Brodner's Cartoon du Jour: The Irony of Satire
In "The Irony of Satire," an Ohio State University study, it was found that conservatives, when polled, took Stephen Colbert seriously. This, along with Barry Blitt's famous New Yorker cover, begs the question, "Who is this thing we do really for? Anyway?"
Irony is a literary device going back at least to Cervantes. Caricature goes back to ancient Egypt. Not to be aware of the quiet wink of satire is to be untouched by Swift, Twain, Waugh, Moliere, Perlman, Gilbert and Sullivan, The Marx Brothers, Bob and Ray, Terry Southern, etc, etc, etc. So here are people unreachable by clever. Millions of them.
Conservatism is not stupidity. They number some of the great intellectuals of history. Today many brainy conservatives in business and media make out very well by their philosophy. I'm speaking of the others. The masses of Palin-eolithics who vote for a fear-based agenda even if it hurts them. It seems they are affected by a belief system that doesn't allow for irony. We all have belief systems but what is it about satire that doesn't violate the belief system of the left that, to the right, bounces like a hammer off a very hard rock?
Page 1 of 1 
Incomplete Study
I was surprised to see that this report got so much attention. This type of misunderstanding goes on all the time. If you pay attention to commentators such as Rush Limbaugh you will see, for example, that when Rush makes a facetious remark conservatives see it as the joke that it is while liberals take him literally.
A thorough study would show this. I give this study a C-.
Reply to Raul
But why is it that so many right-wing pundits are always having to explain that what they said WAS a joke? Mike (The Weiner) Savage has just backed off his remark about autism being fake by saying it was "just a joke." If conservatives have to explain constantly that their most outrageous remarks are jokes, then maybe they ought to leave humor to the professionals, who never seem to have the need to make those clarifications.
As Mark Twain "almost" said, "Suppose you were a right-wing talk show host, and suppose you were an idiot, . . . but I repeat myself."
Incomplete?
While I agree your premise is probably correct, I disagree with your assumption's inference. The only time I've seen a liberal take Rush literally is when he scares the b'Jesus outa them or pisses them off; him being facetious or not... And, either is damned near every time he opens his mouth.
The Satire of Irony
If it is true that a number of constipated Conservatives take Stephen Colbert seriously, then this line of reasoning might suggest that Rush Limbaugh, Savage, et cetera, are only pretending to spew hate speech and goon humor. A possibility I missed, that's for sure.
Hats off to the author of the previous post for cluing clueless lefties in on ways to interpret the subtleties of right wing irony.
relationship with their
relationship with their future spouses. According to the statistic Ukraine dating free big amount of the guys, wishing to tie a knot with Ukraine girls are free dating site about forty years and nevertheless incapable to buy a dwelling or to succeed in . They majorly consider that the women from unfortunate country will not have great dating perm girl requirements and that is why will be perfect for the marriage. Shocking is the fact that more and marriage agency Odessa Ukraine more criminal cases, which happen in America, and in other free service Dating countries are related with the abuse of the foreign wives. ut the bad background of Ukraine dating site - since it is not advantageous. In Washington D. C, for example, lately has been accepted the law, under which the marriage agencies are forced to inform the potential fianc? Es in their native language Ukraine dating agency that they possess a right to demand an official document about the fact of convictions and preceding marriages with the outlanders from their men especially, for the reason of the criminal cases, committed against the frees - migrants, dating Ukraine free which happen more frequently.
I always had the feeling
I always had the feeling 'they' took the Colbert seriously..after all he is Catholic ;) but in any sense 'they' should also tune into the Daily Show because although he is a comedian, he is really GREAT comedian who is only becoming a better journalist day..by day....by day. Jon Stewart + Bill Moyers = FUTURE KINGS. If only Bush would appear on the Daily Show would I be able to view the funniest thirty minute episode...ever. But I really just hope a tumbleweed knocks him over crushing poor Barney.
Colbert: Closet Conservative
I always suspected that the more rigid ideological conservatives had cognitive dissonance and the complete inability to interpret material outside of an ideological prism, but this study is an incredibly frightening indictment beyond anything I could ever contemplate.
I cannot imagine anyone understanding Colbert as a closet-advocate of his preposterous diatribes and invectives. What Colbert does is arrange slogans, buzz words, and distortions in a manner that exposes the fallacy of conservative punditry logic. The slogans, buzz words, and distortions Colbert considers to be comic gold are clearly something more important for herds of Palin-ists. This is troubling because it is empirical evidence that Colbert, to some degree, hardens ideological predilections. However, doesn't it take Colbert's humor to new heights knowing that these people actually exist?
As a debater, I can be very
As a debater, I can be very effective through sarcasm, providing it is on-point and sharp-witted. About 12 years ago I was a guest at a convention in Vegas and had (free) front row seats to 'Monday Nitro' (professional wrestling). I got quite plastered on free drinks and pretended to be an over-the-top, gung-ho fanatical believer. None of the wrestlers could perform. They were all busting out laughing. The show never aired. It had to be scrapped. Thus, I cost the production company at least $1/2-mil. (I could never recreate the moment sober).
Anyway, I think Colbert is occasionally serious. I mean, I think internally he advocates some of the same positions he mocks. But he sees the comedy in it anyway and proceeds on the basis of a performer who has to sell his own side for a laugh and a paycheck.
Con's love to argue.
Lib's hate to argue. They prefer to pretend that everyone agrees with everyone [read: themselves].
I come from a long line of liberals. But due to some fluke of evolution, we argue plenty. Sarcasm (what you call 'irony') is perhaps the most passive (therefore intrinsically 'liberal') form of argument.
Respectfully submitted~
Colbert is a comedian using
Colbert is a comedian using irony to prove the opposite point. He uses satire and sarcasm but he often means what he says, in that he is making a clear point.
