The news of the future: satire
The effects of satire compared to traditional forms of news on
comprehension and political engagement
Joy Schouten, 10416579
Master’s Thesis, Graduate School of Communication Master programme Communication Science
Supervisor Mark Boukes 30-06-2017
2
Abstract
This study investigates how satire is able to increase the feeling of comprehension of a topic compared to traditional forms of news like a documentary and a public news broadcast. Moreover, the consequent effects of the feeling of comprehension on political participation and interpersonal talk about the topic are assessed. To increase the external validity, an online experiment was conducted in which participants were either assigned or could choose a condition. The results showed that satire is able to increase the feeling of comprehension. This feeling, in turn, can increase the likelihood of political participation and interpersonal talk about the topic. The results did not differ between the assigned and the self-selected, ruling out any treatment effects. Finally, the extent to which participants viewed satire with the intention of being entertained did not increase comprehension.
3
Introduction
One of the fundamental questions in political communication research is whether media are able to keep citizens up to date about politics and other public affairs, so that they become informed voters (Holbert, 2005b). Particularly the satirical genre has been shown to increase citizens’ interest in becoming more knowledgeable about political affairs (Feldman & Young, 2008), heighten internal political efficacy (Becker, 2011) and enhance the likelihood that citizens participate in the political process (Hoffman & Young, 2011). Moreover, satire has been gaining momentum on a global scale. The number of viewers is slowly growing in the U.S. (Comedy Central Press, 2017), but also in smaller countries like the Netherlands (Nu.nl, 2017).
Satire’s ability to be newsworthy on the one hand, and entertaining on the other, makes for an enlightening combination (Becker & Goldberg, 2017). Satirical shows have adapted a form of news re-enactment, in which they discuss topics as if they were an actual news program (Baym & Jones, 2012). They are, however, able to make fun of issues and do not have to conform to the same standards as conventional journalists (Burton, 2010). This offers them a chance at diving into (and often critiquing) political issues that have not been picked up by traditional news (Combe, 2015). Moreover, satire shows’ use of humour can engage the audience and provoke discussion (Lee & Jang, 2017), whereas traditional news is objective and therefore stimulates discourse to a lesser extent (Landreville, 2015).
Thus, satire has been proven to be helpful in informing and engaging citizens about political affairs. Another genre that can aid citizens in becoming informed voters is the documentary. Due to their formal tone and perceived realism, they are processed more rationally (Pouliot & Cowen, 2007). Documentaries have been shown to increase issue awareness, affective responses and learning (Landreville & LaMarre, 2011). Taken together with the amplitude of other outlets, satire, news and documentaries should provide enough
4
information for citizens to be adequately informed. Yet, researchers consistently find that there is a large part of society that is uninformed (S. E. Bennett, 1988; Delli Carpini & Keeter, 1996; Fowler & Margolis, 2014; Somin, 2010). According to classical democracy theory, citizens have to be knowledgeable about politics and able to rationally evaluate this
information in order for democracy to work (Somin, 2010). However, democracies have been stable for decades despite the uninformed citizens (Neuman, 1986).
This paradox can be explained by “the illusion of knowledge” (Weber & Köhler, 2017), which is defined as the difference between self-perceived and actual knowledge (Park, 2001). Citizens use heuristic cues (mental shortcuts) to make decisions (Lau & Redlawsk, 2001), which means that they will rely on their feeling of comprehension of an issue rather than retrieve stored knowledge (Adoni & Cohen, 1978; Park, 2001). Thus, if they feel as though they comprehend an issue, they can act on it and have been shown to do so according to their own ideals (Baum & Jamison, 2006). This results in a working democracy.
