1F25 Blog Response 4: News, trust, and “truthiness”

After reading through my peer’s blogs I come to the conclusion that satirical news is really just for humor. From the blogs I read most thought that satirical news isn’t true news and I agree. It’s not meant to be true news by any means; these kinds of shows are meant to bring news in a different manner. “Culture jamming occurs in advertisements, and is usually making fun of political figures or social issues.” (http://amandaregnerus.wordpress.com/) That is exactly what satirical news does and in most cases it is making fun of a situation to make the viewers laugh. Culture jamming used in shows like The Rick Mercer Report is an appropriate way to give the news in a non-serious fashion. It is never meant to hurt anyone or their feelings. A documentary is no different than satirical news; it is their portrayal of a situation.

Satirical news is meant to be funny and make people laugh. Not all viewers laugh and not everyone that watches television watches these kinds of shows. “They provides satisfaction for certain people as the humor and entertainment factor come into play.” (http://at12nk.wordpress.com/) My friends and I find these shows funny but I know certain people don’t because it’s not “real” news. Everyone has their own humor and everyone has their own source for current events. These shows bring the best of both worlds so why not sit down, tune in and see what they have to say about current world events.

“Satirical news is a mainstream form of culture jamming but whether it is useful to the public sphere or not is a controversial question.” (http://razanalkayed.wordpress.com/) It certainly is culture jamming and the way The Daily Show does it proves that it’s good for the public sphere. Shows like that are solely still running because people still watch it. If people still watch it there must be something somewhat good about it because not everyone that watches a show like that is dumb. The point is culture jamming is good for the public sphere because it collaborates normal everyday situations with a bit of satire. The last place I want to live is a world without humor. 

I1F25 s the fake news the real news?

In many situations we can make something serious into something funny and that’s what shows like The Daily Show are for. Satirical news applies to me because I am not one to particularly watch the news to get facts about what is going on in the world. I watch shows that make me laugh and “Cultural jamming examines the whole picture of different situations within a comedic frame, while criticizing media sources that present this news.” (O’Shaughnessy, Michael, and Jane Sadler. 2012, pp. 214) Shows like The Daily Show and The Rick Mercer Report are mainstream culture jamming but I believe the public sphere is benefiting from these shows because it opens the eyes of the viewers on popular topics all while making them laugh.


I believe regular news is made up of propaganda so when shows that are culture jamming are given to me I think that it’s giving everyone a different perspective. Not all the news that is given to us is true “making us notice and question their underlying messages.” (pp. 214) Just because half of what Rick Mercer does on his show is fake or not real news doesn't mean we aren't learning or taking something away from the other half. News is news and I believe it is the same debate about what school someone goes to. “I go to Western, you go to Brock therefore I’m smarter.” I disagree if we both leave our respective schools with a degree how does that make you smarter or in any way better than me? If I watch Jon Stewart and you watch CNN, we are both getting the same news but in different fashions.

In conclusion I feel that satirical news is a way of culture jamming but it is a useful tool in today’s society. Programs like these make the news interesting while not always true they get us hooked and when something happens in the world we look to these shows to cut the tension. They are useful to the public because it provides information in a comical way. I personally enjoy many of the shows that use culture jamming because lets be real, who doesn't like to laugh?

O’Shaughnessy, Michael, and Jane Sadler. 2012. Media and Society. 5th Edition. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press

1F25 What the Hail?

The add to look at is a front page cover that looks like any other, big headlines saying “WE DID IT” with two members of a sports team celebrating by shaking hands front and centre. At the top there are two cricket players with their gear on together and then their wives together as well. This is in the Australian news and right after Australia beat Pakistan in cricket during the 1999 Olympic Games. When you look at the add a bit deeper you notice that it is very male dominated and that the wives are secondary. In Hollywood a handsome man would be the purse on a woman’s arm but in this case the wives are the purse on their husbands arm. The added uses suggestive terms like “We” speaking as if the whole country won the match together rather than using “They.” It catches the reader’s eye being bigger, bolder and making it easy to read quickly with three short words, “WE DID IT.” During the 1999 Olympic Games most Australians only cared about the Games so having a big win front and centre on the newspaper made perfect sense. Since I live in Canada this newspaper did not affect me and probably didn’t affect most of the word as well. “The same event will be reported differently in different countries.” (Michael O’Shaughnessy and Jane Sadler, Media and Society Fifth Edition, p.186) Canada held the Olympics in 2010 and the number of medals “we” as a country won did not affect Australia. I’m sure that Canada winning gold in hockey didn’t matter to the Aussies. Australia celebrated their medals and we as Canadians celebrated ours. I personally only watched Canadian male sports not that I am sexist they applied more to me that female sports did. That goes with all sports; I don’t watch many female sports but watch pretty much every male sport. “Gender is central to identity, and gender socialisation is one of the earliest processes of interpellation” (Michael O’Shaughnessy and Jane Sadler, Media and Society Fifth Edition, p.185) I have always watched male dominated sports because that’s all I was allowed to watch when I was younger. The add was very well placed because it was predominately male which relates to me and grabs my attention.