Satire and Journalism

Abstract

Satire represents a form of public discourse that invites critical judgment of some sociopolitical folly, absurdity, or contradiction. Through devices like exaggeration, irony, and imitation, a satirical text aspires to cut through spin, deception, and misrepresentation in order to spotlight a given state of affairs as they are or could be. That is, satire is propelled by an impulse to elucidate; to highlight some truth. In many respects, journalism’s normative aspirations are similar to that of satire. Journalism’s guiding principles are commonly discussed in light of a central mission to seek and report the best obtainable version of the truth. Though satirical and journalistic endeavors are often carried out with contrasting tones of sobriety, both forms of discourse exhibit idealism in offering unblinking assessments of social realities. Accordingly, it is hardly surprising that satire and journalism have an extensive history of interplay, dating back to some of the earliest venues of modern journalism. Given satire’s penchant to freely draw from the conventions and norms of a wide range of cultural practices in its pursuit of mounting social critiques, it follows that satire would frequently leverage the tools of journalism for its purposes. The journalism profession has long laid claim to privileged legitimacy in the public sphere, positioning itself as a voice of authority in interpreting public affairs events and issues. Journalism’s traditional (though certainly not uncontested) position of privilege has proven useful to satirists. Likewise, satire’s entertaining and attention-getting qualities have long enticed news media actors.

Full text

Satire and Journalism
Page 1 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Subject: Journalism Studies Online Publication Date: Mar 2019
DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.871
Satire and Journalism
Jason Peifer and Taeyoung Lee

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication
Summary and Keywords
Satire represents a form of public discourse that invites critical judgment of some
sociopolitical folly, absurdity, or contradiction. Through devices like exaggeration, irony,
and imitation, a satirical text aspires to cut through spin, deception, and
misrepresentation in order to spotlight a given state of affairs as they are or could be.
That is, satire is propelled by an impulse to elucidate; to highlight some truth. In many
respects, journalism’s normative aspirations are similar to that of satire. Journalism’s
guiding principles are commonly discussed in light of a central mission to seek and report
the best obtainable version of the truth. Though satirical and journalistic endeavors are
often carried out with contrasting tones of sobriety, both forms of discourse exhibit
idealism in offering unblinking assessments of social realities. Accordingly, it is hardly
surprising that satire and journalism have an extensive history of interplay, dating back to
some of the earliest venues of modern journalism. Given satire’s penchant to freely draw
from the conventions and norms of a wide range of cultural practices in its pursuit of
mounting social critiques, it follows that satire would frequently leverage the tools of
journalism for its purposes. The journalism profession has long laid claim to privileged
legitimacy in the public sphere, positioning itself as a voice of authority in interpreting
public affairs events and issues. Journalism’s traditional (though certainly not
uncontested) position of privilege has proven useful to satirists. Likewise, satire’s
entertaining and attention-getting qualities have long enticed news media actors.
Academic scholarship centered on the interplay of satire and journalism emanates from a
variety of research orientations, employs a diversity of methods, and focuses on a wide
range of topics and cultural contexts. The bulk of this body of research highlights satirical
work that draws from journalism-based conventions and practices (for example, The Daily
Show with Jon Stewart), but pockets of scholarship also consider conventional
journalism’s engagement with satire. Still other scholars focus more on how the
convergences of journalism and satire spawn hybrid forms of discourse that contribute to
public culture in meaningful ways. Building on the insights afforded by these diverse lines
of research, future satire–journalism scholarship would be well served by continuing to
draw from across these multifaceted research streams.

Satire and Journalism
Page 2 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Keywords: satire, journalism, news, news parody, political entertainment, political humor, infotainment, journalism
studies
Satire and Journalism
The concepts of satire and journalism both represent forms of public discourse that lay
claim to offering a lens for understanding the surrounding world as it is or could be. Both
modes of discourse can be entertaining, yet entertainment is not necessarily the central
purpose of each. One key distinction between the concepts is that satire—by definition—
offers pointed value judgments, whereas journalism commonly (though not always)
espouses values of neutrality and detachment. In short, satire and journalism have both
significant overlap and tension, which should be neither overstated nor underplayed. This
article discusses the interplay of these two concepts as explored by academic scholarship
—particularly within the scope of journalism-related research literature. There is much to
consider relative to satire and journalism beyond this specific intersection; however, this
review largely limits its focus to work that, in some capacity, pertains to both elements of
journalism and satire.
Scholarship at the intersection of satire and journalism (typically referred to hereafter as
satire–journalism) could be characterized as inhabiting an adolescent stage of
development. This area of academic inquiry is no longer in its infancy, but given that most
research at the nexus of journalism and satire has been generated just within the last two
decades, there is still a considerable amount of “growing up” to do. Though scholars have
made many meaningful strides in this evolving research domain, the research area
remains ripe for future inquiry. Before turning to an examination of how journalism and
satire have interfaced historically, it is helpful at the outset to consider—at a rudimentary
level—the topic of satire–journalism in two ways. First, the combination of satire and
journalism can be viewed from the standpoint of satire that is informed by traditional
journalistic conventions and norms. Notably, the preponderance of research on satire–
journalism centers on television-based satirical content playing off of journalistic
conventions and norms—for instance as performed by Comedy Central’s The Daily Show,
HBO’s Last Week Tonight, or “Weekend Update” on NBC’s Saturday Night Live. In the
past, both scholars and practitioners described such fare as “fake news” (e.g., Borden &
Tew, 2007), long before the term was adopted as an insult for journalists during and after
the 2016 election cycle. Second, the satire–journalism dyad can be understood from the
vantage of conventional journalism covering or employing the tools of satire, such as a
daily round-up of late-night comedy content in a newspaper or morning show, a political
cartoon, or a satirical editorial–op-ed. For example, The Boston Globe newspaper
attracted national attention during the 2016 presidential campaign season for its satirical
representation of a front page imagining the state of affairs in the country under a Donald
Trump presidency (Mullin, 2016).

Satire and Journalism
Page 3 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Yet even as this two-dimensional approach is helpful for describing the research domain
in broad strokes, such a simplification can be misleading. The concepts of journalism
and
satire bear qualities of fluidity and porousness. Discussion of them invites consideration
of hybrid forms of public discourse (Baym, 2005), spurring questions like: Who is and is
not a journalist? What are the essential qualities of a satirist? Can someone truly be both
a journalist and a satirist? It has long been challenging (some would even say pointless) to
make a rigid delineation between satire and journalism. In order to more fully understand
the complexities of the satire–journalism interplay, an examination of satire is warranted.
Satire
Satire defies simple definition (Condren, 2012; Kumar & Combe, 2015), but at a basic
level it is a discursive practice that provocatively serves to challenge an existing political
or social order in a playful manner. It is “artful political critique” (Caufield, 2008, p. 4)
designed to expose a folly, hypocrisy, and–or an absurdity. Satire’s central tendency is one
of attack and (nonviolent) aggression (Knight, 2004), even as it can sometimes seem
innocuous at the surface. As a polemical form of discourse, its ultimate target is a social
or political system or issue, rather than a trivial personal foible (Caufield, 2008). In this
sense, satire is a form of cultural criticism (Meikle, 2008).
Satire’s judgmental impulse, serving to challenge a sociopolitical policy, practice, or
institution, distinguishes it from the broader concept of political humor. While humorous
treatment of a political issue, event, person, or institution can be satirical, not all political
humor qualifies as satire. For instance, in many cases late night comedy programming
(e.g., Late Night with Jimmy Fallon) would not qualify as satire, even as such programs
may regularly feature jokes about politicians and political matters. Indeed, it would be
more appropriate to describe some political humor more as supportive of a political or
social structure than oppositional in nature (Dinç, 2012; Paletz, 1990).
Satire’s impulse to critique and question authority can invite government surveillance,
prosecution, and censorship. For instance in mid-2000, the Turkish cartoonists who
lampooned then-Prime Minister Erdoğan, and the media outlets that published the
cartoons, were sued by the prime minister and fined (Dinç, 2012). In 2011, the Palestinian
Authority shut down the satirical TV show, Watan Ala Watar, because it was regarded as a
threat to relations with other Arab nations (Sienkiewicz, 2012). Elsewhere—for instance
in Belarus and China—political satire has been censored on the Internet as well (Luqiu,
2017; Miazhevich, 2015).
Satire’s ridiculing commentary need not be overtly funny (Gray, Jones, & Thompson,
2009A)—though satire often will elicit laughter. While the combination of the aggression,
judgment, play, and (sometimes) laughter that characterizes satire (Test, 1991) is
fundamentally pessimistic (Ziv, 2010), “the purpose of satire is not negativity, but positive
change” (Gray et al., 2009A, p. 12). Satire’s moral impulse in this regard serves to expose
societal problems with the hope of improvement. Neither is satire monolithic. Different
satirical texts can be animated by contrasting tones—for instance representing horatian