A group of researchers that has contested the ideal notion of an informed citizen argue that citizens have busy, demanding and multidimensional lives (Graber, 2003) in which they are not merely citizens, but take on many roles (Zaller, 2003). To expect them to take in all the details of politics and news that are required to fulfil their duty as informed citizen, is almost impossible (Blumler & Coleman, 2015). Scholars expect citizens to have a certain level of political knowledge (Eveland & Garrett, 2014; Lupia, 2006). However, that level and the topics are predefined for them (Blumler & Coleman, 2015; Smith, 2009), creating an idealized standard of an “Informed Citizen” (Schütz, 1946). Instead, they call for a paradigm shift from the “Informed Citizen” to a modification in the form of a “Monitorial Citizen” (Graber, 2003; Schudson, 2000; Zaller, 2003). The “Monitorial Citizen” does not have to be aware of the details of every political or social issue all the time, but should keep an eye out for issues that are dangerous to them personally or to the public good (Schudson, 2000).
5
Most of the research about satire and its ability to inform the audience has been tested by means of recall and recognition of factual information (Baum, 2003; Becker, 2013;
Brewer, Young, & Morreale, 2013; Hollander, 2005), just as the majority of news reception studies (Schaap, Renckstorf, & Wester, 2005). However, as shown earlier, citizens do not necessarily need detailed factual knowledge to fulfil their civic duties, as long as they can monitor the media and comprehend what poses a personal or civil threat (Graber, 2003; Zaller, 2003). In addition to this, scholars have raised their doubts about the appropriateness of studying comprehension by means of factual recall and recognition (Berry, 1983; Schaap, 2001). Thus, this study will look into the effects of watching satire on the self-reported comprehension of an issue and the subsequent political engagement. To try and assess whether the effects are pure effects or treatment effects, this study will include a free choice section aside from the assigned conditions to test for treatment effects (Gaines & Kuklinski, 2011; Young & Tisinger, 2006).
The scientific relevance of this study therefore is that this study extends previous research by assessing the comprehension of an issue instead of the factual recall and
recognition in a Dutch context. The majority of studies has been done in the U.S. Moreover, it employs an experimental design which controls for forced exposure. In addition, this study is relevant for society since it shows that satire might be able to help citizens in their rational decision-making process by increasing their feeling of comprehension. Citizens’ best interest is served as they can comprehend an issue, increase their political engagement and therefore be able to participate more effectively in democracy. The research question of this study will be: “What are the effects of satire compared to traditional news and a documentary on the comprehension of an issue and does a better comprehension lead to a higher political engagement?”.
6
Satire versus Traditional Forms of News or Documentary
Satire is an old phenomenon that can take many forms, but its origin lies in plays that date back to the ancient Greek and Roman times (Cuddon, 1991). It can be defined as an art form that “diminishes or derogates a subject by making it ridiculous and evoking toward it attitudes of amusement, contempt, scorn, or indignation” (Abrams, 1999, p. 275). Abrams further argues that satire uses humour as a weapon against an individual, class, institution, nation or even the entire human race. The satirist is a “self-appointed guardian of standards and ideals; of moral as well as aesthetic values” (Cuddon, 1991, p. 632). Even though these definitions are a bit dated, they still hold true for the satirical television programs that are airing today, for instance The Daily Show. This show invites the audience to critique political and social issues by means of laughter and entertainment, but still demands some form of accountability (Baym, 2005).
A longitudinal content analysis of interviews in political satire programs has shown that they are often intellectually oriented rather than solely entertainment oriented, with academics, actors, journalists and politicians as guests (Becker & Goldberg, 2017). Moreover, a study that compared broadcast news to satire found that they were equally substantive in terms of references to campaign issues and qualifications of the candidates (Fox, Koloen, & Sahin, 2007). This shows that satire has the potential to be equally informative as traditional. Correspondingly, motivations for viewing satire were (among others) to learn about current events and to make following the news fun (Young, 2013), again indicating that satire should be taken seriously as a source for news, albeit an additional source and not a replacing one (Young & Tisinger, 2006).
To illustrate the differences between satire, traditional news and documentaries, it makes sense to define the concepts of hard and soft news. One can argue that satire and documentaries lean more to soft news than hard news and that traditional news will
7
consequently be viewed as hard news, but this is a difficult (and too simplified) evaluation. The distinction between these concepts should not be viewed as a dichotomous choice, but rather as a multi-dimensional framework on which media can be positioned to assess their intended journalistic strategy (Otto, Glogger, & Boukes, 2017).
Responding to the growing ambiguity, Reinemann, Stanyer, Scherr and Legnante (2012) identified three dimensions which help to define harder and softer types of news, namely topic, focus and style. They argue that the main element that defines hard or soft news is the topic, which deals with the political relevance of a subject. Moreover, the focus
dimension considers the individual or societal relevance and the thematic or episodic framing. The style dimension attends to the personal or impersonal, and emotional or unemotional style of reporting. When assessing all these dimensions, one can see how where a story or showfits within this framework. The “soft” or “fake” news genres are interesting to investigate,
because they have been found to attract younger viewers (Hmielowski, Holbert, & Lee, 2011; Hollander, 2005) and have even been used as learning material for students (Glazier, 2014).
When we look at the topic dimension, all three genres discuss politically relevant news to some extent. Satire however, uses a subjective reporting style and thematic focus, which is opposite to the objective and episodic reporting of traditional news. Documentaries also employ a thematic focus, but still differentiate from satire through a lack of humoristic features. The reporting style of documentaries is not objective nor subjective, and tries to convince the viewer of a certain aspect by portraying real information. In this way,
documentaries can increase issue concern and learning (Lamarre & Landreville, 2009), but they lack humour. Humour is essential in decreasing scrutiny of the information (Dannagal G. Young, 2008). Thus, satire and documentaries give commentary and context, where
traditional news is objective and rational (Baym, 2005). Moreover, humour is needed to persuade a citizen with the given information, which is more often employed by satire.
8
Comprehension
As shown, each of these genres has different journalistic strategies that might produce
different effects on the perceived comprehension of an issue. The feeling of comprehension is essential in citizens’ presumed ability to participate in the political system (Roth, Weinmann, Schneider, Hopp, & Vorderer, 2014), since it enhances their sense of competence. As
mentioned in the introduction, citizens’ feeling of comprehension surrounding an issue was more strongly related to the willingness of forming a political judgement than the actual knowledge (Adoni & Cohen, 1978). Moreover, citizens do not need extensive factual
knowledge about current affairs and politics to come to reasoned decisions (Lau & Redlawsk, 2001; Levendusky, 2011; Lupia, 1994) because they make use of heuristic cues.
Heuristics are defined as mental shortcuts which citizens use to simplify choices, not only in politics but also in their daily lives (Katsikopoulos, 2010). Furthermore, not only lay people make use of heuristics, experts such as doctors (Green & Mehr, 1997) or engineers (Magee & Frey, 2006) also employ them. This is logical, since it is humanly impossible to assess detailed information about every choice that we make, especially when taking into consideration that we decide on thousands of choices each day (Lupia & Matsusaka, 2004). Lau and Redlawsk (2001) have identified five major heuristics that voters use, namely: a candidate’s party affiliation, ideology, endorsements, results from polls and candidate appearance. Instead of learning about each candidate’s specific stands on all policies, voters infer their evaluation of a candidate through those five heuristics and have been shown to do so in accordance to their underlying values and interests (Bowler & Donovan, 2000; Lupia & Matsusaka, 2004).
Moreover, research from the political psychology field has shown that people are often unable to recall campaign facts, even if it involves simple questions and minimal delay
9
discipline has wrongfully assumed that citizens are only able to form accurate evaluations of political information when they can recall it. They propose instead, that citizens form their judgement of an issue or candidate the moment they encounter it. This evaluation is then stored in a “running tally”, which is an aggregate of evaluations about that specific issue or candidate. Subsequently, this running tally is then stored in long-term memory. The details that they have encountered are almost immediately dismissed, but the summative evaluation in the tally will be called upon when they have to make decisions. The impression that they have stored is remembered and allows them to vote or respond in a way that is in line with their ideals. This way of processing information is called the online (meaning in the moment)
model of information processing.
