Satirists Put On Notice, Again
What are the rules?
May of 2019 was a turning point for my writing. I decided to diversify and include satire, allegory and surreal irony into my stories which originally began here on Medium as independent and investigative journalism. It was an epiphany rooted in several months of recent deep exposure to authors such as George Orwell and Bret Easton Ellis in such respective satirical masterpieces as Animal Farm and American Psycho.
Realistically the “inside dope” of corruption, collusion and corporate behemoths vs. “the little guy” only appeals to a limited readership of ambitiously strong and optimistic thinkers who are committed to the deep learning necessary to change the world. This kind of mind-altering introspection and enhanced worldview is dangerous to our emotional and even financial stability because, well, politics.
At the same time, tedious research simply cannot compete for limited attention spans and disbelief systems catered to by our modern mainstream media’s (MSM) “infotainment” sector. These news segments are specifically designed to distract from, minimize or ignore the ugliest state of affairs around the world and even locally in our own front yard.
For these reasons, the truth has historically been framed and cleverly disguised in writings such as the allegorical Moby Dick, satirical Don Quixote and the surrealism of Franz Kafka’s Metamorphosis. This entertaining and brain tickling variety of intellectual insights gives new perspective and often comic relief that fortifies the reader with intellectual weaponry rather than weighing them down with only the depressing realities of existing tyrannies, large and small.
Of course, The Establishments in social hierarchies around the globe that have been exposed for their corruption have never much appreciated the most powerful of these literary or artistic contributions and it has continued to be a difficult niche to curate for writers and cartoonists alike.
But those who are successful in balancing their activism with a certain gift for resonating with the public on important political matters succeed not only by informing on the direction a society or country is taking but more precisely how the ongoing dangerous shift of power is taking place in obscurity.
I have long admired Dan Piraro of Bizarro fame, The Far Side’s Gary Larson and the Calvin & Hobbes artist Bill Watterson who all played mostly on the lighter side of humor as surreal cartoonists favoring more Horatian or Menippean satire as opposed to the stronger and angrier tones of the more powerful Juvenalian style. And it is becoming quite clear why so many talented artists and writers with obvious passion in spreading political messages have chosen not to more vigorously challenge the status quo — even in a nation where we should be able to question and rebuke authority.
Journalists and writers everywhere are now facing a looming threat as authoritarian movements take broad hold but little did I know that cartoonists were threatened with career loss and imprisonment (Musa Kart turned himself into Turkish authorities on April 25th this same year) when I embarked on this new genre adventure. Although my stories have so far been limited to primarily text, I have been practicing drawing techniques to maximize impact plus save words and eventually time. However, the rather continuous gray area of “acceptable humor” in this format may escape my detection as a novice — similar to the pros I’ve highlighted in this article.
Beyond the headlines of jailed journalists from Turkey, China and Egypt of recent years, the sensitivity to political criticism has grown inside and across our own northern American borders. In just one month of early 2019 two separate incidences targeted political satire in Canada and at the New York Times while having additional far-reaching consequences to more satirists working internationally for The Gray Lady.
The downfall of political humor began with outrage over a Netanyahu depiction, deemed anti-semitic, from an April issue of NYT that should never have been published and becomes as much editor as creator error. The impact of this effective genre termination spread overseas as Patrick Chappatte lost his cartooning contract for the International New York Times despite no direct fault. Shortly thereafter, our democratic neighbor and Canadian MSM fired Michael de Adder who garnered negative attention for a derogatory take on Trump’s golfing and immigration positions that was circulated on his personal Twitter account.
But the overarching question regarding fault is this: why does no one seem to know the rules?
Michael de Adder had the bad luck of his tweet going a bit viral but it was never published by the four newspapers he was forced leave. Was he given some warning about personal content on social media? Because Trump has been fair game by every comedian and satirist around the world for as long as he has been a public figure. In fact, so have all the serving Presidents.
Neither de Adder’s former employer Brunswick News, owned by the world’s 8th wealthiest family, nor the Times that was founded in 1851, had any way of delineating dangerous territory? Because there are clear distinctions between the three main types of satire that I have written about here which might be helpful in preserving future careers by definition alone. (Or might I suggest a simple e-mailed memo replete with bullet-style listing of taboo subjects?)
Without proper communication we are setting our artists up to fail. Or was this orchestrated to leave political critique to the “experts” of MSM — all branches of which are conveniently owned by 99.9% of those being criticized?
Political satire is designed to draw attention to observed abuses from the perspective of the abused — not the narrowly shared views of the abusers and their cronies. It is often not heavy on background information, making use of brevity to highlight one or two main points that are generally already popularly established. Instead, a snapshot of controversial subjects is illustrated with a cartoon drawing having the value of the proverbial 1,000 words.
Visual art has the intrinsic potential to deliver profound messages clearly, without the tedium of muddled research and verbiage very often used to obfuscate clear meaning. Evocative images give quick glimpses into issues that are challenging to define and can provide readers with their own no-nonsense tools of getting to the bottom of a recurring, unresolved topic.
So if the creative hired guns, who in peaceful times typically add value to publications, become overly offensive during political partisan wars then that is a management matter concerning terms of employment likely left loosely defined. This remains something that can be easily resolved without any need to dictate absolute termination of either employees or an entire genre.
The very nature of satire aims to engage people in difficult conversations with an element of comic relief. Even the hard-hitting Juvenalian form has a purpose in catalyzing anger or outrage at societal abuses that are not receiving due attention. There are certainly things satire should not be, such as bullying. No helpless person or defenseless group of people should be attacked. But fighting back aka “punching up” is altogether different.
Given the brief coverage of these stories and explanations surrounding them from the specified papers involved it is unclear why these circumstances resulted in completely ending political cartooning for one and threatening many careers for the other. Based upon Patrick Chappate’s comments on CNN from Sweden it remains unclear why the content creators were not aware of the dangerous zone they were treading. He claims:
“Political satire today is figure skating on very thin ice…it seems that people of power, that they are very macho, very authoritative rulers… who have a very thin skin and little patience for humor.”
You have to ask yourself, who is next? Horror writers or documentarians detailing injustices in the new era of kings and queens? Historical nonfiction authors who explore the real rather than revisionist record? Will Erotica be reduced to Harlequin romances?
Hiding behind a “no politics” persona will not stop the affront on our freedoms — certainly not the ones that matter most. The more vicious the competition in global markets and the more depleted our planetary resources become then the wider the net will be cast to demonize individuals who shed light where profits often hide.
Keep fighting and speaking out against authoritarian regimes, at home and abroad!
Thanks for reading! Please share to protect freedom of speech, journalists and journalism everywhere.