Satire and Journalism
Page 4 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
satire or juvenalian satire (Holbert, Hmielowski, Jain, Lather, & Morey, 2011). Akin to the
literary tradition of tragedy, juvenalian satire is harsh, biting, merciless, and indignant. In
contrast—more akin to the literary genre of comedy—horatian satire wields a more
detached and light-hearted tone, typically delivered with a smile (LaMarre et al., 2014;
Sanders, 1971).
For satire to be most effective, an audience member needs to be at least relatively
familiar with the larger context of the satire message’s critique(s) and its target
(Caufield, 2008). That is, the intertextual nature of satirical content—reliant on a web of
texts beyond the immediate context of the satire—renders it variously accessible and
comprehensible to audience members (Van Zoonen, 2017). Similarly, a given piece of
satirical content has the potential to render multiple interpretations, dependent in part
on the predispositions of the audience members (LaMarre, Landreville, & Beam, 2009), as
well as on the “polysemic scaffolding” of the satirical message (Perks, 2010). That is,
certain discursive textual patterns in satirical content have the potential to produce
multiple meanings (i.e., polysemy) among different audience members.
Furthermore, satire can be understood as “pre-generic” (Knight, 2004, p. 4). Satire
represents an “invasion of genre” wherein it “often succeeds by masquerade, by initially
pretending to be something else” (Kumar & Combe, 2015, p. 213). Satire commonly
adopts, manipulates, and exploits a diversity of genres, whether in the form of a novel,
speech, poem, television show, radio program, YouTube mashup, magazine, or tweet. In
this sense, satire is parasitic (Hutcheon, 1985). Satire is similar to the concept of parody,
which centrally features an imitative quality. However, while parody and satire are
oftentimes loosely discussed as if synonymous, parody does not necessarily share the
aggressive and judgmental compulsions of satire. Just as not all political humor qualifies
as satire, parody is not always satirical (see Druick, 2009; Gray et al., 2009A). Parody’s
central thrust is that of playing with and inverting the form of some text or genre; parody
is not necessarily crafted to advance a critique of the humor target. Yet even as satire
should be understood as distinct from parody, satire—like parody—does commonly imitate
and play with the conventions and norms of various news media genres in the service of
its efforts to expose some social or political folly.
Given satire’s parasitic nature and journalism’s prominent role in society, traditionally
serving as an authoritative source of public affairs information, it’s hardly surprising that
satirists have long employed the tools of journalism. As a privileged (though increasingly
contested) form of public discourse, the conventions of journalistic genres have long
served as an effective prism through which satirists can channel their sociopolitical
commentary. Moreover, journalism’s investigative and adversarial functions—related to
the normative role of being a “watchdog” over varied forms of cultural and political
power—complements satire’s impulse to challenge and critique social and political
systems.

Satire and Journalism
Page 5 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
History of Interplay of Journalism and Satire
Though scholarly research at the intersection of journalism and satire has not drawn
widespread attention until more recently, the use of satire dates back thousands of years
—as highlighted in literary scholarship focusing on satire in Western poetry, novels, and
plays (e.g., the satire of Aristophanes, Juvenal, Horace, Alexander Pope, Voltaire,
Jonathan Swift, Jane Austen, Mark Twain, George Orwell). However, while satire has
traditionally been investigated within the realm of literary research, its interplay with
journalism is not new. For instance, satirical content was published in the journalism of
colonial America—such as the satirical article, “A Witch Trial in Mount Holly” in Benjamin
Franklin’s Pennsylvania Gazette newspaper in 1730. In Mark Twain’s (Samuel Clemens)
early days as a reporter, he published numerous satirical newspaper articles. And
political cartoons have long been embedded in news-related publications—from those of
Benjamin Franklin to Thomas Nast to Bill Mauldin to Herbert Block (Hess & Northrop,
2011). Neither are satirical newspapers and magazines like The Onion
or
Charlie Hebdo
new phenomena. The satirical French magazine Le Charivari was first published in 1830;
the British magazine Punch was launched in 1841.
Television has served as the most prominent venue for contemporary satire engaging with
elements of journalism. NBC aired That Was the Week That Was (TW3) from 1964 to
1965, inspired by the BBC program of the same name. Offering a satirical take on current
events, the short-lived TW3 marks one of the earliest examples of television-based satire
toying with the conventions of journalism. The longest-running satirical treatment of
television news emerged with the launch of Saturday Night (later named Saturday Night
Live
(SNL)) in 1975. Though the show has consistently lampooned a wide range of
popular culture phenomena, its popularity is largely tethered to its treatments of politics
and journalism—especially during election years (Gray, Jones, & Thompson, 2009B). The
“Weekend Update” segment of SNL’s weekly programming has long featured comedic
(and sometimes satirical; see Jones, 2009) commentary on the headlines and peculiar
stories of a given week. In a Canadian context, This Hour Has 22 Minutes (or 22 Minutes)
is another long-running weekly satirical news program, having premiered in 1993.
In 1993, Comedy Central premiered a new show, hosted by comedian Bill Maher, called
Politically Incorrect. Each episode typically opened with a topical (often satirical)
monologue delivered by Maher, followed by a panel discussion that mimicked the
framework of political news discussion shows like The McLaughlin Group. However,
unlike news talk shows, Politically Incorrect’s panels featured a mix of celebrities,
pundits, political consultants, and journalists to discuss news-related topics. Shortly
before Politically Incorrect jumped to ABC in 1997, Comedy Central created another
news-based comedy show: The Daily Show (hereafter, TDS). Launched in 1996, Craig
Kilborn originally hosted the comedy program. TDS was distinct from other late night
comedy variety shows of the time –such as those fronted by Jay Leno and David
Letterman—in that central conceit of the program was assuming the appearance of a
(faux) news program.

Satire and Journalism
Page 6 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
In 1999, stand-up comedian Jon Stewart took over TDS. Under Stewart’s direction, the
show took a more aggressive turn in its political humor and steadily gained popularity,
both in terms of ratings and critical acclaim. The show won a Peabody Award for its
coverage of the 2000 presidential election. Around the same time, the Pew Research
Center (2000) also released a report that drew considerable attention for its findings that
substantial proportions of American population under the age of 30 “sometimes” learned
things about the presidential campaign from comedy shows and late night talk shows.
Later in the following election cycle, the Pew Research Center (2004) again highlighted
the trend, reporting that (a) young people were turning away from traditional news
sources, and (b) were increasingly gleaning campaign news from comedy shows like SNL
and TDS. Such polling sparked a raft of news headlines and commentary asserting that
young people were “getting their news” from Jon Stewart (see Young & Tisinger, 2006).
Not coincidentally, this was also the time period when numerous communication scholars
began to study questions about the influence, features, and significance of satirical news
(like TDS) and late-night comedy more generally (e.g., Baym, 2005; Holbert, 2005; Niven,
Lichter, & Amundson, 2003; Young, 2004).
As the popularity and credibility of TDS with Jon Stewart grew in the 2000s, so did the
public’s appetite for satirical treatments of news genres, as evidenced by the success of
Stephen Colbert’s The Colbert Report, which premiered in 2005. Even as The Colbert
Report run came to a close in 2014 and Jon Stewart retired from TDS soon thereafter,
other satirical news programs have cropped up in the United States—including The Onion
News Network,
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO), Full Frontal with Samantha
Bee (TBS), the defunct Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore (Comedy Central), the defunct
The Opposition with Jordan Klepper (Comedy Central), and The Jim Jeffries Show
(Comedy Central). Notably, fusing satire and journalism is transnational phenomena
(Baym & Jones, 2012). Beyond the U.S. context, numerous satirical news-related
programs have surfaced over the decades, including Al-Bernameg
(Egypt), Parazit (Iran),
Gav Hauma
(Israel),
Zang-e-Khatar (Afghanistan), Rick Mercer Report (Canada), Spitting
Image (United Kingdom), Giacobbo–Müller (Switzerland), Striscia la Notizia (Italy), Heute
Show (Germany), Saturday Night Live Korea (South Korea), and Les Guignols (France)—to
name a few. Furthermore, more traditional late-night comedy talk shows in the United
States like The Late Show with Stephen Colbert (CBS) and Late Night with Seth Meyers
(NBC) increasingly include segments comprised of satirical commentary embedded in the
use of news conventions—like a news anchor desk, newsmaker b-roll, and over-the-
shoulder graphics. Though not the only forms of contemporary satirical news (e.g., The
Onion website and various YouTube channels are devoted to satirical treatments of the
news), such television offerings highlight the continued popularity and prominence of the
satire–journalism interplay. The reasons for a rise in popularity of satire–journalism in the
post-9–11 era are complex and multifold. Yet the growth can be understood, in part at
least, as a response to the increasingly manufactured nature of public life within the
competitive and fragmented media landscape of the 21st century (Baym, 2010; Day,
2011).

