6 ms·

Its a different world. Comedy will belong to those who have the bravery to make fun of today's sacred cows not yesterday's. Mad was built on parodying a Middle

Its a different world. Comedy will belong to those who have the bravery to make fun of today's sacred cows not yesterday's. Mad was built on parodying a Middle American mindset that largely doesn't exist anymore. Thanks in small part to counterculture such as it self. In a way its a victim of its own success. It tore down the enemy too well and the counterculture is 'the Man' now. You can see the same thing happening with the Simpsons. Its lost its purpose. On another note, I'm not going to pretend that simply being left leaning doomed Mad but there are already a gajillion places simply making fun of Drumpf and Republicans. Gotta stand out somehow.

jtx22 7y ago
Show some respect for the President.
taurath 7y ago
Not to veer wildly into politics, but the gajillion places making fun of the right seem to be much less effectual than in the past. The ubiquitousness of the conversation centering around them seems to be getting coopted as an advantage. It’s “no press is bad press” on cocaine and I’m really curious when the societal antibodies are going to kick in, if they exist. I’m trying to think of the punch that’s landed the hardest and actually caused damage, and I’m coming up short. I’m not saying this as a partisan or political argument, but I’m genuinely curious about the sociological implications. It’s a very... strange puzzle to me, and I’d welcome some fresh perspectives.
- asark 7y ago
  > I’m trying to think of the punch that’s landed the hardest and actually caused damage, and I’m coming up short. SNL's Palin parodies? Not sure whether that actually mattered or the Republicans just, for unrelated reasons, failed to GOTV. I'm pretty sure most self-identified Republicans still think she's great and weren't turned away from the polls over her, but maybe it swayed some moderate/no-party-affiliation folks? Beyond that, humor's kinda a sustaining force for the left, in the same way... whatever you'd call Talk Radio style entertainment-news is for the right (AM radio, various web shows and podcasts, Fox News). Its efficacy may be more in group cohesion than converting "others". [EDIT] incidentally, SNL probably played a large part in painting the (fairly negative) pop-culture image of Hillary that was such an important part of the 2016 election, overshadowing the whole race. Think mid- to late-Clinton-presidency SNL. So there's that.
  - taurath 7y ago
    Those are good examples - I'm trying to think about the current era though. Interesting that you bring up Hillary being mocked actually - perhaps it was a turning point in suddenly the Dems were more mockable, or at least mockery stuck to them. With the republicans now, I think they've positioned themselves to be immune from mockery - they saw how effective Jon Stewart was during the Bush years, and the solution now seems to be to fill the air with as much as possible so that it all turns to static. I remember when Trump got elected, the biggest question everyone had as a comedian was "how do you mock this person, he's already too ridiculous"? Ditto Boris Johnson happening now. Some are trying to start countering this from trying to draw a line by defining values (that they clearly don't seem to share) - the Pete Buttigieg strategy, the Joe Biden strategy. It just seems like a fascinating turn of events that suddenly mockery as a political tool can be nullified. Nothing SNL has ever done on Trump has ever seemed to dent him. Sean Spicer though - that definitely got through. And now he's gone, replaced by Sarah Sanders who manages to soak up all sorts of sympathy despite lying all the time. I guess the other poster is right - the progressives really have become the social establishment, and that comes with a lot of really interesting concequences.
    - asark 7y ago
      I remember when it was the AM radio folks mocking Trump. And, you know, everyone else. Ah, the 90s, when regarding Trump as the textbook definition of a philandering flim-flam artist, worthy of little to no respect whatsoever and certainly no trust, crossed party lines. What a ride this has been.
- cybersnowflake 7y ago
  Setting aside arguments that could be considered more partisan...I think its partially mainstreaming. I'm sure an early Church father or Renaissance secularist were a bit more sophisticated in promulgating and defending their creed than your average Joe Schmoe door to door evangelist or random early 2000s poster to r/atheism. What was the domain of (still crazy imo) but select group of activists/academics is now to the point where people with actual diagnosed mental disorders are latching on to it in large numbers. (my personal favorite way of measuring whether something is mainstream) https://youtu.be/Gzdf4V7Cf_M https://youtu.be/Gzdf4V7Cf_M Also theres the new dynamic which has emerged within the past decade or 2 but has ramped up considerably where Progressives are the new establishment. They of course have dominated certain areas for a long time but its at the point now where every major sector of society (with a current trivial exception of a tenuous hold on a few offices in the federal government) is controlled by people who are fanatics for or at least bow to what would have been considered ridiculous political correctness/social justice only a few short years earlier. Parody walks hand in hand with fighting against something larger. So does self actualization. Hence the desperate attempts for people to convince themselves that Google/MS/Facebook/Amazon/CNN/HuffPo/NYT et al is 'The Resistance'.
