Clayton Chappelle's Frontline

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.

America is a culture that enjoys having some time away from the reality of political issues within society. Comedic entertainment has found ways to also inform its audience about important political statements that is used to “refer to any act or nonverbal form of communication that is intended to influence a decision to be made for or by a political party”( Wikipedia), or ideas through a comedic point of view. Comical news is what brings our attention with ease because listening to straight political debates can lead a person to not want to sit and become informed on latest political topics. The culture that society has developed into became accustomed to finding it better to have a laugh about serious news because through humor an audience

Many people feel that controversial topics, such as racism or anti-Semitism, should be regarded as off-limits when it comes to humor. These people argue that any joke about these topics is inappropriate and always should be punished, or, at the very least, condemned, and to a certain extent, I agree with

Humorists are present through multiple mediums such as talk shows, blog columns, and political cartoons. The different platforms humorists’ use lends different purposes for their content. For example, political cartoon artists have the creative liberty to create offensive content on certain political issues. The political cartoons

On the other side, satire may offend some people. As much as it can lift up a topic, so does it can ruin those related to the issue. The negative comments it receives can fire up a whole other conflict and that leads to the possibility of harming the society. It can be deemed unimportant and immature.

Filmic comedies are often genres that are overlooked in regards to the level of seriousness that they bring. Due to the levity of the content itself, comedies have much more freedom to deviate from the contextual restraints, imposed by society itself, other film genres must respect. Contextual constraints, such as, racial stereotypes, gender connotations, and cultural references, are components that comedies use in order to achieve humor at its maximum effect. The override of these constraints, however, has detrimental effects on entire ethnic and gender populations that go unnoticed at the expense of laughter. The 2001 film comedy, Rush Hour 2, uses humor as a vehicle to propagate active stereotypes that render the Asian female as an objective commodity that through an American lens devalues Asian culture and emasculates Asian men as a result.

Satire requires a lot of interpretation. No one quite has the same opinions on what is trying to be conveyed by such satire. Some people think satire is rude and crosses the line. For others, it is easier to comprehend more serious political topics when humor is involved. Satire can be helpful to some in the transmission of information. I agree completely with this. Humor helps grab the attention of viewers and make the experience more enjoyable. I find it easier to watch the SNL skits mocking the debate over the real deal. Yes, they may be making fun of people, but I unapologetically find that funny. In my opinion there is a reason these people are victims of satire.

Although the term “political correctness” may be somewhat new, the sentiment behind it is as old as comedy, itself; comedians have never been able to joke about controversial subjects without incurring criticism. The proliferation of social media is the main culprit behind the seemingly pervasive presence of political correctness. An increasing number of ways to record and stream stand-up routines means that a comedian cannot test a joke out without running the risk of finding themselves in the middle of an “internet firestorm” (Schwarz, Washington Post). Nonetheless, the real consequence of the propagation of controversies over “political incorrectness” is that the realm of the taboo appears to have expanded – there are now more things you

Satire holds darker undercurrents because of its roundabout attacks regarding the matter. Satire can be utilized to express predominance over others and move equilibrium of force far from those being focused on. Satire, although considered a type of amusingness, does not include much fun and chuckling. Satire is outlined as an inconspicuous assault against others trying to disparagement and mischief. The utilization of cleverness to deride and censure certain individuals, especially in legislative issues to the detriment of another person gives the creator a considerable measure of

This is the case in the context of comedy in the modern era. In hindsight, comedy is based on controversial and/or negative elements. This suggests comedy must discredit one facet of life to generate comical relief to the listener, which may promote cases of racial stereotypes, societal bias, and even gender discrimination jokes that receive wide acclaim by listeners based on the delivery and dexterity of the joke. This is a blend of freedom of speech and moral rights; however, the context of the freedom of speech may infringe on the ideologies of people leading to people adopting the rationale presented by a comedian.

The media has a strong influence on how societies receive and react to the context of the messages that the media displays to the public. From Disney movies on up to horror films there’s a plot that each film is trying to accomplish. The controversial issue comes into play based on how the film messages are portrayed. Films that use racial humor harm the particular race that the films are depicting. Films with racial humor that is enhanced to be seen as acceptable creates prejudge mental labels for certain races. The viewers of these films are more likely to view these stereotypes portrayed in the media as facts about whatever race that is being critically represented. Films that are created with this line of content harms individuals credibility based on the racial group they belong to. This harms a potential interaction of individual of certain races due to the knowledge they receive about that racial group through the media. The media sets the tone of our cultural experiences before they occur this happens within advertisements and movies. These storylines help to created trend and beliefs that might not be true or affective. These cause viewers who haven’t interacted with certain racial groups before to believe these stereotypes to be a reality versus that of a stereotype due to their lack of personal knowledge of how different cultures actually act.

Even on the surface the jokes of a country generally reflect its habitat, attitude, and its people. In the US for instance, most jokes you hear on late-night television would probably be political ones, bashing this political figure or the next. Why is this so? Perhaps

Political correctness has become essentially people utilizing their personal views to take power over those who may conflict with it. In this way, political correctness is harming those people who give their opinions publicly, entailing people such as comedians, writers, politicians, and more. It prevents them from saying things that they really mean out of fear that what they may say will cause someone to become offended, and therefore, cause themselves to receive some sort of public backlash. Saying something offensive, even something not intended to offend, can be the catalyst that ruins your career. For example, Tim Hunt, a Nobel prize winning scientist, was giving a presentation in Korea. During

    Satires     used in many ways to move an audience, especially on television. Family Guy for instance, utilizes many satirical techniques in it’s episodes. An adequate amount of MacFarlane’s episodes attack sensitive topics of life, such as:  racism, women’s rights and religion. In season seven, episode two of Family guy, the episode starts in a diner where all the servers are caricatures of famous icons of the 1950’s like Marilyn Monroe, Elvis Presley and even the stereotypical white police

Comedy is a fickle medium. It is hard for a comedian to predict how an audience or individuals will react to a joke. Satire is even more uncertain due the medium’s socio-political nature. The purpose of satire can be misconstrued due to its tendency to obscure or simplify the point it is trying to make for the sake of a joke. In Mathew Bevis’ “Taking Liberties”, he argues that individuals with different world views can interpret a satirical piece in very different ways. In this paper, I shall use the satirical sketch “A Politically Correct Minute” by the Royal Canadian Air Farce to argue that satire becomes and ineffective tool in conveying a political message due to Bevis’ argument that the viewer shapes the meaning of the sketch. The creator might have tried to establish a moral high ground, but it is hard to defend due to the medium being reliant on the viewers sensibilities over the creator’s intent, thus making us unsure if a moral high ground actually exists.