This model has been tested and verified (Lodge, Mcgraw, & Stroh, 1989; Glen Smith, 2016), but there are also researcher that vouch for the memory based model of information processing (Zaller & Feldman, 1992). The theory of online-based processing states that people form attitudes in real time, updating their affective evaluation of the topic rather than retrieving factual knowledge, as opposed to the memory-based model, which poses that people form attitudes based on the retrieval of stored knowledge. Therefore, some researchers propose that it is not merely this online model, but a combination of online and memory-based processing (Y. M. Kim & Garrett, 2011). Citizens are expected to use each model as a consequence of individual differences, political sophistication, complexity of the issue, processing goals (Lodge et al., 1989) or the type of media presented (Y. M. Kim & Vishak, 2008).
Kim and Vishak (2008) found that satire encouraged online information processing, whereas news stimulated memory-based processing. This shows that viewing satire can update the intuitive evaluation of the mentioned topics, enabling viewers to form heuristic cues to base later judgements on. For each new piece of information, a tag is formed and
10
stored in the ‘online tally’ of that specific issue. A citizen therefore doesn’t have to remember all the factual details of a story to retrieve whether or not he/she supports or likes the
information (Lodge et al., 1995). The focus of research on recall, recognition or memory of factual information when testing the effects of satire is therefore not entirely suitable. As the online tally of citizens “spontaneously infuses the encoding, retrieval and comprehension of information” (Druckman, Green, Kuklinski, & Lupia, 2011) and therefore does not promote factual learning, respondents should be asked about their feeling of comprehension to test the effects of the media stimulus instead of being asked about their factual knowledge.
Moreover, research shows that the motivations to view satire are ‘to contextualise the news’, ‘to make news fun’ and to ‘learn about current affairs’ (Young, 2013). Although satirical programs steer away from viewing themselves as informational programs and aim to make people laugh (Burton, 2010), the audience does view it as a source of political
information (Hardy, Gottfried, Winneg, & Jamieson, 2014). Since satire sheds light on social and political issues by explaining the multiple aspects (Baym, 2005), it might increase comprehension more than traditional news that only offers fact and no opinion (Delli Carpini & Williams, 2001). Moreover, the given context allows for more heuristic cues. This could lead to a better feeling of comprehension of the topic of the video than the objective
traditional news according to the online model of information processing (Kim & Vishak, 2008). In addition, documentaries do not use humour which could increase the extent to which the given information is scrutinized. Thus, this will lead to a smaller increase in comprehension than satire.
Finally, when people view a political talk show with the intention of being entertained, they report a stronger feeling of comprehension and feel more entertained than when viewing it with the intention of being informed (Mattheiß et al., 2013). This might be explained by the notion that people feel both enjoyment and appreciation for the artistic value of the media
11
when viewing entertainment (Oliver & Bartsch, 2010). Thus, when viewing a humorous show, participants appreciate the information more and process it differently than non-entertainment shows like traditional news. Another explanation could also be that people do not expect to be informed by entertainment. Therefore, they report the extent to which they feel informed as higher than when they view news and do expect to be informed. It is thus expected that satire will lead to a better feeling of comprehension than the traditional hard news and the documentary, and that this effect will be moderated by viewing intention.
H1: Viewing satire leads to a better feeling of comprehension of the covered subject than viewing either (a) hard news or (b) a documentary and this effect will be stronger for participants that (c) viewed the video with the intention of being entertained.
Political engagement and Affinity for Political Humour
In addition to the cognitive effects of satire on an individual, some studies have linked satire to behavioural political tendencies. More specifically, satire was found to increase political engagement (Lee, 2012). The term political engagement is used to describe a variety of political actions such as voting, having discussions about political topics or taking action through demonstrating or signing a petition (Gennaro & Dutton, 2006; Wojcieszak, Baek, & Delli Carpini, 2010). This study will include interpersonal talk and political participation, but not voting, since the Dutch elections have just passed and prior actions cannot be influenced.
As discussed earlier, political knowledge is not a prerequisite for a working
democracy, but citizens should be able to vote according to their personal interests through rational decision making (Lau & Redlawsk, 2001) in order for democracy to thrive. Citizens can increase their rational voting behaviour by discussing political matters with
12
large number of citizens (Ikeda & Huckfeldt, 2001) and these knowledgeable discussants do not necessarily need a large degree of initial knowledge (Grofman, Owen, & Feld, 1983). Thus, increased interpersonal talk is beneficial for democracy by influencing the rational decision-making process of its citizens and enabling them to vote according to their personal values (Richey, 2008).
