Social change, a laughing matter!

A good piece of journalism is a powerful thing. It can force you to think about an issue that you wouldn’t otherwise consider (or would rather avoid), motivate you to act on the issues raised and give you the information needed to present such a case to other people. Even more importantly, perhaps, it can be used to hold policy-makers and authority figures to account. If nobody assesses decisions made by such powerful figures on their merits and exposes wrongdoing when it occurs, then a crucial element of democracy would be lost. But you know all this already. It’s a given that journalism is a worthwhile enterprise – the problem is getting people to actually read the stuff.

People read what they want to read. This seemingly obvious statement is surprisingly important – if a person reads something that fundamentally conflicts with their pre-existing viewpoint, then they’ll simply stop reading. Take the Daily Mail (often known as the Daily Hate) in England, one of the most popular papers in the country. It thrives on creating fear: of immigrants; of rising house prices; of ‘loss of Britishness’, whatever that means. Grab a copy of this fine piece of literature out of any white middle-aged woman’s hands at the bus stop and replace it with the more liberal Guardian, and you’ll be accused of assault before you can say: ‘but it really has some interesting insights into the valuable work that immigrants do for the British economy…’ If it doesn’t fit with what the Mail tells me, the typical response is, then it’s probably wrong, and I’m not going to read it. It’s quite hard to change someone’s mind when they don’t want it to be changed.

This is a particular problem in England with journalism that goes anywhere near a social or environmental issue. Recently it’s become cool to be green and socially-conscious, and the newspapers have lapped it up. This means you can’t open any newspaper without seeing an article on climate change or Madonna’s latest take-away adopted child (special offer: get a free Asian with every African at Rent-A-Kid) – and the public has reached saturation point. So, whenever a headline mentions one of these issues, I, and many other people like me, find myself turning the page to avoid the article. Why? Again, it’s because I think we know what it will say and therefore decide that it doesn’t interest me. So, how DO you get people to read a bit of journalism that is trying to create some sort of change?

I think the answer is actually fairly easy – make it enjoyable to read. Everyone likes to laugh, and putting a bit of humour into an article will get a person reading through just to get the joke at the end. I started up a paper called Mostly Harmless this year at Durham University which includes a lot of silly jokes and puns in each issue. However, they at least persuade students, an audience with a notoriously short attention span, to pick up the paper. Hopefully, then they’ll have a look at the more serious points we make in each issue because they fit into the general sarcastic and humorous tone. For example, we printed a ‘Spot the Difference’ competition in the last edition. In the format of an easy and accessible game, the article simultaneously ridiculed the Iran hostage ‘crisis’ and drew attention to human rights abuses in Guantanamo Bay – both important points that deserve attention, but which would have been ignored if presented in a long dry article about international law.

Satire is particularly useful here, because authority figures are often inherently ridiculous – it’s very easy to draw a cartoon and mock them while at the same time pointing out a serious flaw in their policy. Avoiding sounding either strident and slightly self-righteous or boring is a difficult task, but satire, especially when written with a dash of indignation, can negotiate both problems. I’ve found that Mostly Harmless has been reviewed very positively by its target audience, Durham students. It’s difficult to know to what extent anyone’s mind is actually changed by the paper, but people are certainly actively engaging with the articles rather than discarding them like other student papers, and this can only be a good thing. Good journalism CAN contribute towards making the changes mentioned above, but if you can’t interest your target audience in this journalism then it’s worse than useless. Use humour, use a different style, use a cartoon – just, for God’s sake, don’t be boring!

Tom Walker
—-

Tom is a second-year history undergraduate studying at the University of Durham in England. He is a co-founder of Mostly Harmless, a satire and comment newspaper within the university. It was set up last September and since then has reached a circulation of 4,000 copies and maintains a lively website/blog at www.mostly-harmless.org.uk.

Advertisements

Posted on 05/23/2007, in Fun, Media, Opinions, UK, Youth-Culture-Society. Bookmark the permalink. 1 Comment.

  1. This is an excellent blog post. I agree that humor is one of the most effective mediums to inform the public as to what’s happening in the world today. Nevertheless, I think it’s important that we don’t interpret this call for humor as an educational to be a another way of saying we want our news simplified. Essentially, if we can create a convergence of humor and journalism which stand fast by the journalistic objectives of impartiality and accuracy I have no doubts that more people would read newspapers to get their information. We already see seeds of this cultural shift which looks towards satirists for information in parody news programs like the Jon Stewart Show and Stephen Colbert. In the end, satire is a useful tool for the spread of information but like all sources it shouldn’t be the ONLY source in which we get our information. In spite of the boring and dry qualities of conventional methods of journalism one can deny its importance as a necessary and democratizing force in America. Boredom is a small price to pay for knowledge. Anyway, this was a delightful read. You should check out my blog. I wrote a blog titled “No Laughing Matter: Stand up Comedy or Social Commentary”. It covers alot of the same issues you touch on in this. Great job!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: