The perceived effects of televised political satire among viewers and the communication directors of political parties: A European case

Abstract

This study broaches the question of the impact of televised political satire as perceived by viewers. It offers a new perspective: the differing perceptions of citizens and the communication directors of political parties regarding its capacity for bringing about changes or contributing to the diffusion of information about political issues. The main research question is about whether there are differences between the views of citizens and those of the communication directors of political parties regarding the perceived effects of the satirical Spanish programme Polònia. As a result of data obtained by means of three cross-referenced methodological approaches (random surveys, focus groups and interviews), it is concluded that political communication directors consider that the satire is closer to real events than citizens do, and believe that it has a considerable persuasive effect. However, the citizens consulted in the sample deny that it could heighten their interest in politics or lead to a change of opinion.

Keywords

Media impact perception of politics political satire reception studies

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baek

Wojcieszak

(2009) Don’t expect too much! Learning from late-night comedy and knowledge item difficulty. Communication Research 36(6): 783–809.

Balló

(2007) La ficció de la màscara: el cas de Polònia a Catalunya. Quaderns del CAC 27: 59–62.

Baumgartner

Morris

(2006) The Daily Show effect, candidate evaluations, efficacy, and American youth. American Politics Research 34(3): 341–367.

Baym

Jones

(2012) News parody in global perspective: Politics, power, and resistance. Popular Communication 10(1–2): 2–13.

Becker

Xenos

Waisanen

(2010) Sizing up the Daily Show: Audience perceptions of political comedy programming. Atlantic Journal of Communication 18: 144–157.

Brants

(1998) Who’s afraid of infotainment? European Journal of Communication 13(3): 315–336.

Cacioppo

Harkins

Petty

(1981) The nature of attitudes, cognitive responses, and their relationships to behavior. In: Petty

Ostrom

Brock

(eds) Cognitive Responses in Persuasion. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.31–54.

Cao

(2008) Political comedy shows and knowledge about primary campaigns: The moderating effects of age and education. Mass Communication and Society 11(1): 43–61.

Chen

Shechter

Chaiken

(1996) Getting the truth or getting along: Accuracy-versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71: 262–275.

10.

Consell de l’Audiovisual de Catalunya (2007) Informe específic de pluralisme durant la campanya de les eleccions municipals 2007, 6 June. Available at: http://www.cac.cat/pfw_files/cma/actuacions/Continguts/Acord_Valoraci__municipals_2007__2_.pdf

11.

Dahlgren

(2009) Media and Political Engagement: Citizens, Communication and Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

12.

Davison

(1983) The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly 47(1): 1–15.

13.

Day

(2011) Satire and Dissent: Interventions on Political Contemporary Debate. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

14.

Delli Carpini

Wiliams

(2001) Let us infotain you: Politics in the new media environment. In: Bennet

Entman

(eds) Mediated Politics Communication in the Future of Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, pp.160–181.

15.

Der Undertang [Downfall] (2004). German Italian Austrian film directed by Oliver Hirschbiegel, with Bruno Ganz as Adolf Hitler, and Alexandra Ulrich.

16.

Ferré-Pavia

(ed.) (2013) Infoentretenimiento. El formato imparable de la era del espectáculo. Barcelona: Editorial UOC.

17.

Ferré-Pavia

Gayà

(2011) Infotainment and citizens’ political perceptions: Who’s afraid of Polònia? Catalan Journal of Communication and Cultural Studies 3(1): 45–61.

18.

Ferré-Pavia

Sintes

Gayà

(2013) ¿Piensan lo mismo ciudadanos y partidos sobre la sátira política? La diferente percepción en el caso de un programa televisivo. Estudios sobre el mensaje periodístico 19(1): 383–402.

19.

Forgette

Russo

(2013) Political satire, media choice, and political learning. In: SSSA annual meeting, Marriott, New Orleans, Louisiana, 27-30 March 2013.

20.

Guggenheim

Kwak

Campbell

(2011) Nontraditional news negativity: The relationship of entertaining political news use to political cynicism and mistrust international. Journal of Public Opinion Research 23: 287–314.

21.

Hariton

(2011) Satirical political media and youth political participation: A look at The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report. Department of Political Science, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN. Available at: http://polisci.indiana.edu/undergraduate/theses/Hariton.pdf

22.

Helonmore

(2014) How John Oliver started a revolution in US TV’s political satire. The Guardian, 15 June. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2014/jun/15/john-oliver-started-a-revolution-in-us-tv-political-satire

23.

Hmielowski

Holbert

Lee

(2011) Predicting the consumption of political TV satire: Affinity for political humor, The Daily Show, and The Colbert Report. Communication Monographs 78(1): 96–114.

24.

Hoffmann

Young

(2011) Satire, punch lines, and the nightly news: Untangling media effects on political participation. Communication Research Reports 28(2): 159–168.

25.

Holbert

(2013) Developing a normative approach to political satire: An empirical perspective. International Journal of Communication 7: 305–323.

26.