When it comes to interpersonal talk, satire is particularly effective in sparking public debate about politics (Burton, 2010; Kim, Wyatt, & Katz, 1999; Pan, Shen, Paek, & Sun, 2006). Within satire, it is possible to scrutinize politicians and hold them accountable, something that traditional news media do to a lesser extent (Baym, 2005). As a consequence of watching satire, people often experience negative emotions toward public officials, political parties, and government policies (Lee & Jang, 2017; Lee & Kwak, 2014). These emotions like anger, worry or disgust have been found to provoke discussion of the satirized subject (Lee & Jang, 2017). This happens through an indirect process of cognitive reflection that is induced by heuristic cues (Cho et al., 2009). As noted earlier, satire provides context that stimulates the use of heuristic cues, as mentioned by the online processing of information model (Kim & Vishak, 2008).
Moreover, satire can be interpreted in many ways and often needs some form of background knowledge to be understood (Young, 2004). Therefore, it can create media-based uncertainty about the source (intention), the message (implication), the self (own reaction) or others (reaction of others) (Landreville, 2015). However, satirists are also known for
encouraging their viewers to rectify the social and political problems (Jones, 2005), which can increase someone perceived ability to partake in society (also known as internal efficacy) (Craig, Niemi, & Silver, 1990). Thus, the combination of uncertainty about the topic and the encouragement of the satirist promote healthy discussion among its viewers. Based on these findings, we can expect that satire will have a more positive effect on intended interpersonal
13
political talk than traditional news or a documentary, since these genres do not provide both encouragement and negative rhetoric.
Furthermore, political engagement does not only entail interpersonal talk, political participation is also essential to a working democracy (Teorell, 2006). One form of
entertainment that is somewhat linked to satire is the political comedy show. Cao & Brewer (2008) found that watching these shows was positively associated with political participation in terms of joining an organisation or attending a demonstration. Satire specifically was found to have a positive effect on political participation, albeit through the moderator of internal efficacy (Hoffman & Young, 2011). If people feel efficacious, they feel as though they are capable enough to participate in politics (Gennaro & Dutton, 2006). Thus, if people feel more efficacious by watching satire and the subsequent increase in comprehension, the likelihood of political participation increases as well (Pollock, 1983). Traditionally speaking, satirists do not employ a call to action; they merely ridicule and aim at humour (Holbert, 2013). The rise of televised satire however, has adapted to the mass audience and does use a (subtle) call to action in the form of asking to tweet, sign a petition or engage in other forms of online action (Ferri, 2013). Moreover, the encouragement of citizens that they can affect the political process stimulates political participation as well (Jones, 2005). This is distinctly different than traditional news that does not encourage people to participate, since it is supposed to remain objective. Also, documentaries are aimed at informing and educating its audience (Lamarre & Landreville, 2009), thus this is not expected to have an effect on participation.
Concluding, it is expected that viewing satire will lead to a higher political
engagement in terms of interpersonal talk and political participation. However, this relation is dependent upon a good comprehension, which is therefore expected to act as a mediator.
14
H2: Viewing satire will lead to a higher intention of political engagement in terms of (a) political participation and (b) interpersonal talk than watching a documentary or hard news via the indirect effect of comprehension.
Conceptual model
Self-selection
Finally, on a methodological level, randomly assigning participants to conditions makes for statistically valid samples. However, this could mean that participants who normally do not watch satire, would be forced to do so in this experiment. Essential to understanding satire (and to therefore comprehend the issues), is to “get the joke” (Young, 2004). Feldman, Stroud, Bimber and Wojcieszak (2013) state that forcing participants instead of letting them self-select a stimulus can give different effects. Moreover, some experiments have been shown to yield different results when they were performed in a lab or in the field (Jerit, Barabas, & Clifford, 2013). Incorporating self-selection can, thus, improve the classical design (Gaines & Kuklinski, 2011), especially when it comes to satire.