Satire and Journalism
Page 7 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Research Approaches
When taking stock of research centered on satire and journalism, a diversity of research
orientations become apparent—whether in terms of epistemological approaches or
methodological tacks. Researchers from both social scientific and humanistic frameworks
have embarked on explorations of the satire–journalism terrain, often working in isolation
from one another. Yet there have been efforts to bridge such scholarly divides (Becker &
Waisanen, 2013; Young & Gray, 2013)—as well as the gap between practitioners and
scholars (Young, Holbert, & Jamieson, 2014).
As a means to explore the contours of this body of research, this article maps out two
principal areas: (1) features and (2) effects research (see also Becker & Waisanen, 2013).
This features–effects delineation is here adopted in an effort to avoid dichotomies that
cast quantitative versus qualitative—or social scientific versus humanistic—traditions of
research as being mutually exclusive. The features category of research pertains to
scholarship emphasizing the content of satire–journalism, including its rhetorical
strategies, ideological and ethical dimensions, and capacity to animate public culture.
This category also includes quantitative approaches to satire–journalism features, as
uncovered by formal content analyses. In contrast, the effects category of research
largely encompasses survey and experimental work (commonly grounded in social-
scientific approaches to communication-based research) that examine the consequences
of exposure to satire–journalism—in terms of learning, knowledge, attitudinal, affective,
and behavioral outcomes and processes.
Features
Content
Consistent with the history of literary-based scholarship on satire, one key line of
research in the satire–journalism domain is one that examines the content of “texts”
related to satire–journalism. This includes quantitative content analyses, which entail
systematic coding and quantification of texts, image, and/or symbols. For instance, Fox,
Koloen, and Sahin’s (2007) content analysis of TDS episodes during the 2004 election
season offered evidence of TDS featuring the same amount of substantive information as
broadcast network newscasts. Focusing on TDS content about a year later—in 2005—
Brewer and Marquardt (2007) took inventory of several dozen episodes highlighting how
the program devoted substantial coverage to political topics, world affairs, and the news
media. Wise and Brewer’s (2010) analysis of the news parody content highlighted how
TDS tends to cover the news media in a negative light. This theme was echoed by Littau
and Stewart (2015), whose content analysis of both TDS and The Colbert Report
(hereafter TCR) indicated that television-based news shows are frequently criticized by
the comedy programs. In another analysis of both TDS and TCR, Feldman (2013)
showcases how the shows’ content resoundingly affirms the reality of global warming and
frequently targets climate skepticism. Notably, while content analyses in the journalism–

Satire and Journalism
Page 8 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
satire domain have typically focused on TDS (and, to a lesser extent, TCR), scholars have
also devoted attention to other programs. For example, content produced by a satirical
news website in the Republic of Macedonia (Bosilkov, 2017). In sum, quantitative
inventories of satirical news offer a variety of descriptive findings, highlighting how
satirical news programming like TDS is frequently substantive—not just focused on trivial
matters—and that a large proportion of its content exhibits a critical edge, whether
related to issues like climate change or various shortcomings of the journalism industry.
Textual Strategies
The satire–journalism research domain is also animated by scholarship that engages in
close readings of satirical news coverage, artifacts of events, and other related texts.
Focusing on the devices, conventions, and strategies used by contemporary satirical
news, much of this work is based in the rhetorical stream of communication scholarship,
drawing from a range of theorizing—from ancient philosophers like Aristotle to more
relatively contemporary voices like Mikhail Bhaktin and Kenneth Burke (Goodnow, 2011).
For example, Stewart and Colbert have been conceptualized as “epideictic
rhetors” (Howell, 2014. p. 7), enacting a rhetorical genre that features praise and blame
related to civic behavior. Drawing from theories of Kenneth Burke, Waisanen (2009) also
identified Stewart and Colbert as practicing rhetorical criticism, “analyzing and
dissecting public discourse” (p. 134) from their perches as faux news anchors. Similarly,
Placone and Tumolo (2011) draw from Burke’s theorizing on comedy to examine Stewart
and Colbert’s Rally for Sanity and–or Fear in 2010 as a performance of social critique (see
also Herbig & Hess, 2012). Meanwhile, Gaines (2007) employs a semiotics framework to
examine the communication strategies of TDS, noting that the comedy provides context
and background for making sense of contemporary political discourse—often better than
conventional television news.
While the work of Stewart and Colbert have been privileged by satire–journalism
scholarship, probes of related political humor communication strategies are not limited to
these two comedians. Achter (2008), for instance, uses Mikhail Bakhtin’s work as a lens
to examine the rhetoric of The Onion in the wake of the 9/11 crisis, concluding that the
satirical news publication served to educate the public, contributed to keeping power-
holders accountable, and modeled new possibilities for public discourse during national
crises. In a similar vein, Waisanen (2011) examined content from the Onion News
Network (ONN), positing that ONN engages in “ironic iconicity,” wherein textual elements
interact in incongruous ways, resulting in meaningful social critiques. Examinations of
satirical news podcasts have also emerged in this research area—for instance, analyzing
the popular South Korean podcast series Nakkomsu and its capacity to subvert social and
cultural hierarchies and mainstream media discourse (Park, 2017). On the whole,
research focused on the textual features of satirical news tend to venerate the rhetoric of
satirical sources (e.g., Jon Stewart or The Onion) as significant voices in contemporary
political discourse.

Satire and Journalism
Page 9 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Ideological Dimensions and Ethics of Accountability
Scholars also devote attention to questions of how satire–journalism texts operate relative
to addressing issues of power, race, gender, ethics, and related concepts. One recurrent
theme in this cluster of research is consideration of how TDS and TCR deconstruct
dominant discourses and ideologies, urging audiences to think critically about politics,
media, and culture (e.g., Anderson & Kincaid, 2013). Similarly, critical scholarship has
analyzed “Egypt’s Jon Stewart”—Bassem Youssef—and his television show Al-Bernameg in
this vein (Ibrahim & Eltantawy, 2017). Some work applies a historical lens—for instance,
focusing on Italian satirical journals during the rise of fascism in the early 20th century
(Mascha, 2008). But much of it is focused on satire as critique of political authority (Dinç,
2012; Warner, 2008) or commercial culture (Warner, 2007) in more contemporary
contexts. Although considered more sporadically, issues of race and ethnicity are also
interrogated by satire–journalism scholarship. This stream of research examines, for
instance, how TDS models imaginative ways of communicating and thinking about issues
of race (Gilbert & Rossing, 2013), illuminating the complexities and contradictions that
shape understandings of racism (Rossing, 2014) and nationality (Ross & York, 2007).
Media criticism and questions of media ethics represent another key cluster of satire–
journalism research. In particular, scholars commonly emphasize how TDS and TCR
function as critiques of news media conventions, norms, outlets, and actors—promoting
deeper (re)consideration of journalism processes and its role in society (McKain, 2005).
Though some question whether the likes of Stewart are truly different from journalists
(Faina, 2013; Spicer, 2011), scholars generally conceptualize these satirists more as
media critics than bona fide journalists (Borden & Tew, 2007), with a particular focus on
holding broadcast news accountable (Painter & Hodges, 2010). Given the relatively wide
reach of satirical news programming, scholars have also explored questions of what
responsibilities (if any) satirists are beholden to as entertainers who wield considerable
cultural authority (Peifer, 2012; Williams & Delli Carpini, 2011), as well as consideration
of what roles political satire should—from a normative perspective—play in democracy
(Holbert, 2013).
Contributions to Public Culture
Perhaps one of the most spirited debates sparked by the interplay of satire and journalism
is whether the integration of news and political humor benefits society or contributes to
undermining the health of public culture. Some scholars take a pessimistic standpoint,
tied to long-held concerns about the fusion of entertainment and news-related
information (Postman, 1985). Critics worry that the likes of Jon Stewart make political
cynicism attractive and “atmospheric, a mist that hovers over us each day” (Hart &
Hartelius, 2007, p. 264). However, others are more optimistic, assessing political satire as
an important resource for sustaining democratic public culture (Hariman, 2008;
McClennon & Maisel, 2014). For instance, blending of satire and journalism is understood
to render politics more accessible to the broader public, encourage civic engagement,
spur new styles of citizenship (Jones, 2010), and open up meaningful avenues for

Satire and Journalism
Page 10 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
expressing dissent (Day, 2011). Operating the machinery of “the news” through parody,
satirical journalism can confront unexamined assumptions about public discourse and
equip viewers to better recognize good journalism—one form of media literacy (Peters,
2013). Given the affordances of the internet and its interactive capacities, satirical user-
generated content is also understood to shape to public culture, whether in the form of
reader comments to online news (Tang, 2013) or citizen-generated YouTube videos
related to political news (El Marzouki, 2015).
By integrating discourses of news, politics, entertainment, and marketing, satirical
treatments of the news are also argued to represent experimentation with new forms of
journalism, potentially highlighting future directions for an industry entrenched in great
upheaval (Baym, 2005). Notably, these new hybrids have prompted efforts among
journalists to both legitimize and delegitimize the work of satirists like Jon Stewart,
representing interpretive struggles about who should be able to lay claim to cultural
authority and professional jurisdictions in the production of public knowledge (Carlson &
Peifer, 2013; Tenenboim-Weinblatt, 2009). At a time of heightened political polarization
and often heated political rhetoric, questions about the nature of satire–journalism’s
contributions to public culture are subject to ongoing debate.
Effects
The integrations of satire–journalism have also been extensively examined from vantages
of the “media effects” tradition, typically employing surveys and experiments. Within this
scope a variety of traditional theoretical frameworks—mostly commonly drawn from the
political communication domain—are referenced, including agenda-setting (Littau &
Stewart, 2015), uses and gratifications (Young, 2013), third-person effect (Becker et al.,
2010), and hostile media effect (Coe et al., 2008). Some researchers have examined the
motivations that underlie the consumption of satire, along with explorations of how
political satire is processed by individuals—marking one subcategory of research. But
more generally, political entertainment scholars have directed considerable focus to the
nature of satire–journalism as an agent of influence, examining how exposure to or
reliance on satirical news programming affects individuals, and in turn democracy.
Hence, empirical research often conceives of satire–journalism exposure and
consumption as an independent variable, relative to the consequences of such exposure
or viewing habits. The dependent variables—that is, the effects of political satire—to
which scholars have channeled most attention can generally be classified into three
additional basic categories: effects on learning and knowledge, affective and attitudinal
effects, and behavioral outcomes.
Learning and Knowledge Outcomes
The association between exposure to satirical news–late-night comedy and acquiring (or
retaining) political knowledge is one established line of research (e.g., Pew Research
Center, 2000). While earlier work questioned the informative power of political satire or

Satire and Journalism
Page 11 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
entertainment-based news (Prior, 2003), scholarship does offer some evidence of political
entertainment viewing affecting learning and knowledge of public affairs (Hardy,
Gottfried, Winneg, & Jamieson, 2014; Hollander, 2005; Kim & Vishak, 2008). Political
satire’s influence on learning outcomes appears especially pronounced among young and
politically inattentive viewers (Baek & Wojciezak, 2009; Baum, 2003; Cao, 2008). One
explanation for this conditional effect is that people may gain political knowledge from
satirical comedy as an incidental by-product (Baum, 2002). While this line of research
commonly focuses on the direct effects of political satire consumption on political
knowledge, some studies highlight how learning can occur indirectly, on the heels of
viewing political comedy, through subsequent exposure to traditional news (Baum, 2003).
Different scholars offer support for this so-called “gateway effect.” For example, Feldman
and Young (2008) showed that viewers of late-night comedy were more likely to pay
attention to the presidential campaign in traditional news coverage. Xenos and Becker
(2009) also found evidence that exposure to political comedy programming served as a
gateway to political knowledge by fostering interest in other news media and politics.
Attitudinal and Affective Outcomes
Satire–journalism scholarship also investigates the effects of satirical news within the
scope of affect and attitudes. While some have investigated the attitudinal influence of
newspaper editorials employing satire (Powell, 1975), most research focuses on political
entertainment-based television programming and comedy outlets that employ journalistic
conventions. In particular, attitudes about politicians and political institution have drawn
deep consideration (Balmas, 2014; Baumgartner & Morris, 2006; Boukes, Boomgaarden,
Moorman, & de Vreese, 2015). For instance, Baumgartner, Morris, and Walth (2012)
highlighted an association between exposure to Tina Fey’s spoofs of Sarah Palin on SNL
(within the context of parodied public events like press conferences and political debates)
and attitude change relative to Palin. The underlying mechanism of this attitudinal effect
may be explained by agenda-setting and priming frameworks, which have long been used
in the context of traditional journalism research. Studies suggest that the caricatured
traits of the political figures targeted by this form of satire–parody are rendered more
salient as a result of exposure to the comedy (Esralew & Young, 2012). Speaking to
concerns about satire’s effect on political institutions more broadly, scholarship also
explores the relationship between satire and cynicism about politics and the press. For
example, the experimental work of Baumgartner and Morris (2006) suggests that
exposure to TDS is linked to cynicism toward electoral processes and the news media
among young people. However, such findings may not hold true for all demographics. For
instance, one field experiment found exposure to political satire to be associated with
positive perceptions of the news media (Brewer, Young, & Jones, 2013). Research also
indicates that news parody can also strengthen perceptions of the news media’s
importance, which can in turn foster increased trust in the news media (Peifer, 2018A).
In addition to attitudinal change relative to the targets of satire (e.g., the news media or a
political figure), satire consumption also exhibits a capacity to affect self-perceptions and
internal emotions. A variety of studies demonstrate that exposure to satirical news can