Holbert

Lambe

Dudo

. (2007) Primacy effects of The Daily Show and national TV news viewing: Young viewers, political gratifications, and internal political self-efficacy. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 51: 20–38.

27.

Holbert

Tchernev

Walther

. (2013) Young voter perceptions of political satire as persuasion: A focus on perceived influence, persuasive intent, and message strength. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 57(2): 170–186.

28.

Hollander

(2005) Late-night learning: Do entertainment programs increase political campaign knowledge for young viewers? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 49(4): 402–415.

29.

Jones

(2004) Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

30.

Katz

Lazarsfeld

(1955) Personal Influence, The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

31.

Klein

(2013) Entertainment-education for the media saturated: Audience perspectives on social issues in entertainment programming. European Journal of Cultural Studies 16(1): 43–57.

32.

Kleinen-von Königslöw

Keel

(2012) Localizing The Daily Show: The heute show in Germany. Popular Communication 10: 66–79.

33.

Kvale

Brinkmann

(2009) Interviews. Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: Sage.

34.

Lakoff

Johnson

(2008) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

35.

LaMarre

Landreville

Beam

(2009) The irony of satire political ideology and the motivation to see what you want to see in The Colbert Report. International Journal of Press/Politics 14(2): 212–231.

36.

Landreville

Holbert

LaMarre

(2010) The influence of late-night TV comedy viewing on political talk: A moderated-mediation model. International Journal of Press/Politics 15(4): 482–498.

37.

Lippmann

(2003 [1922]) La opinión pública [Public Opinion]. Barcelona: Langre.

38.

McCombs

Shaw

(1972) The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36(2): 176–187.

39.

McLuhan

(1994) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge, MA; London: MIT Press.

40.

McNair

(2006) Cultural Chaos: Journalism, News and Power in a Globalized World. London: Routledge.

41.

Marshall

Rossman

(2010) Designing Qualitative Research. London: Sage.

42.

Moy

Xenos

Hess

(2005) Communication and citizenship: Mapping the political effects of infotainment. Mass Communication and Society 8(2): 111–131.

43.

Moyer-Gusé

(2008) Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication Theory 18: 407–425.

44.

Moyer-Gusé

Nabi

(2010) Explaining the effects of narrative in an entertainment television program: Overcoming resistance to persuasion. Human Communication Research 36: 26–52.

45.

Noelle-Neuman

(1984) Spiral of Silence: Public Opinion – Our Social Skin. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

46.

Norris

(2000) A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

47.

Oring

(2003) Engaging Humour. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

48.

Perloff

(1999) The third-person effect: A critical review and synthesis. Media Psychology 1: 353–378.

49.

Perloff

(2002) The third-person effect. In: Bryant

Zillmann

(eds) Media Effects Advances in Theory and Research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.489–506.

50.

Rodríguez-Virgili

López-Escobar

Tolsá

(2011) La percepción pública de los políticos, los partidos y la política, y uso de medios de comunicación. Comunicación y Sociedad 24(2): 7–39.

51.

Sanguinetti

(2009) La comedia del poder. El País, 13 June, p.31.

52.

Sienkiewicz

(2012) Out of control: Palestinian news satire and government power in the age of social media. Popular Communication 10: 106–118.

53.

Slater

(2002) Entertainment education and the persuasive impact of narratives. In: Green

Strange

Brock

(eds) Narrative Impact Social and Cognitive Foundations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp.157–182.

54.

Slater

Rouner

(2002) Entertainment-education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Communication Theory 12: 173–191.

55.

Stewart

(2007) The Daily Show effect revisited: How satire contributes to political participation and trust in young audiences. In: AEJMC annual conference, Washington, DC, 9–12 August. Available at: http://www.aejmc.org/home/2011/03/ent-2007-abstracts/

56.

Thussu

(2007) News as Entertainment: The Rise of Global Infotainment. London: Sage.

57.

Tsakona

Popa

(2011) Humour in politics and the politics of humour: An introduction. In: Tsakona

Popa

(eds) Studies in Political Humour: In between Political Critique and Public Entertainment. Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp.1–30.

58.

Vallès

(2008) Una agenda imperfecta: amb Maragall i el projecte del canvi. Barcelona: Edicions 62.

59.

Vidmar

Rokeach

(1974) Archie bunker’s bigotry: A study in selective perception and exposure. Journal of Communication 24(1): 36–47.

60.

Warner

(2007) Political culture jamming: The dissident humor of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Popular Communication 5: 17–36.

61.

Xenos

Becker

(2009) Moments of zen: Effects of The Daily Show on information seeking and political learning. Political Communication 26: 317–332.

62.

Young

(2004) Late-night comedy in election 2000: Its influence on candidate trait ratings and the moderating effects of political knowledge and partisanship. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 48(1): 1–22.

63.

Young

(2006) Late-night comedy and the salience of the candidates’ caricatured traits in the 2000 election. Mass Communication and Society 9(3): 339–366.

64.

Young

Tisinger

(2006) Dispelling late-night myths: News consumption among late-night comedy viewers and the predictors and exposure to various late-night shows. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 11: 113–134.