Feeling of Comprehension of the topic of the video
Political engagement
Political participation Political interpersonal talk Genre
15
Furthermore, recent research has stressed the vital roles of the intention and motivation of viewing news, where motivated viewers are more likely to elaborate on the topic than the unmotivated viewers (King, Jensen, Carcioppolo, Krakow, & Sun, 2015). Moreover, the intention of viewing a political talk show with the intention of being
entertained can increase the feeling of being well informed (Mattheiß et al., 2013). Therefore, the external validity might be better if participants could choose whether they viewed satire, traditional news or a documentary. This option will therefore be incorporated in this study.
H3: The positive relationship between viewing satire and (a) comprehension, and the indirect effect of comprehension on (b) political participation and (c) intended political interpersonal talk, is stronger for participants who self-selected the stimuli.
Method
Sample & Data Collection
An online experiment was conducted from May 19th till June 8th. Respondents were recruited by means of several Facebook posts that the researcher posted in political discussion groups, survey groups and through personal messages. Furthermore, to enhance the diversity of the sample, Facebook advertisements were used to target specific people who were
underrepresented in the sample, along with personal recruitment of the researcher in crowded areas. Respondents were stimulated to take part in the survey by offering a chance at winning €50, - from an online shop. The Facebook ads showed several photos of people behind their computer, with the caption ‘Wanted: Opinion’ and a reference to the €50, - gift card.
The data shows that 30% of respondents found the survey through Facebook ads, 26% filled it in because of a personal relationship with the researcher and the rest filled it in
16
had different reasons not mentioned above (18%)1. In total, the survey was successfully completed by 245 respondents.
Respondents who took over two hours to complete the survey were removed, along with people under 18, due to the nature of the experiment that is focused on political
participation and engagement. The result was a sample with a total of 229 respondents. Their ages ranged from 18 to 67 (M = 30.86, SD = 12.87), 45.4% identified as male, 54.1% as female and 0.4% as different. The sample is highly educated, with 7.9% having lower intermediate vocational education, 39.1% higher vocational education and 51% having a bachelor or master’s degree. Moreover, the sample is leaning slightly towards the left-wing political preference spectrum with a mean of -0.95 (SD = 2.54) on a scale from -5 (left) to 5 (right). Finally, the average time respondents took to complete the experiment was about 15minutes.
Design
The hypotheses were tested through an experimental 2 (assigned or self-selection) x 3 (satire, news, documentary) between-subjects design. When participants gave their informed consent, they were randomly assigned to either the self-selection condition (n = 112) or the assigned condition (n = 117). In the self-selection condition, respondents could choose themselves between three videos, namely satire, news or a documentary, whereas in the assigned condition they were randomly assigned to one of the three videos. Due to the freedom of choice between the videos in the self-selection condition, the satire video (n = 62) was
selected more often than the documentary (n = 13) and the news video (n = 37). The videos in
1
Some respondents might have failed to see the distinction between a Facebook-ad and a Facebook-post. There was not a specific answer option included that said that they were recruited by means of a Facebook-post of the researcher, so people might have seen the word Facebook and chose this option without reading the specific information.
17
the assigned condition were almost evenly distributed; satire (n = 38), documentary (n = 41), news (n = 37).
Randomization checks
To check if the conditions were evenly distributed in terms of age, gender and education, randomization checks were performed. First, the random assignment of respondents to the self-selected or the assigned condition in terms of age F (1, 226) = 1.04, p = 0.308, education,
Χ² (6) = 3.73, p = 0.713 and gender Χ² (2) = 1.18, p = 0.554 proved successful. Additionally,
respondents in the assigned condition were again randomly assigned to one of three
conditions: satire, news or a documentary. To check if the allocation of respondents was also random in terms of age, education and gender, three more randomization tests were
performed. These proved non-significant for age F (2, 113) = 0.20, p = 0.822, education Χ² (12) = 19.85, p = 0.070 and gender Χ² (2) = 0.35, p = 0.841. Thus, the randomization of respondents to the different videos was successful.