Satire and Journalism
Page 12 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
foster internal political efficacy—beliefs in one’s personal competence to understand and
engage in politics. Baumgartner and Morris (2006), for example, found that exposure to
TDS increased internal political efficacy, enhancing perceived understandings of politics
and public affairs. Similarly, Kaye and Johnson (2016) showed that viewers of news
parody programs like TDS exhibited greater self-efficacy than cable or broadcast TV news
viewers. Ongoing research in the area has added nuance to the link between satire and
efficacy, showing, for instance, that selective exposure to liberal satirical news can
increase internal political efficacy, whereas conservative satirical news exposure seems to
undermine efficacy (Knobloch-Westerwick & Lavis, 2017). Exploring satire–journalism’s
influence on various affective elements, scholars have also probed how sarcasm-based
political satire can evoke negative emotions toward a government policy (Lee & Kwak,
2014; Lee & Mo Jang, 2017). Elsewhere, the relationship between news parody exposure
and the elicitation of mirth—as a function of affective dispositions toward a given satirist
—has also been examined (Peifer, 2018B). On the whole, however, scholarship on the
affective outcomes of satirical news is somewhat sparse, representing an underexplored
research area.
Behavioral Outcomes
Findings have been somewhat mixed with regard to the effects of satirical news on
traditional notions of political participation. Some studies offer evidence that those who
consume political satire–news parody are more likely to participate in politics, especially
in terms of attending meetings and donating money to a campaign (Kaye & Johnson,
2016). Yet other studies do not readily support a direct relationship between exposure to
satirical news and political participation (Cao & Brewer, 2008; Ferré-Pavia & Gayà-Morl,
2011). However, though research does not evince strong evidence of satire exposure
directly affecting political participation, scholarship does suggest indirect effects. For
example, studies have demonstrated that political efficacy (Hoffman & Young, 2011),
emotion (Chen, Gan, & Sun, 2017; Lee & Kwak, 2014), and interpersonal talk (Lee, 2012)
can mediate the relationship between political satire exposure and political participation.
Additionally, research has shown that political satire exposure can affect other behaviors,
for instance indirectly influencing interpersonal discussion (Lee & Jang, 2017), or sharing
behavior, such as environmental advocacy groups reposting TDS and TCR clips to promote
their agendas (Baym & Shah, 2011). As conceptions of citizenship continue to change in
the digital age (Jones, 2010), it will be important to further probe how satire–journalism
can affect behavioral outcomes beyond the realm of traditional political participation
activities.
Antecedents and Processing
Though satirical news is often treated as an independent variable in the effects research
domain, scholars also investigate predictors of political satire consumption, addressing
the question of why and when individuals consume satirical news. For instance, research
has identified age, exposure to satirical sitcoms, exposure to liberal cable news, and an
Affinity for Political Humor (AFPH) as predictors of political satire viewing. Hmielowski,

Satire and Journalism
Page 13 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Holbert, and Lee (2011) developed a measure for AFPH, animated by four traditional
approaches to understanding humor, including superiority, incongruity, relief–anxiety
reduction, and social connectedness.
Scholarship also tackles the question of how ideology moderates the production and
reception of satirical news, wrestling with the issue of why there seem to be so few
conservative political satirists. Most contemporary prominent satirists appear to lean to
the left of the political spectrum (Dagnes, 2012). Notably journalists—perhaps more so
than scholars—have considered this issue (e.g., McElwee, 2014; Morrison, 2015; Nevins,
2017). Some research argues that satire’s heavy use of irony may help to explain why this
style of humor seems to be more popular on the political left: the structure of satire is
less conducive to the psychological profiles of many conservatives (Young, Bagozzi,
Goldring, Poulsen, & Drouin, 2017). To be sure, there have been attempts to create more
conservative brands of political satire. For instance, in 2007 the Fox News Network
launched a satirical news show, The ½ Hour News Hour, but it lasted less than a year.
The lack of prominent conservative satire begs the question: can news parody with a
conservative bent enjoy widespread popularity like that of TDS, Last Week Tonight, or
The
Onion? (And are media organizations willing to fund more conservative-leaning satirical
perspectives in the first place?) Continued investigation into the structures of political
satire and the antecedents of consumption may serve to clarify this.
Research on audiences’ processing of humor is another important domain in political
satire scholarship. Incorporating dual processing models, such as the Elaboration
Likelihood Model
(ELM), studies suggest that instead of closely scrutinizing an argument
presented in satirical messages, audiences tend to process political humor peripherally,
thereby reducing counterarging (Nabi, Moyer-Guse, & Byrne, 2007; Young, 2008). Young
(2008) attributed this reduction in argument scrutiny to a process that depletes cognitive
resources, given that humor comprehension commonly involves a taxing cognitive load.
Polk, Young, and Holbert (2009) also found evidence to support this hypothesis in
comparing two different types of humor: irony and sarcasm. Nabi et al. (2007), however,
suggest that argument scrutiny is affected because a humor message commonly functions
as a discounting cue, prompting people to treat the message as little more than a joke,
thereby decreasing the desire to take the message seriously and counterargue it. More
recently, studies have examined these mechanisms relative to processing horatian versus
juvenalian satire (LaMarre, Landreville, Young, & Gilkerson, 2014) and vis-à-vis mediating
variables like absorption in political satire (Boukes et al., 2015). On the whole,
examinations of the antecedents of engaging with satire–journalism and the mechanisms
of its influence serve to elucidate how and when this form of discourse affects knowledge,
attitudes, emotions, and behaviors.
Future Satire–Journalism Scholarship
One key insight highlighted by this article is the breadth of the research literature
focused on the intersection of satire and journalism. This domain of scholarship spans a

Satire and Journalism
Page 14 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
diversity of topics, media, methods, and research orientations. While the body of work
tends to emphasize Western satire (especially that of Jon Stewart), it clearly has an
international scope (see Baym & Jones, 2012; Kumar & Combe, 2015). As noted at the
outset, this is a maturing research domain, one that is still finding its footing. Indeed,
some of the early work in this area could be described as atheoretical (Holbert, Hill, &
Lee, 2014). Nonetheless, it demonstrates evidence of remaining on a trajectory of growth.
As scholars continue to interrogate the complexities of satire vis-à-vis journalism, several
facets of this interplay warrant ongoing attention.
First, it is important to continue expanding the geographical and cultural focus on satire–
journalism. In many respects, humor is a culturally bound phenomenon, a factor that
underscores the importance of probing the resonance and influence of this interplay in a
variety of contexts. The need to continue widening the scope of texts to be analyzed is
also apparent. Television-based news satire receives the lion’s share of scholarly
attention, but a wealth of other satirical work is ripe for ongoing analysis, whether user-
generated content on YouTube, political cartoons, or text and images (e.g., memes)
circulated in social media. Podcasts also represent an intriguing frontier for satire–
journalism scholarship (Park, 2017). This hybrid of talk radio and satirical treatments of
the news may represent an area of pronounced growth in the contemporary media
environment.
Given the recent shifts in the satire media landscape—namely, Jon Stewart’s departure
from TDS and Stephen Colbert’s jump to CBS’s Late Show—it is also important to
continue taking stock of the widening range of popular satirical voices, like John Oliver,
Bassem Youssef, Trevor Noah, and Samantha Bee. In addition to understanding the
meaning and influence of their work, it will also be important to continue forging a better
understanding of the credibility and cultural authority of such satirists (e.g., “ironic
authenticity”; see Day, 2011). Analyzing the widening scope of satirical voices should also
expand an understanding of satire–journalism’s ideological dimensions. For example,
given the emergence of Samantha Bee—one of the few women fronting a satirical news
program—it stands to reason that issues of gender in satire represent an important site of
future interrogations.
Because satire is not monolithic (Holbert et al., 2011), scholarship should continue
conducting research in a manner that recognizes the diversity of satire message features.
As a multifaceted mode of humorous cultural commentary, satire employs many rhetorical
devices—such as parody, irony, and sarcasm—and can be characterized by contrasting
tones (e.g., horatian, vs. juvenalian). Such distinctions may have meaningful implications
for the influence and resonance of satire–journalism. Furthermore, it would also be
worthwhile to devote deeper consideration to conventional journalism’s use of satirical
devices, whether in editorials, political cartoons, or forms of punditry. To be sure,
journalism’s use of satire has not been altogether ignored by scholars (e.g., Powell, 1975;
Vraga et al., 2012), but such research is fairly scarce.

