More engagement equals more persuasion? How entertainment experiences predict attitudinal effects of satirical news articles

Satirical news and its effects on outcomes such as appreciation and persuasion have gained considerable currency as a topic of research in mass communication studies. Through the framework of construal level theory, we investigated whether different levels of spatial distance influence these effects. In a between-subjects experiment, participants in the United Kingdom (UK; n = 282) and New Zealand (NZ; n = 370) read a satirical or non-satirical news text summarizing a study reporting on the negative impact of increased digital device screen time on young children. Depending on condition, the texts referred to entities and locations in either the participant’s own country (spatially close) or a foreign country (spatially distant). Results showed significant main effects of satirical news on audience perceptions, emotions, and attitudes. While there were no significant interactions between article type (satirical vs. regular news) and spatial distance (close vs. distant), our results indicated that satirical news was associated with higher perceptions of spatial distance for both the UK and NZ participants as well as higher perceptions of social distance for the NZ participants. Exploratory indirect-effects analyses found several indirect effects of satirical news through increased perceptions of spatial and social psychological distance on audience emotions, text perceptions, and attitudes. We take these results as initial evidence suggesting spatial and social distance are potential variables to consider in future investigations of satirical news.

Satirical news blends entertainment with information and opinion. Satire can thus impact various audience responses, such as positive and negative affect, learning, and persuasion. However, the presence and size of these communicative effects have been debated. We conducted a three-level random-effects meta-analysis on the impact of satirical news ( k = 70, Ntotal = 22,969). We compared satirical news to two reference categories: (1) control messages with no or irrelevant information, and (2) regular news with similar informational content. Results demonstrate that satirical (vs. regular) news increased positive affective responses and message discounting. By contrast, satire increased learning compared to control messages, but not compared to regular news. We find limited evidence for a positive main effect of satire on persuasion. However, we find different moderating effects, indicating that persuasion effects are stronger for Republicans (vs. other voters), student (vs. general-population) samples, TV satire (vs. online and print satire), and for satire targeting social actors.

Previous research suggests that, compared to regular news, satirical news has its own frame repertoire, which differs by outlet characteristics (e.g. medium type, political leaning). We analyzed two large corpora of satirical and regular news: television show episodes (8,925,180 words) and online written articles (64,301,669 words) of liberal and conservative outlets for character, emotional, and moral framing. Contrary to expectations, findings revealed consistent framing differences between the satirical and regular news genres, which were not moderated by medium type or political leaning. Thereby, this study shows how genre-level frame repertoires can offer deeper insights into cross-genre differences in news coverage.

While satirical news has the potential to sway viewers’ political opinions, empirical evidence for these effects remains mixed. Although some studies have shown that satire consumption results in viewer attitudes being more in line with satirists’ positions, other studies did not. A possible explanation for these conflicting findings is the lack of clarity about the mediating processes that play a role in this relationship. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the degree to which both self-reported as well as physiological cognitive, emotional, and excitative responses influence viewers’ attitudes when watching satirical news. We conducted a lab experiment in which participants watched either three satirical or three regular news videos about the same topics. Results showed that satire affected viewers’ self-reported and physiological cognitive, emotional and excitative responses. Nevertheless, viewers’ attitudes were mainly impacted through an affective rather than a cognitive or excitative route. More specifically, only positive emotions mediated the relationship between satirical (vs. regular) news on message-congruent attitudes, but in two opposite directions, which suppressed an overall direct effect on viewers’ attitudes. This indicates the need to differentiate between emotions with the same valence when studying effects of satirical news.

Satirical news detection is an important yet challenging task to prevent spread of misinformation. Many feature based and end-to-end neural nets based satirical news detection systems have been proposed and delivered promising results. Existing approaches explore comprehensive word features from satirical news articles, but lack semantic metrics using word vectors for tweet form satirical news. Moreover, the vagueness of satire and news parody determines that a news tweet can hardly be classified with a binary decision, that is, satirical or legitimate. To address these issues, we collect satirical and legitimate news tweets, and propose a semantic feature based approach. Features are extracted by exploring inconsistencies in phrases, entities, and between main and relative clauses. We apply game-theoretic rough set model to detect satirical news, in which probabilistic thresholds are derived by game equilibrium and repetition learning mechanism. Experimental results on the collected dataset show the robustness and improvement of the proposed approach compared with Pawlak rough set model and SVM.