Stimulus material
The videos that the respondents watched were all existing videos to enhance the external validity, but were altered to conform to about the same length (satire = 6:04 minutes, documentary = 5:58 minutes, news = 5:23 minutes) and increase the internal validity of the stimuli. The topic of the three videos was the same, namely trade associations such as TTIP and CETA. This topic was chosen due to the complexity of the issue, which is more likely to provide substantial new insights in terms of comprehension than a simple topic.
The satire video was an excerpt from the popular Dutch television show Zondag met
Lubach.2 This show started in 2014 and has grown in popularity ever since (NOS.nl, 2017b).
2
18
Its aim is to “shed light on topics that have been snowed under” (VPRO.nl, 2017b). The show was indeed found to act as a watchdog, guiding viewers to the most important developments in current affairs and reflect on them with a critical view (Veen, 2017). The video entailed an explanation of both TTIP and CETA, in which host Arjen Lubach uses the example of buying lipstick from America (or Canada).
Due to the regulations in TTIP and CETA, the Netherlands will have to allow the lipstick that is produced in the U.S. to be sold in the Netherlands, despite their own standards for production. If the lipstick has already been tested in the U.S., it doesn’t have to conform to the Dutch safety regulations in terms of animal-testing and health procedures. Moreover, the Netherlands could even be sued for millions of dollars if they refuse to import the lipstick. Another example that Lubach mentions is the ‘chlorine chicken’. In the U.S., chickens can be processed through chlorine to kill bacteria, while this is not allowed in Europe. However, if TTIP will be enacted, those chlorine processed chickens will have to be allowed even though they do not meet Dutch standards.
Lubach intertwines his examples with jokes. For instance, he quotes an article stating that the trade agreement CETA only has to be translated to French and German, after which it can be implemented. He comments on this with “Yes, it’s only simple things like that, just simple translations of sentences like ‘Europe, we’re going to fuck you over big time’ to ‘Europe, nous vous fuckerons grand temps’. All of his jokes and explanations are
accompanied by visual images, which often are perfectly timed to make people understand the joke immediately.
For the news condition an excerpt of the NOS Journaal was selected about the same topic.3 The NOS aspires to maintain high journalistic values such as reliability and objectivity when reporting the news (NOS.nl, 2017a) and has the highest viewing ratings of television
3
19
news outlets (Stichting KijkOnderzoek, 2017). It can therefore be considered ‘hard’ or traditional news, aired on the public channel NPO (Boukes, Boomgaarden, Moorman, & de Vreese, 2015).
The video shows a news anchor talking about the implementation of CETA. She talks about the contempt of Canada that the agreement is being blocked by the Walloons, a
southern region of Belgium. The news then proceeds to view an interview with the minister of foreign affairs of Canada, in which she expresses her sadness and that she is no longer willing to keep the negotiations open. Furthermore, the news anchor then explains that all other countries want the agreement, except that small part of Belgium. CETA is then explained through a small animation video, which shows the benefits (free trade) and one point of criticism from the Belgians (rights of the native workers).
This news video differs from the satire in terms of attitude, since it doesn’t really give any negative critiques. Moreover, it is similar in that is uses animations or pictures to try to
explain the essence of the agreement and it is in the same studio-like environment. Therefore,
visually speaking the two videos are quite similar, but there is no use of humour in this video. The condition with the documentary contained a video of the Dutch television show
Tegenlicht.4 This is an informative documentary-style program which aims to investigate new ideas and trends in politics, economics, society, technology and science (VPRO.nl, 2017a). It uses a lot of characters and metaphors to visually explain concepts and could therefore also be quite successful in conveying comprehension (Jong, 2012). The documentary shows what TTIP entails by consulting experts, but also by asking protestors on the street. It was chosen because people view documentaries with a mix of entertainment as well as information-seeking motivations, but it differs from satire due to the absence of humorous content. This makes it easier to assess whether the effects of viewing satire can be attributed to the use of
4
20
humour. The video also shows the negative aspects that Zondag met Lubach also assesses, but it doesn’t use humour or suspense. The content is therefore very similar, but the visuals and the way of presenting the arguments differ substantially. The tone is similar to the news video, but the content is far more critical.