Satire and Journalism
Page 15 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Another promising direction is one that further explores how satire–journalism can
empower citizens. For instance, scholars have suggested that satirical content may point
to tools and strategies for improving media literacy (Gray, 2005). Future research would
also benefit by focusing less on what satire–journalism does to people; it should further
explore questions of why people seek political satire and what purposes it serves them.
Such work could also entail probing the blurred line between producer and consumer in
an interactive media environment, addressing questions of citizens’ involvement in
shaping dynamics of satire–journalism—whether via creating (user-generated) content or
sharing satirical content in one’s social network. Taking research in such directions will
likely involve crafting “a new vocabulary” (Jones, 2013) for conceptualizing dynamics of
the 21st-century media landscape—one not beholden to the assumptions undergirding
more traditional entertainment concepts like parody and satire (e.g., see Waisanen, 2018).
Moreover, stepping beyond questions related to more traditional political communication
outcomes (e.g., knowledge gain or political participation), future research inquiries
should shed further light on the significance of people engaging with politics and public
affairs as a site of play, experimentation, and community building (Jones, 2010).
Future work could also continue examining the mutual, dynamic influences of
conventional journalism and satire—for instance considering satire’s influence on the
journalism profession, prompting reevaluation of the norms and practices of traditional
journalism. Or whether conflations of satire and journalism propel new trends in satirical
news. It is noteworthy, for instance, that Last Week Tonight with John Oliver functions, in
many respects, as an investigative news program. The show, which resembles the
explanatory journalism genre, employs a team of people who were previously
conventional journalists and fact-checkers (Edmonds, 2016). What does the success of a
program like Last Week Tonight portend for future satirical news endeavors?
Finally, future research should continue efforts to cross-pollinate across research
traditions. The satire–journalism research domain has arguably benefitted from previous
efforts to bridge scholarly divides (Becker & Waisanen, 2013; Young & Gray, 2013) and it
is important to continue such efforts. To be sure, there are very real differences between
the various research orientations highlighted here, some of which may never prove to be
entirely compatible. Nonetheless, finding points of convergence across the streams of
research within the satire–journalism terrain—leveraging the rich, detailed descriptions,
theorizing, and empirical evidence of trends and patterns afforded by contrasting
approaches—should further illuminate the meaning and significance of satire within the
scope of journalism studies.
Further Reading
Amarasingam, A. (Ed.). (2011). The Stewart/Colbert effect: Essays on the real impact of
fake news. Jefferson, NC: MacFarland.
Baumgartner, J. C., & Becker, A. B. (2018). Political humor in a changing media landscape:
A new generation of research. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Satire and Journalism
Page 16 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Baumgartner, J. C., & Morris, J. S. (2008). Laughing matters: Humor and American
politics in the media age. New York, NY: Routledge.
Baym, G. (2010). From Cronkite to Colbert: The evolution of broadcast news. Boulder, CO:
Paradigm Publishers.
Baym, G., & Jones, J. P. (2012). News parody in global perspective: Politics, power,
and resistance. Popular Communication, 10, 2–13.
Becker, A. B., & Waisanen, D. J. (2013). From funny features to entertaining effects:
Connecting approaches to communication research on political comedy. Review of
Communication, 13, 161–183.
Day, A. (2011). Satire and dissent: Interventions in contemporary political debate.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Gray, J., Jones, J. P., & Thompson, E. (2009). Satire TV: Politics and comedy in the post-
network era. New York, NY: NYU Press.
Holbert, R. L. (Ed.). (2015). Entertainment media and politics: Advances in effects-based
research. London: Routledge.
Young, D. G., & Gray, J. (Eds.). (2013). Breaking boundaries in political entertainment
studies. Los Angeles, CA: USC Annenberg Press.
References
Achter, P. (2008). Comedy in unfunny times: News parody and carnival after 9/11.
Critical Studies in Media Communication, 25, 274–303.
Anderson, J., & Kincaid, A. D. (2013). Media subservience and satirical
subversiveness: The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, the propaganda model and
the paradox of parody. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 30, 171–188.
Baek, Y. M., & Wojcieszak, M. E. (2009). Don’t expect too much! Learning from late-
night comedy and knowledge item difficulty. Communication Research, 36, 783–809.
Balmas, M. (2014). When fake news becomes real: Combined exposure to multiple
news sources and political attitudes of inefficacy, alienation, and cynicism.
Communication Research, 41, 430–454.
Baum, M. A. (2002). Sex, lies, and war: How soft news brings foreign policy to the
inattentive public. American Political Science Review, 96, 91–109.
Baum, M. A. (2003). Soft news and political knowledge: Evidence of absence or
absence of evidence?Political Communication, 20, 173–190.

Satire and Journalism
Page 17 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Baumgartner, J. C., Morris, J. S., & Walth, N. L. (2012). The Fey effect: Young adults,
political humor, and perceptions of Sarah Palin in the 2008 presidential election
campaign. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76, 95–104.
Baumgartner, J., & Morris, J. S. (2006). The Daily Show effect: Candidate evaluation,
efficacy, and American youth. American Politics Research, 34, 341–367.
Baym, G. (2005). The Daily Show: Discursive integration and the reinvention of
political journalism. Political Communication, 22, 259–276.
Baym, G. (2010). From Cronkite to Colbert: The evolution of broadcast news. Boulder, CO:
Paradigm Publishers.
Baym, G., & Shah, C. (2011). Circulation struggle: The on-line flow of
environmental advocacy clips from The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.
Information Communication and Society, 14, 1017–1038.
Becker, A. B., & Waisanen, D. J. (2013). From funny features to entertaining effects:
Connecting approaches to communication research on political comedy. Review of
Communication, 13, 161–183.
Becker, A. B., Xenos, M. A., & Waisanen, D. J. (2010). Sizing up The Daily Show: Audience
perceptions of political comedy programming. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 18(3),
144–157. doi:10.1080/15456871003742112
Borden, S. L., & Tew, C. (2007). The role of journalist and the performance of
journalism: Ethical lessons from “fake” news (seriously). Journal of Mass Media
Ethics, 22, 300–314.
Bosilkov, I. (2017). Political satire in the Republic of Macedonia: Forms of humour
and satire types in the online satirical news outlet Koza Nostra. International
Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 13, 249–263.
Boukes, M., Boomgaarden, H. G., Moorman, M., & de Vreese, C. H. (2015). At odds:
Laughing and thinking? The appreciation, processing, and persuasiveness of
political satire. Journal of Communication, 65, 721–744.
Brewer, P. R., & Marquardt, E. (2007). Mock news and democracy: Analyzing The
Daily Show. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 15, 249–267.
Brewer, P. R., Young, D. G., & Jones, P. E. (2013). Campaign news genres, audience
characteristics, and media perceptions: A field experiment. Electronic News, 7,
189–203.
Cao, X. (2008). Political comedy shows and knowledge about primary campaigns:
The moderating effects of age and education. Mass Communication and Society, 11,
43–61.

Satire and Journalism
Page 18 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Cao, X., & Brewer, P. R. (2008). Political comedy shows and public participation in
politics. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20, 90–99.
Carlson, M., & Peifer, J. T. (2013). The impudence of being earnest: Jon Stewart and
the boundaries of discursive responsibility. Journal of Communication, 63, 333–350.
Caufield, R. P. (2008). The influence of “infoenterpropagainment”: Exploring the power of
political satire as a distinct form of political humor. In J. C. Baumgartner & J. S. Morris
(Eds.), Laughing matters: Humor and American politics in the media age (pp. 3–20). New
York, NY: Routledge.
Chen, H., Gan, C., & Sun, P. (2017). How does political satire influence political
participation? Examining the role of counter- and proattitudinal exposure, anger,
and personal issue importance. International Journal of Communication, 11, 3011–
3029.
Coe, K. et al. (2008). Hostile news: Partisan use and perceptions of cable news
programming. Journal of Communication, 58, 201–219.
Condren, C. (2012). Satire and definition. Humor, 25, 375–399.
Dagnes, A. (2012). A conservative walks into a bar: The politics of political humor. New
York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Day, A. (2011). Satire and dissent: Interventions in contemporary political debate.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Dinç, E. (2012). On the limits of oppositional humor: The Turkish political context.
Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication, 5, 322–337.
Druick, Z. (2009). Dialogic absurdity: TV news parody as a critique of genre.
Television & New Media, 10, 294–308.
Edmonds, R. (2016, August 8). I was interviewed by “Last Week Tonight.” Here's why
the show is journalism. Poynter.
El Marzouki, M. (2015). Satire as counter-discourse: Dissent, cultural citizenship,
and youth culture in Morocco. International Communication Gazette, 77, 282–296.
Esralew, S., & Young, D. G. (2012). The influence of parodies on mental models:
Exploring the Tina Fey–Sarah Palin phenomenon. Communication Quarterly, 60,
338–352.
Faina, J. (2013). Public journalism is a joke: The case for Jon Stewart and Stephen
Colbert. Journalism, 14, 541–555.
Feldman, L. (2013). Learning about politics from The Daily Show: The role of
viewer orientation in processing motivations. Mass Communication & Society, 16,
586–607.