Katz (1996, 2005, 2009) has often emphasized the importance of testing effects of irony in its social context. One social context that has not yet received much attention in the literature is the inherently ironic genre of satirical news. To alert their audiences to irony, satirists can use markers, one of which being prosody. However, little is known about whether variations in prosodic features actually promote satire liking. This study focused on two prosodic features that previous research associated with irony marking: (a) low vocal pitch, and (b) slow speech rate. We conducted two experiments to determine whether a low (vs. high) vocal pitch (Experiment 1; N = 244) and a slow (vs. fast) speech rate (Experiment 2; N = 234) moderated potential effects of satirical (vs. regular) news exposure on perceived humor, enjoyment, and appreciation. Results showed that participants rated satirical news recordings as more humorous than regular news recordings. In both experiments, enjoyment and appreciation of satirical news were mediated by perceived humor, such that there was a suppression effect: while the indirect effect of satirical news exposure on enjoyment and appreciation was positive, the direct effect was negative. Vocal pitch and speech rate did not influence humor ratings. This finding suggests that contextual cues may already sufficiently be at play in signaling the irony in satirical news, therefore supporting Katz's claim (1996, 2005, 2009) that taking social context into account when conducting irony experiments is essential. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Satirical news presents a critique of current affairs through humor. Previous research suggests that satirical news can have different humor forms (e.g. linguistic strategies) and humor contents (e.g. news topics, targets), and that such differences in humor characteristics can influence audience effects of satirical news. This paper extends this research by analyzing these relationships across different types of outlets in a content analysis (Study 1) and audience engagement analysis (Study 2). In Study 1, we compared humor forms and contents of satirical news headlines posted on Facebook (N = 5,775) between outlets from different countries (United States and the Netherlands) with different political leanings (liberal and conservative). Findings showed that the coded humor forms reasonably consistently characterized satirical news across outlet types, while humor contents did not. In Study 2, we examined associations of the humor characteristics with the number of likes and comments the Facebook posts received. Results were often outlet-specific, especially in case of the coded humor contents. This paper thus reveals that when satirical news’ audience effects differ by humor characteristics, this may be attributed less to differences in humor form, and more to differences in humor content.

Previous research suggests that a defining characteristic of satirical news shows (e.g. The Daily Show) is discursive integration: a creative blend of genre conventions of regular news and fiction. This study aimed to extend the concept of discursive integration to another popular form of satirical news: written satirical news. We focused on both liberal (e.g. The Onion) and conservative (e.g. The Babylon Bee) online outlets of satire. We collected texts published in 2018 by a total of 36 satirical news, regular news and fiction websites (65,530,647 words). Discursive integration was measured by means of linguistic register, because genres can be effectively identified through patterns of linguistic features. Four linguistic register dimensions were identified. Findings showed that written satirical news is indeed characterised by discursive integration because written satirical news’ register scored in between the registers of written regular news and written fiction. No differences in discursive integration levels were found between liberal and conservative satirical news. This study demonstrates the value of discursive integration for understanding the genre of satirical news across partisan lines.

Satirical news shows constitute an innovative hybrid genre that mixes regular news and fiction. The discursive integration hypothesis posits that the defining characteristic of satirical news shows is that news and fiction elements are integrated such that boundaries between the preexisting genres have blurred. The current study quantitatively tests this hypothesis on both long-running American shows such as The Daily Show and more recent shows such as Last Week Tonight. We collected transcripts of fifteen satirical news shows, eleven regular news shows, and fourteen fiction shows from 2018 (9,824,249 words). Transcripts were automatically tagged for over fifty linguistic features to identify register dimensions, patterns in linguistic features unique to genres, which we used to determine the presence of discursive integration. Findings revealed that two-thirds of satirical news shows were indeed characterized by discursive integration (which we labeled “complete hybrids”), while one-third manifested through the already existing hybrid genre of opinionated news (which we labeled “hybrid-genre echoes”). These two categories of shows demonstrate the importance of genre hybridity for defining satirical news across different shows.

Currently, there has been a significant increase in the diffusion of fake news worldwide, especially the political class, where the possible misinformation that can be propagated, appearing at the elections debates around the world. However, news with a recreational purpose, such as satirical news, is often confused with objective fake news. In this work, we decided to address the differences between objectivity and legitimacy of news documents, where each article is treated as belonging to two conceptual classes: objective/satirical and legitimate/fake. Therefore, we propose a DSS (Decision Support System) based on a Text Mining (TM) pipeline with a set of novel textual features using multi-label methods for classifying news articles on these two domains. For this, a set of multi-label methods was evaluated with a combination of different base classifiers and then compared with a multi-class approach. Also, a set of real-life news data was collected from several Brazilian news portals for these experiments. Results obtained reported our DSS as adequate (0.80 f1-score) when addressing the scenario of misleading news, challenging the multi-label perspective, where the multi-class methods (0.01 f1-score) overcome by the proposed method. Moreover, it was analyzed how each stylometric features group used in the experiments influences the result aiming to discover if a particular group is more relevant than others. As a result, it was noted that the complexity group of features could be more relevant than others.

