place to prevent any further

The aim for satirical humor is to provoke readers and even listeners to criticize the words and actions of the people who lead them, they can be politicians and even divine figures but when those words and actions are offensive or harmful to those whom they profess to lead, it can cause chaos, disruption and pain. Warburton writes about the difference between giving and taking offence and that were supposed to accept the fact that satirical humour is supposed to make us uncomfortable and that were not supposed to take offense to it but let’s not forget that exercising these liberties includes duties and responsibilities according to Ali Mohamed. Our right should be practiced and used to advocate against government corruption, for equal rights, social justice and many other things that actually matter and have value to all of us and bring us together and help us move forward as a society.

Sarah Bishop ,who is an assistant professor in the department of communication studies at Baruch College, has written an article about Stephen Colbert’s appearance at a congress hearing addressing the issue of migrant workers. The congressional testimony from Colbert was meant to highlight the issues with our over dependence of migrant workers and how little we appreciate them. Bishop goes through the whole event and states her opinions on the matter using quotes and facts. She also tries to inform the reader on both sides of the argument for better perspective. Sarah Bishop throughout the article tries to explain why she believes that Stephen Colbert and other figures of comedy can have an outstanding influence on major issues outside of comedy. They can use their fame and humor to bring light to certain issues that might not be heard by the common person if not for the humor.