  - taurath 7y ago
    Excuse me for a moment while I mourn for my youtube suggestions. I think mainstreaming is an interesting point - a similar strain to what people are calling the "rise of populism" which ends up being more direct. In some ways its empowering the unwashed masses, and in others its being more genuine/less filtered. I had another paragraph here that went into how progressives aren't the establishment economically by any means and was about to disagree, but after re-reading and scoping your argument to just having command of the social landscape I think you're probably correct. The lines of attack brought on by some in the social justice world can be patently ridiculous, and are ripe for parody. Its difficult to come around to being empathetic to that fact when most of my upbringing was during the culture wars against the "prudes", who had all the power and were using it to gatekeep everyone. I'm certainly more comfortable living in this social environment myself, but I remember the feelings of empowerment when we got to call out something in society that was obviously bullshit bullshit. I suppose I have some fear around that as a natural backlash on some issues can turn into a general backlash against the entire thing - are we heading for another Disco Demolition? Or will a more middle ground maturing of language happen? One thing does seem almost certain - the corporations will make a lot of money any way the wind blows.
- unionpivo 7y ago
  It's because of the "closed garden circle jerks" aka social media. Before social media, most people were consuming similar media, so counterpoints could make a difference. Nowadays algorithms decide what you would like to see/hear so only people that are already against trump are seeing those. And this is not just websites. Metric and tracking got so much better that even traditional media, can target their viewership better.
  - taurath 7y ago
    I think that's the easy answer but I think it may not be the whole story. Fox news, conservative radio, etc have existed for a while. Bubbles have also always existed, and yes they've gotten bigger - but at the same time, there's been a big social shift that's happened at the same time this has been going on. The Obama era marked a change to progressives being the social establishment (not to be confused with economic establishment). Suddenly the previous mockers are now the cheerleaders, and corporate america dives right in with them on the equality/diversity train. Then Trump comes in, and somehow wins with a secret weapon - if he acts like a crazy person all the time, the mocking will get so loud, AND be so ubiquitous it'll just turn to static in everyone's minds. Suddenly the biggest political weapon the left has to win over independents isn't very useful. I'm not concerned with the "base" of both parties - Trump hasn't dropped below 40% in a while, partly out of polarization, but also partly that there is a base he has, and that base is opposition to the left, who soundly beat them from Clinton to Obama culturally. This might be why despite having the house, senate, and white house the republicans could keep telling themselves they were the underdogs - culturally they are, and continue to be. So there will still be independents who are on the side of fighting the "progressive hegemony", and they by default go to trump. Instead of the skater punk in high school cussing and spitting in front of the nuns, its the kid on the computer intentionally calling someone the wrong pronouns.
    - pjc50 7y ago
      > its the kid on the computer intentionally calling someone the wrong pronouns. Today this, tomorrow goading someone (such as a trans person) into suicide, the next day egging on the person who says they're going to shoot up a synagogue. The punk confronting nuns is doing so from the bottom of the power hierarchy, and achieving their freedom not at the expense of anyone else. The modern alt-right culture is looking for targets and hostile to anyone who asks for respect. A big difference.
- pjc50 7y ago
  It worked when the right relied on "seriousness" and "respectability". Mockery is the counter to seriousness. The targets of this used to be at the top of the power ladder; mocking them was a form of levelling. The right has largely stopped trying to engage neutrals on any kind of intellectual, rational basis, and has instead gone for leaning heavily on the emotional buttons of fear and power. Especially power: the cruelty of family separation at the border is deliberate. The right tells you who to hate and encourages you to watch their humiliation, but picks targets by their vulnerability. Hence it has to lie about their power and big up children into "threats to national security". The tank parade is yet another symbol of this, nicely timed for just after the 30th anniversary of Tianamen.

