The Effects of Satire: Exploring Its Impact on Political Candidate Evaluation

Abstract

The effect of contemporary satires on the political opinions of their audiences is contested. Some scholars and commentators claim satire has a unique effect and may reach a non-traditional or a non-convinced audience. Others argue that it validates existing ideas and makes traditional forms of political participation less likely to occur. The assumption common to both sides is that satire does have some effect in shaping or influencing an opinion, if only to reinforce it. This chapter asks what kind of an effect can be shown to occur, by reporting an online experiment conducted in 2012 that assessed the effects of satire on the evaluation of political candidates in the UK and the USA. The experimental design controlled for both the self-selecting nature of satire’s audiences and satire’s educational effect. Results indicated that, unless audiences are self-selecting, all publicity is probably good publicity in terms of candidate evaluation—in the sense that even critical satiric coverage improved the candidate’s evaluation in comparison to a control group that viewed non-political humorous material. Further, the effect of viewing satire did not differ substantially in impact upon candidate evaluation from the effect of exposure to negative news coverage, suggesting results due to the acquisition of information rather than any unique effect of satire. The experimental design raises several methodological challenges and design issues for future audience opinion studies and investigations into satire’s reception.