News satire has proliferated worldwide and has emerged as a valid site for public discourse. What we see today is a spectrum of news satire formats ranging from the predominantly absurd and comedic to more overtly journalistic satirical deconstructions of current affairs. This maturation of news satire as an alternative form of journalism thus underlines the necessity for further research into the journalistic roles that certain news satire formats carry out. This study assesses the journalistic roles in three international news satire formats i.e., the United States’ Last Week Tonight, the Swedish Svenska Nyheter, and the Dutch Zondag met Lubach and presents the findings of a content analysis of 150 satirical segments having aired from October 2020 to April 2023. We conclude that Western news satire displays a fairly united execution of journalistic role performances with high scores for the Advocate, Watchdog and Civic Educator roles, yet low scores for Reporter and Loyalist roles. Furthermore, we present the Comedic Interlocutor role, and discuss its place in alternative conceptions of professional journalism today. This study empirically validates that humor and entertainment are not irreconcilable with a factual, civically engaged, critical kind of journalistic coverage.

Although past research suggested that entertainment viewing may weaken political trust, only a few studies have investigated this outcome for specific types of nontraditional news shows. This study examines the relationship between exposure to three forms of nontraditional news that merge entertainment with informational content—comedy talk shows, satirical news, and cable opinion news—and political mistrust and cynicism. Using data from a national survey (n = 777) conducted in the United States, findings indicate that viewing satirical news programs appeared to be related to systemic cynicism, while exposure to all three shows was either directly or indirectly associated with distrust in politicians. Mistrust in the news media, on the other hand, appeared for comedy talk shows and satirical news use only in particular contexts.

The political Left dominated news satire in the United States in the early part of the 21st century with television shows such as The Daily Show and newspapers and sites like The Onion, leading some commentators and scholars to argue that satire leans inherently left or is even the exclusive domain of progressivism. Since 2016, The Babylon Bee, a conservative, Christian news satire website has defied these expectations. This article offers an examination of how The Babylon Bee, has adapted contemporary practices of news satire in the 21st century United States to the conservative perspective. After providing a theoretical definition of “conservative satire,” the paper provides brief historical overviews of news satire since the turn of the century, conservative satire from Ancient Greece to the British Enlightenment, and the founding and evolution of The Babylon Bee. Finally, the author demonstrates how The Bee has brought news satire to the Right in the 21st century by navigating three challenges of the recent American politics of particular importance to conservatives: the divisive figure of Donald Trump, the rise of misinformation, and the nuances of identity politics.

Satire is an attractive subject in deception detection research: it is a type of deception that intentionally incorporates cues revealing its own deceptiveness. Whereas other types of fabrications aim to instill a false sense of truth in the reader, a successful satirical hoax must eventually be exposed as a jest. This paper provides a conceptual overview of satire and humor, elaborating and illustrating the unique features of satirical news, which mimics the format and style of journalistic reporting. Satirical news stories were carefully matched and examined in contrast with their legitimate news counterparts in 12 contemporary news topics in 4 domains (civics, science, business, and “soft” news). Building on previous work in satire detection, we proposed an SVMbased algorithm, enriched with 5 predictive features (Absurdity, Humor, Grammar, Negative Affect, and Punctuation) and tested their combinations on 360 news articles. Our best predicting feature combination (Absurdity, Grammar and Punctuation) detects satirical news with a 90% precision and 84% recall (F-score=87%). Our work in algorithmically identifying satirical news pieces can aid in minimizing the potential deceptive impact of satire.

The objective of this study was to qualitatively summarise the content of online news articles pertaining to food parenting practices and determine whether this content is substantiated by the scientific literature. News article data were identified and collected from United Kingdom online news published during 2010–2017 period using the News on the Web corpus. A coding framework was used to categorise the content of news articles to identify information related to food parenting practices. Then, claims made about food parenting practices were extracted from relevant news articles. Each claim was evaluated to determine the extent to which any claims were supported by the available scientific research evidence. The study identified ten claims across thirty-two relevant online news articles. Claims made across the news articles reported on the following food parenting practices: food restrictions, food-based threats and bribes, pressure to eat, use of food to control negative emotions, food availability, food preparation, and meal and snack routines. Eight out of the ten claims identified did not refer to scientific research evidence. News articles frequently lacked detail and information to explain to readers why and how the use of certain food parenting practices could have a lasting impact on children’s health outcomes. Considering the influence that news media has on parents, the reporting of food parenting practices in news articles should aim to provide a balanced view of the published scientific evidence and recognise the difficulties and barriers that prevent the use of helpful and healthy food parenting practices. The study results in this paper could be used to aid and structure of the dissemination of food parenting practice research findings in the media, inform public health education to influence perceptions of unhelpful food parenting practices, and promote parental use of responsive food parenting practices.