Skip to main content

The differences between satire and fake news

I really hate that it's gotten to this point, but sadly, on December 14th of 2016, I feel I must explain the differences between satire and fake news. Sadder yet, renowned satirist Andy Borowitz has now decided to include the words "NOT THE NEWS" front and center on each and every one of his articles, because apparently, we're too stupid to figure that out for ourselves (well, some of us).

I bring up Borowitz because, earlier today, a Facebook friend of mine commented on one of his articles, saying, "Fake news should be outlawed!" This prompted me to explain the differences between the two, in a condensed fashion, saying, "It's satire. If we went down that slippery slope, all comedy would be outlawed. There's a stark difference between 'fake news' with the intent of misinforming mass quantities of people to provide aid for a particular political agenda, and 'fake news' with the intent of stimulating thought and laughter by poking fun of the former and what is often believed by the former."

I later tweeted, "Dear Trumpkins:

The difference between satire & fake news is satire pokes fun at fake news while fake news distorts reality."

Fake news tries showcasing itself as actual news, attempting to trick people into believing their message. Satire tries showcasing itself as fake news, attempting to make people laugh and think about what they just read. A stand-up comedian making up a story to prompt laughter is quite different from a politician feeding on people's fears by lying to them in order to earn their votes come election day.

Let's think about this for a moment. Without satire, we'd be without The Daily Show, The Late Show, The Onion, and Saturday Night Live. Without fake news, however, we'd likely be without President-elect Donald Trump. Whether it be satire or fake news, taking such stories as factually accurate I think says more about the reader than the actual content of the articles. In any case, the two are not the same. It's not even an apples and oranges argument. It's more like an apples and bucket of fried chicken argument, for while satire pokes fun at fake news, fake news distorts reality.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more