jtx22 7y ago

Show some respect for the President.

taurath 7y ago

Not to veer wildly into politics, but the gajillion places making fun of the right seem to be much less effectual than in the past. The ubiquitousness of the conversation centering around them seems to be getting coopted as an advantage. It’s “no press is bad press” on cocaine and I’m really curious when the societal antibodies are going to kick in, if they exist. I’m trying to think of the punch that’s landed the hardest and actually caused damage, and I’m coming up short. I’m not saying this as a partisan or political argument, but I’m genuinely curious about the sociological implications. It’s a very... strange puzzle to me, and I’d welcome some fresh perspectives.

asark 7y ago
> I’m trying to think of the punch that’s landed the hardest and actually caused damage, and I’m coming up short. SNL's Palin parodies? Not sure whether that actually mattered or the Republicans just, for unrelated reasons, failed to GOTV. I'm pretty sure most self-identified Republicans still think she's great and weren't turned away from the polls over her, but maybe it swayed some moderate/no-party-affiliation folks? Beyond that, humor's kinda a sustaining force for the left, in the same way... whatever you'd call Talk Radio style entertainment-news is for the right (AM radio, various web shows and podcasts, Fox News). Its efficacy may be more in group cohesion than converting "others". [EDIT] incidentally, SNL probably played a large part in painting the (fairly negative) pop-culture image of Hillary that was such an important part of the 2016 election, overshadowing the whole race. Think mid- to late-Clinton-presidency SNL. So there's that.
- taurath 7y ago
  Those are good examples - I'm trying to think about the current era though. Interesting that you bring up Hillary being mocked actually - perhaps it was a turning point in suddenly the Dems were more mockable, or at least mockery stuck to them. With the republicans now, I think they've positioned themselves to be immune from mockery - they saw how effective Jon Stewart was during the Bush years, and the solution now seems to be to fill the air with as much as possible so that it all turns to static. I remember when Trump got elected, the biggest question everyone had as a comedian was "how do you mock this person, he's already too ridiculous"? Ditto Boris Johnson happening now. Some are trying to start countering this from trying to draw a line by defining values (that they clearly don't seem to share) - the Pete Buttigieg strategy, the Joe Biden strategy. It just seems like a fascinating turn of events that suddenly mockery as a political tool can be nullified. Nothing SNL has ever done on Trump has ever seemed to dent him. Sean Spicer though - that definitely got through. And now he's gone, replaced by Sarah Sanders who manages to soak up all sorts of sympathy despite lying all the time. I guess the other poster is right - the progressives really have become the social establishment, and that comes with a lot of really interesting concequences.
  - asark 7y ago
    I remember when it was the AM radio folks mocking Trump. And, you know, everyone else. Ah, the 90s, when regarding Trump as the textbook definition of a philandering flim-flam artist, worthy of little to no respect whatsoever and certainly no trust, crossed party lines. What a ride this has been.
cybersnowflake 7y ago
Setting aside arguments that could be considered more partisan...I think its partially mainstreaming. I'm sure an early Church father or Renaissance secularist were a bit more sophisticated in promulgating and defending their creed than your average Joe Schmoe door to door evangelist or random early 2000s poster to r/atheism. What was the domain of (still crazy imo) but select group of activists/academics is now to the point where people with actual diagnosed mental disorders are latching on to it in large numbers. (my personal favorite way of measuring whether something is mainstream) https://youtu.be/Gzdf4V7Cf_M https://youtu.be/Gzdf4V7Cf_M Also theres the new dynamic which has emerged within the past decade or 2 but has ramped up considerably where Progressives are the new establishment. They of course have dominated certain areas for a long time but its at the point now where every major sector of society (with a current trivial exception of a tenuous hold on a few offices in the federal government) is controlled by people who are fanatics for or at least bow to what would have been considered ridiculous political correctness/social justice only a few short years earlier. Parody walks hand in hand with fighting against something larger. So does self actualization. Hence the desperate attempts for people to convince themselves that Google/MS/Facebook/Amazon/CNN/HuffPo/NYT et al is 'The Resistance'.
