Digital Satire
From RhetorClick
Contents |
Rhetoric, Satire, and Digital Media
Rhetoric
Aristotle taught that rhetoric is the art of persuasion consisting of various methods used in attempting to persuade an audience.[1] A persuasive argument can be measured by the effectiveness of its rhetorical devices. Such devices may or may not be fact based, and may employ humorous ridicule, hyperbole, sarcasm, or cynicism. Rhetoric utilizing this technique is often called satire.[2] Aristotle lists three persuasive audience appeals: Logos, Pathos, and Ethos - the logical, emotional, and ethical appeal to the audience, respectively. It is essential to understand how to use logos, pathos, and ethos in order to effectively persuade your audience. There are five cannons of rhetoric: Invention, Arrangement, Style, Memory, and Delivery. Using the five canons of rhetoric you can build an effective argument.
Satire
Satire is often accredited with acting as a literary genre or form. It can also be found in graphic and entertaining arts such as magazine articles and theatrical performances. In satire shortcomings are held up to ridicule for not being in harmony with accepted norms.
Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon [3].
A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant" (Frye) - but parody, and burlesque are frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack [4].
Satirical works often contain "straight" humour. Laughter is not an essential component of satire,(Corum 175) as in spectrum of satire there are types that are not meant to arise laughter and be "funny".
Conversely, not all humour is necessarily "satirical", even on such topics as politics, religion or art, or even when it uses the satirical tools of irony, parody, and burlesque [5].
Satirical playwright Dario Fo pointed out the difference between satire and teasing. Teasing is the reactionary side of the comic, it limits itself to a shallow parody of physical appearance. Satire instead uses the comic to go against power and its oppressions, has a subversive character, and a moral dimension which draws judgement against its targets [6].
Teasing is an ancient form of simple buffoonery, a form of comedy without satire's subversive edge. Teasing includes light and affectionate parody, good-humoured mockery, simple one-dimensional poking fun, benign spoofs. Teasing typically consists in a impersonation of someone monkeying around with his exterior attributes, tics, physical blemishes, voice and mannerisms, quirks, way of dressing and walking, the phrases he typically repeats. By contrast, teasing never touches on the core issue, never makes a serious criticism judging the target with irony; it never harms the target's conduct, ideology and position of power; it never undermines the perception of his morality and cultural dimension [7].
Critics tend to see irony, parody, and satire as diminishing meaning (by belittling the subject), but as Harold Bloom reminds us, the great ironists such as Shakespeare tended to expand meaning (13). Satire is provocative, not dismissive - a crucial point that critics typically ignore when assessing its role in public discourse [8].
Test argues that play and laughter constitute and define all satiric undertakings and distinguish it from other forms of aesthetic expression with which it is sometimes confused with "humor, comedy, social criticism, parody, burlesque, farce and travesty"(13).
Again, there has been some controversy over whether laughter is a necessary component or distinguishing feature of satire. Laughter is ultimately something satire may or may not produce within the audience. It is not something that resides in the artistic expression itself. Satire does not need to be funny. [9].
Satire relies on rhetorical devices like enthymemes, understated logic, where the audience must draw its own conclusions [10]. In this way, satire dismantles an opponent without explicit argumentation for a particular position. Since the audience must finish assembling the argument, satire may at times be more effective than explicit or more traditional rhetoric. Drawing attention to some absurdity or inconsistency may also arouse sympathy for an alternate view, thereby forging inroads with an otherwise disagreeable audience.
Satire is a contemporary of events with the newest satirical internet. The cinema contains political documentaries which consist of a combination of satire and polemic. The media text is a mainstream of political coverage. The 3 prevalent forms: satiric documentary, parodic news show, ironic, and media savvy activism.
The image of physically unveiling something or someone is a role that recurs again and again in discussions of satire [11]. In public debate, satire often acts as a critical component to any argument. Often used as a tool to help the public or intended audience develop a powerful political consciousness, satire helps to create a forum of true public opinion from which debate can thrive. Satire has the ability to enthrall an audience and the media only helps to exploit satirists desires. The audience does not get the opportunity to agree or disagree, but in viewing satire from various media sources, it is clear that public debate can be sparked. In taking a passive approach, satirists are able to call to action, if not to anger a particular set of individuals.
Satire is looked to, for its ability to unmask and to deconstruct, pointing us toward the flaws and the posturings of official policy [12]. Also, satire has been feared and banned because it is seen as a powerful force (Feinberg)[13].
Satire is effective in its goal to provide social commentary now more than ever because it grabs the attention of its audience. In recent years, a divide has been built between media outlets and the viewers for which they compete. Effective satire, like that of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report, is very critical of media networks who report with the goal of shock value in mind, rather than balanced news. Constructively criticizing widely untrusted news sources builds an implied trust that the satirist is credible; it also encourages the audience to become more informed so they can understand the humor used in the satire.
According to Hutcheon [14] a more idealistic view holds that satire and irony have "the potential to offer a challenge to the hierarchy of the very 'sites' of discourse." Also, Lillian and Edward Bloom go on to explain, that satire ultimately has little political effect because it does not in itself initiate change and, in fact, rarely encourages it [15].
Satire can play a big role in public debate. There are bloggers that post ideas anonymously on the internet, and there are people that challenge those in power [16].
Also, certain tools lend themselves more fully to digital satire to give back to society.
A drawback in political debate is the possibility that audiences view satire as an end in itself rather than as an impetus to act on the message. For this reason, most theorists argue satire is politically impotent, they viewing traditional and more seriously framed debate as the driving force in shaping opinion. Based on Sigmund Freud’s proposal that humor sublimates aggression, theorists argue that satire numbs an audience resulting in their inaction; thus, satire has no useful place in political discourse [17]. Of course, not all theorists agree with this position. In addition, a 2009 study shows a wide difference of opinion among a diverse audience when each was asked what the same satirist had really been advocating, showing that satire is not always equally effective [18]. But satire does play a role, if only to draw attention to an issue. Proponents view it as an important tool leveraged in the modern political debate. As one puts it, "Instead of holding out for monumental change, I am more interested in incremental shifts in influencing public debate and in creating or mobilizing political communities" [19]. Whether or not true creation or mobilization occurs, satire is a tool to reach otherwise disengaged segments of society who have become skeptical of the status quo.
Certain communication techniques lend themselves more to satire than others. For example, irony is the leading literary device which often drives satirical arguments. To assist their arguments even further, satirists often employ the use of exaggeration, innuendo, and paranomasia. Extended similies and metaphors often help to allow an audeience to see a comparison of what is being scorned.
Communities of Satire
Identity
Community
Institutions
Audience
Crowdsourced Satire
Open Source
Memes
References
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire
- ↑ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire
- ↑ <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire
- ↑ <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire
- ↑ <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire
- ↑ <https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkaWdpdGFsc2F0aXJlc3dpZnR8Z3g6MmI5MTFlMzVkZTA2NDcyYg
- ↑ <https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkaWdpdGFsc2F0aXJlc3dpZnR8Z3g6MmI5MTFlMzVkZTA2NDcyYg
- ↑ http://rhetoric.byu.edu/figures/E/enthymeme.htm
- ↑ Day 12
- ↑ Day 12
- ↑ http://www.democracynow.org/resources/63/263/The_Irony_of_Satire.pdf
- ↑ Day 12
- ↑ Day 12
- ↑ http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/evgeny_morozov_is_the_internet_what_orwell_feared.html
- ↑ Day, Amber. Satire and Dissent (Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2011), pp. 11-13.
- ↑ http://hij.sagepub.com/content/14/2/212.abstract
- ↑ Day 21
