Towards a contextual approach: Audiences, television and ‘offensive’ humour

Abstract

The fine line between humour and offence has long been of interest for scholars and media outlets alike. While some argue for an avoidance of offence at all costs, others defend the ‘right to offend’ as an essential part of humour. By bringing critical sociological studies in humour into dialogue with feminist writings on affect and the politics of emotion, this article argues for a more nuanced and contextualised understanding of offensive humour. Based on empirical data from an audience study about offensive television content in Britain and Germany, we consider what exactly people do with humorous content they find offensive, not what it does ‘in general’. Such a contextualised approach illustrates the ethical and transformative potential of so-called negative affect. Thus, rather than perceiving offence as an ‘ugly’ feeling with merely negative consequences for society, this article contends that the avoidance of offence can also operate as a strategy for evading responsibility and action, thereby hindering social change.

News satire engagement as a transgressive space for genre work

“…There are certainly examples of all possible tendencies in the study though, meaning unlaughter seems to be ‘trans-ideological’. This is confirmed in one of the few other empirical studies with a similar contextualizing approach to humour engagement, by Graefer and Das (2017). For those concerned with potential harm caused by humour, there is an implicit top-down perspective on media engagement and meaning making.…”

“…The transgressive potential of news satire is only realized if it is detected (Hutcheon, 1994). There are two main levels of transgression at work in news satire: generic transgression, between ‘serious’ news and ‘silly’ humour; and the social and moral transgression inherent in humour (Graefer and Das, 2017). Further, the ironic mode common to contemporary news satire is ‘trans-ideological’ – used for various ideologies and motivations (Hutcheon, 1994).…”

“…Critical audience members construct news satire’s moral and social transgressions in relation to social hierarchy, often with the metaphor of ‘kicking downwards’ or ‘upwards’ to illustrate. Satire’s ‘directionality’ – who jokes about what/whom (Graefer and Das, 2017) – becomes a main point of assessment:Kicking downwards, it just isn’t funny. It should be directed towards those in power, there needs to be this power-thing about it.…”

“…Specifically, rather than just parodying politicians, contemporary news satire provides interviews with public figures, scrutinizes news programming and does ‘the investigative work of matching a politician’s or pundit’s statements, with past actions and positions’ (Day, 2013: 415). The use of humour adds another level of transgression, as humour is often is used to deal ‘with sensitive topics, touching on or transgressing social norms and moral boundaries around sexuality, religion or death’ (Graefer and Das, 2017: 2). These two levels of transgression: genre-related, and related to social and moral boundaries, are often conflated.…”

How Satirical News Impacts Affective Responses, Learning, and Persuasion: A Three-Level Random-Effects Meta-Analysis

“…Similarly, across the globe, political elites have expressed complaints and filed lawsuits against satirists who targeted them. Examples include US President Trump, who disparaged satirists on Twitter (Becker, 2018) and Turkish President Erdogan, who filed a lawsuit against German satirist Jan Böhmermann (Graefer & Das, 2020). We thus propose: H2.…”