- taurath 7y ago
  Excuse me for a moment while I mourn for my youtube suggestions. I think mainstreaming is an interesting point - a similar strain to what people are calling the "rise of populism" which ends up being more direct. In some ways its empowering the unwashed masses, and in others its being more genuine/less filtered. I had another paragraph here that went into how progressives aren't the establishment economically by any means and was about to disagree, but after re-reading and scoping your argument to just having command of the social landscape I think you're probably correct. The lines of attack brought on by some in the social justice world can be patently ridiculous, and are ripe for parody. Its difficult to come around to being empathetic to that fact when most of my upbringing was during the culture wars against the "prudes", who had all the power and were using it to gatekeep everyone. I'm certainly more comfortable living in this social environment myself, but I remember the feelings of empowerment when we got to call out something in society that was obviously bullshit bullshit. I suppose I have some fear around that as a natural backlash on some issues can turn into a general backlash against the entire thing - are we heading for another Disco Demolition? Or will a more middle ground maturing of language happen? One thing does seem almost certain - the corporations will make a lot of money any way the wind blows.
unionpivo 7y ago
It's because of the "closed garden circle jerks" aka social media. Before social media, most people were consuming similar media, so counterpoints could make a difference. Nowadays algorithms decide what you would like to see/hear so only people that are already against trump are seeing those. And this is not just websites. Metric and tracking got so much better that even traditional media, can target their viewership better.
- taurath 7y ago
  I think that's the easy answer but I think it may not be the whole story. Fox news, conservative radio, etc have existed for a while. Bubbles have also always existed, and yes they've gotten bigger - but at the same time, there's been a big social shift that's happened at the same time this has been going on. The Obama era marked a change to progressives being the social establishment (not to be confused with economic establishment). Suddenly the previous mockers are now the cheerleaders, and corporate america dives right in with them on the equality/diversity train. Then Trump comes in, and somehow wins with a secret weapon - if he acts like a crazy person all the time, the mocking will get so loud, AND be so ubiquitous it'll just turn to static in everyone's minds. Suddenly the biggest political weapon the left has to win over independents isn't very useful. I'm not concerned with the "base" of both parties - Trump hasn't dropped below 40% in a while, partly out of polarization, but also partly that there is a base he has, and that base is opposition to the left, who soundly beat them from Clinton to Obama culturally. This might be why despite having the house, senate, and white house the republicans could keep telling themselves they were the underdogs - culturally they are, and continue to be. So there will still be independents who are on the side of fighting the "progressive hegemony", and they by default go to trump. Instead of the skater punk in high school cussing and spitting in front of the nuns, its the kid on the computer intentionally calling someone the wrong pronouns.
  - pjc50 7y ago
    > its the kid on the computer intentionally calling someone the wrong pronouns. Today this, tomorrow goading someone (such as a trans person) into suicide, the next day egging on the person who says they're going to shoot up a synagogue. The punk confronting nuns is doing so from the bottom of the power hierarchy, and achieving their freedom not at the expense of anyone else. The modern alt-right culture is looking for targets and hostile to anyone who asks for respect. A big difference.
pjc50 7y ago
It worked when the right relied on "seriousness" and "respectability". Mockery is the counter to seriousness. The targets of this used to be at the top of the power ladder; mocking them was a form of levelling. The right has largely stopped trying to engage neutrals on any kind of intellectual, rational basis, and has instead gone for leaning heavily on the emotional buttons of fear and power. Especially power: the cruelty of family separation at the border is deliberate. The right tells you who to hate and encourages you to watch their humiliation, but picks targets by their vulnerability. Hence it has to lie about their power and big up children into "threats to national security". The tank parade is yet another symbol of this, nicely timed for just after the 30th anniversary of Tianamen.