Satire and Journalism
Page 19 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Feldman, L., & Young, D. G. (2008). Late-night comedy as a gateway to traditional
news: An analysis of time trends in news attention among late-night comedy
viewers during the 2004 presidential primaries. Political Communication, 25, 401–
422.
Ferré Pavia, C., & Gayà Morl, C. (2011). Infotainment and citizens’ political
perceptions: Who’s afraid of “Polònia”?Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural
Studies, 3, 45–61.
Fox, J., Koloen, G., & Sahin, V. (2007). No joke: A comparison of substance in The
Daily Show with Jon Stewart and broadcast network television coverage of the
2004 presidential election campaign. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media,
51, 213–227.
Gaines, E. (2007). The narrative semiotics of The Daily Show. Semiotica, 166, 81–96.
Gilbert, C. J., & Rossing, J. P. (2013). Trumping tropes with joke(r)s: The Daily Show
“plays the race card.” Western Journal of Communication, 77, 92–111.
Goodnow, T. (Ed.) (2011). The Daily Show and rhetoric: Arguments, Issues, and
Strategies. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Gray, J. (2005). Television teaching: Parody, The Simpsons, and media literacy
education. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 22, 223–238.
Gray, J., Jones, J. P., & Thompson, E. (2009a). Satire TV: Politics and comedy in the post-
network era. New York, NY: NYU Press.
Gray, J., Jones, J. P., & Thompson, E. (2009b, March 20). “Using one of its lifelines”:
Does politics save Saturday Night Live from oblivion? Flow.
Hardy, B. W., Gottfried, J. A., Winneg, K. M., & Jamieson, K. H. (2014). Stephen Colbert’s
civics lesson: How Colbert Super PAC taught viewers about campaign finance.
Mass Communication and Society, 17, 329–353.
Hariman, R. (2008). Political parody and public culture. Quarterly Journal of Speech,
94, 247–272.
Hart, R. P., & Hartelius, J. (2007). The political sins of Jon Stewart. Critical Studies in
Media Communication, 24, 263–272.
Herbig, A. & Hess, A. (2012). Convergent critical rhetoric at the Rally to Restore
Sanity: Exploring the intersection of rhetoric, ethnography, and documentary
production. Communication Studies, 63, 269–289.
Hess, S., & Northrop, S. (2011). American political cartoons: The evolution of a national
identity, 1754–2010. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Satire and Journalism
Page 20 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Hmielowski, J. D., Holbert, R. L., & Lee, J. (2011). Predicting the consumption of
political TV satire: affinity for political humor, The Daily Show, and The Colbert
Report. Communication Monographs, 78, 96–114.
Hoffman, L. H., & Thompson, T. L. (2009). The effect of television viewing on
adolescents’ civic participation: Political efficacy as a mediating mechanism.
Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53, 3–21.
Hoffman, L. H., & Young, D. G. (2011). Satire, punch lines, and the nightly news:
Untangling media effects on political participation. Communication Research
Reports, 28, 159–168.
Holbert, R. L. (2005). A typology for the study of entertainment television and
politics. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 436–453.
Holbert, R. L. (2013). Developing a normative approach to political satire: An
empirical perspective. International Journal of Communication, 7, 305–323.
Holbert, R. L., Hill, M. R., & Lee, J. (2014). The political relevance of entertainment
media. In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political Communication (pp. 427–448). Berlin, Germany:
De Gruyter Mouton.
Holbert, R. L., Hmielowski, J., Jain, P., Lather, J., & Morey, A. (2011). Adding nuance to
the study of political humor effects: Experimental research on juvenalian satire
versus horatian satire. American Behavioral Scientist, 55, 187–211.
Holbert, R. L., Tchernev, J. M., Walther, W. O., Esralew, S. E., & Benski, K. (2013). Young
voter perceptions of political satire as persuasion: A focus on perceived
influence, persuasive intent, and message strength. Journal of Broadcasting and
Electronic Media, 57, 170–186.
Hollander, B. A. (2005). Late-night learning: Do entertainment programs increase
political campaign knowledge for young viewers? Journal of Broadcasting and
Electronic Media, 49, 402–415.
Howell, W. (2014). Fewer rainbows: Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert as epideictic
rhetors. Texas Speech Communication Journal, 38, 6–20.
Hutcheon, L. (1985), A theory of parody: The teachings of twentieth-century art forms.
Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Ibrahim, A., & Eltantawy, N. (2017). Egypt’s Jon Stewart: Humorous political satire
and serious culture jamming. International Journal of Communication, 11, 2806–2824.
Jones, J. P. (2009). With all due respect: Satirizing presidents from Saturday Night Live to
Lil’ Bush. In J. Gray, J. P. Jones, & E. Thompson (Eds.), Satire TV: Politics and comedy in
the post-network era (pp. 37–63). New York, NY: New York University Press.

Satire and Journalism
Page 21 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Jones, J. P. (2010). Entertaining politics: Satiric television and political engagement.
Lanham, MD: Rowman &Littlefield.
Jones, J. P. (2013). Toward a new vocabulary for political communication research:
A response to Michael X. Delli Carpini. International Journal of Communication, 7, 21.
Jones, J. P. (2015). Politics and the brand: Saturday Night Live’s campaign season humor.
In R. Becker, N. Marx, & M. Sienkiewicz (Eds.), Saturday Night Live and American TV
(pp. 77–92). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2016). Restoring sanity through Comic Relief: Parody
television viewers and political outlook. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 24, 131–
143.
Kim, Y. M., & Vishak, J. (2008). Just laugh! You don’t need to remember: The effects
of entertainment media on political information acquisition and information
processing in political judgment. Journal of Communication,58, 338–360.
Knight, C. A. (2004). The literature of satire. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University
Press.
Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Lavis, S. M. (2017). Selecting serious or satirical,
supporting or stirring news? Selective exposure to partisan versus mockery news
online videos. Journal of Communication, 67, 54–81.
Kumar, S., & Combe, K. (2015). Political parody and satire as subversive speech in
the global digital sphere. The International Communication Gazette, 77, 211–214.
LaMarre, H. L., Landreville, K. D., & Beam, M. A. (2009). The irony of satire: Political
ideology and the motivation to see what you want to see in The Colbert Report.
The International Journal of Press/Politics, 14, 212–231.
LaMarre, H. L., Landreville, K. D., Young, D., & Gilkerson, N. (2014). Humor works in
funny ways: Examining satirical tone as a key determinant in political humor
message processing. Mass Communication & Society, 17, 400–423.
Landreville, K. D. (2015). Satire as uncertain territory: Uncertainty expression in
discussion about political satire, opinion, and news. Humor, 28, 559–582.
Lee, H. (2012). Communication mediation model of late-night comedy: The
mediating role of structural features of interpersonal talk between comedy
viewing and political participation. Mass Communication and Society, 15, 647–671.
Lee, H., & Kwak, N. (2014). The affect effect of political satire: Sarcastic humor,
negative emotions, and political participation. Mass Communication and Society, 17,
307–328.

Satire and Journalism
Page 22 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Lee, H., & Mo Jang, S. (2017). Talking about what provokes us: Political satire,
emotions, and interpersonal talk. American Politics Research, 45, 128–154.
Littau, J., & Stewart, D. R. (2015). “Truthiness” and second-level agenda setting.
Electronic News, 9, 122–136.
Luqiu, L. R. (2017). The cost of humour: Political satire on social media and
censorship in China. Global Media and Communication, 13, 123–138.
Mascha, E. (2008). Political satire and hegemony: A case of “passive revolution”
during Mussolini’s ascendance to power 1919–1925. Humor, 21, 69–98.
McClennen, S., & Maisel, R. (2014). Is satire saving our nation?: Mockery and American
politics. Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave Macmillan.
McElwee, S. (2014, March 12). The plight of conservative comedy: Where’s the
right’s Daily Show?The Atlantic.
McKain, A. (2005). Not necessarily not the news: Gatekeeping, remediation, and
The Daily Show. The Journal of American Culture, 28, 415–430.
Meikle, G. (2008). Naming and shaming: News satire and symbolic power. The
Electronic Journal of Communication, 18.
Miazhevich, G. (2015). Sites of subversion: Online political satire in two post-Soviet
states. Media, Culture & Society, 37, 422–439.
Morrison, O. (2015, February 14). Waiting for the conservative Jon Stewart: A
unified theory of why political satire is biased toward, and talk radio is biased
against, liberals in America. The Atlantic.
Mullin, B. (2016, April 10), Boston Globe runs satirical front page showing Trump
presidency. Poynter.
Nabi, R. L., Moyer-Gusé, E., & Byrne, S. (2007) All joking aside: A serious
investigation into the persuasive effect of funny social issue messages.
Nevins, J. (2017, September 27). Why can’t rightwing comics break into US late-
night TV?The Guardian.
Niven, D., Lichter, S. R., & Amundson, D. (2003). The political content of late night
comedy. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 8, 118–133.
Painter, C., & Hodges, L. (2010). Mocking the news: How The Daily Show with Jon
Stewart holds traditional broadcast news accountable. Journal of Mass Media Ethics,
25, 257–274.
Paletz, D. L. (1990). “Political humor and authority: From support to subversion.”
International Political Science Review,11, 483–493.

Satire and Journalism
Page 23 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Park, C. S. (2017). Citizen news podcasts and engaging journalism: The formation
of a counter-public sphere in South Korea. Pacific Journalism Review, 23, 245–262.
Peifer, J. T. (2012). Can we be funny? The social responsibility of political humor.
Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 27, 263–276.
Peifer, J. T. (2018a). Imitation as flattery: How TV news parody’s media criticism
can influence perceived news media importance and media trust. Journalism &
Mass Communication Quarterly, 95, 734–756.
Peifer, J. T. (2018b). Liking the (funny) messenger: The influence of news parody
exposure, mirth, and predispositions on media trust. Media Psychology, 21, 529–
557.
Peifer, J. T., & Holbert, R. L. (2016). Appreciation of pro-attitudinal versus counter-
attitudinal political humor: A cognitive consistency approach to the study of
political entertainment. Communication Quarterly, 64, 16–35.
Perks, L. G. (2010). Polysemic scaffolding: Explicating discursive clashes in
Chappelle’s Show. Communication, Culture & Critique, 3, 270–289.
Peters, C. (2013). “Even better than being informed”: Satirical news and media literacy.
In C. Peters & M. J. Broersma (Eds.), Rethinking journalism: Trust and participation in a
transformed news landscape (pp. 173–188). New York, NY: Routledge.
Pew Research Center. (2000, February 5). Audiences fragmented and skeptical: The
tough job of communicating with voters.
Pew Research Center. (2004, January 11). Cable and internet loom large in
fragmented political news universe.
Placone, R. A., & Tumolo, M. (2011). Interrupting the machine: Cynic comedy in the
“Rally for Sanity and/or Fear.” Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, 1, 10–21.
Postman, N. (1985). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show
business. New York, NY: Penguin.
Polk, J., Young, D. G., & Holbert, R. L. (2009). Humor complexity and political
influence: An elaboration likelihood approach to the effects of humor type in The
Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 17, 4, 202–219.
Powell, J. L. (1975).The effects of ego involvement on responses to editorial satire.
Central States Speech Journal, 26, 34–38.
Prior, M. (2003). Any good news in soft news? The impact of soft news preference
on political knowledge. Political Communication, 20, 149–171.

Satire and Journalism
Page 24 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Ross, M. L., & York, L. (2007). “First, they’re foreigners”: The Daily Show with Jon
Stewart and the limits of dissident laughter. Canadian Review of American Studies,
37, 351–370.
Rossing, J. P. (2014). Prudence and racial humor: Troubling epithets. Critical Studies
in Media Communication, 31, 299–313.
Sanders, C. (1971). The Scope of Satire, Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
Sienkiewicz, M. (2012). Out of control: Palestinian news satire and government
power in the age of social media. Popular Communication, 10, 106–118.
Spicer, R. N. (2011). Before and after The Daily Show: Freedom and consequences in
political satire. In T. Goodnow. (Ed.), The Daily Show and rhetoric: Arguments, issues, and
strategies (pp. 19–42). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Tang, L. (2013). The politics of flies: mocking news in Chinese cyberspace. Chinese
Journal of Communication, 6, 482–496.
Tenenboim-Weinblatt, K. (2009). Jester, fake journalist, or the new Walter
Lippmann?International Journal of Communication, 3, 416–439.
Test, G. A. (1991). Satire: Spirit and art. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida.
Van Zoonen, L. (2017). Intertextuality. In P. Rössler, C. Hoffner, & L. Van Zoonen (Eds.),
The international encyclopedia of media effects. Oxford, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell.
Vraga, E. K., Edgerly, S., Bode, L., Carr, D. J., Bard, M., Johnson, C. N., Kim, Y. M., & Shah,
D. V. (2012). The correspondent, the comic, and the combatant: The consequences
of host style in political talk shows. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89,
5–22.
Waisanen, D. (2018). The comic counterfactual: Laughter, affect, and civic
alternatives. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 104(1), 71–93.
Waisanen, D. J. (2009). A citizen’s guide to democracy inaction: Jon Stewart and
Stephen Colbert’s comic rhetorical criticism. Southern Communication Journal, 74,
119–140.
Waisanen, D. J. (2011). Crafting hyperreal spaces for comic insights: The Onion
News Network’s ironic iconicity. Communication Quarterly, 59, 508–528.
Warner, J. (2007). Political culture jamming: The dissident humor of The Daily
Show with Jon Stewart. Popular Communication, 5, 17–36.
Warner, J. (2008). Tyranny of the dichotomy: Prophetic dualism, irony, and The
Onion. The Electronic Journal of Communication, 18.

Satire and Journalism
Page 25 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Williams, B. A. & Delli Carpini, M. X. (2011). The Daily Show and The Colbert Report in a
changing information environment: Should “fake news” be held to real standards? In R.
W. McChesney & V. Pickard (Eds.), Will the last reporter please turn out the lights (pp.
306–313). New York, NY: The New Press.
Wise, D., & Brewer, P. R. (2010). News about news in a presidential primary
campaign: Press metacoverage on evening news, political talk, and political
comedy programs. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 18, 127–143.
Xenos, M. A., & Becker, A. B. (2009). Moments of Zen: Effects of The Daily Show on
information seeking and political learning. Political Communication, 26, 317–332.
Young, D. G. (2004). Late-night comedy in election 2000: Its influence on candidate
trait ratings and the moderating effects of political knowledge. Journal of
Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48, 1–22.
Young, D. G. (2008). The privileged role of the late-night joke: Exploring humor’s
role in disrupting argument scrutiny. Media Psychology,11, 119–142.
Young, D. G. (2013). Laughter, learning, or enlightenment? Viewing and avoidance
motivations behind The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. Journal of Broadcasting
and Electronic Media, 57, 153–169.
Young, D. G., Bagozzi, B. E., Goldring, A., Poulsen, S., & Drouin, E. (2017). Psychology of
Psychology, political ideology, and humor appreciation: Why is satire so liberal?
Popular Media Culture.
Young, D. G., & Gray, J. (2013). Breaking boundaries: Working across the
methodological and epistemological divide in the study of political
entertainment. International Journal of Communication, 7, 552–555.
Young, D. G., & Tisinger, R. (2006). Dispelling late-night myths: News consumption
among late-night comedy viewers and the predictors of exposure to various late-
night shows. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 11, 113–134.
Young, D. G., Holbert, R. L., & Jamieson, K. H. (2014). Successful practices for the
strategic use of political parody and satire: Lessons from the P6 symposium and
the 2012 election campaign. American Behavioral Scientist, 58, 1111–1130.
Ziv, A. (2010). The social function of humor in interpersonal relationships. Society,
47, 11–18.
Jason Peifer
The Media School, Indiana University Bloomington
Taeyoung Lee

Satire and Journalism
Page 26 of 26
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, COMMUNICATION (oxfordre.com/communication). (c) Oxford
University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for details see
Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: OUP-Reference Gratis Access; date: 09 April 2019
Department of Journalism, University of Texas at Austin