Manipulation check
A manipulation check confirmed that the relationship between the type of video and the perceived function of the video (humoristic or informative) was significant χ² (2) = 54.73, p < 0.001 and moderate (tau = 0.23). Respondents in the news condition perceived the
information as informative (100%) rather than humoristic (0%). The same was true for respondents in the documentary condition, where 97,6% found the video informative rather than humoristic (2,4%). In the satire condition, respondents indeed found the video humoristic (60,5%) rather than informative (39,5%), but these numbers are more even than the news and documentary condition.
Moreover, respondents in each condition correctly identified the video they watched,
Χ² (4) = 209.28, p < 0.001, tau = 0.90. Respondents in the satire condition assessed the type of
video that they just watched as ‘a satirical show/comedy’ (97,3%), in the news condition as ‘the daily news’ (97,4%) and in the documentary condition as ‘a documentary’ (95,1%).
Measures
Mediators
Comprehension of the topic of the video
The scale for Comprehension of the topic of the video was measured with 6 items on a 7-point scale ranging from totally disagree (1) to totally agree (7), which was adapted from Mattheiss et al. (2013). All items loaded on one component in a principal components analysis (PCA)
21
and had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.86. See the items in Table 1. The scale intends to measure to what extent participants are able to comprehend the issue that was discussed in the video, namely the trade agreements TTIP or CETA.
Table 1.
Items for the scale Comprehension of the topic of the video
I think that I am able to explain the facts from the video without difficulty I think I have learned something from the video
I think that I have understood the essential facts of the subject I think that I now able to understand the complexity of the topic I think I can place the proposed information within a broader context I felt well informed by the excerpt
Dependent variables
Political interpersonal talk
Intended Political interpersonal talk was measured on three 7-point Likert scales ranging from very unlikely (1) to very likely (7) that the participants will engage in conversation about the issue of the video with their (a) colleagues, (b) friends and (c) family. This dependant scale variable was adopted from Hoon and Jang (2017). All items loaded on one component in a principal components analysis (PCA) and the scale proved reliable with a Cronbach’s alpha of .94.
Political participation
Political participation consisted of offline and online political participation. Offline political participation was measured with two items on a scale ranging from 1 (very unlikely) to 7
22
(very likely), namely: How likely is it that you will... ‘sign a petition about trade agreements such as TTIP or CETA?’, ‘participate in a demonstration about trade agreements such as TTIP or CETA?’ (Hooghe & Marien, 2013). Furthermore, online participation was measured with the same 7-point scale and three items: How likely is it that you will.. ‘forward political information about trade agreements such as TTIP or CETA to others online?’, ‘participate in political discussions about trade agreements such as TTIP or CETA online?’, ‘post political information about trade agreements such as TTIP or CETA on your social media?’ (Vesnic-Alujevic, 2012). The five items are slightly altered to fit into one scale and make them issue-specific. All items loaded on one component in a principal components analysis (PCA). The scale proved reliable with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.82.
Moderators
Viewing intention
Viewing intention consisted of one item questioning the extent to which participants watched the video with the intention of being informed or entertained. The scale ranged from -5 (intention of getting informed) to 5 (intention of getting entertained).
Results
To test the first Hypotheses 1a and 1b of the effect of genre on the feeling of comprehension of the topic of the video, an ANOVA among the assigned conditions satire, news and the documentary was conducted. The results showed that there was a moderate, significant effect of genre on comprehension, F (2, 119) = 7.08, p = 0.001, η² = 0.11. Respondents in the satire condition (M = 5.54, SD = 0.16) scored significantly higher than those in the news condition (M = 4.93, SD = 0.16) or the documentary condition (M = 4.72, SD = 0.16) on their
23
comparison Bonferroni showed that there were significant differences between the satire and news condition (Mdifference = 0.62, p = 0.025) and the satire and documentary condition
(Mdifference = 0.82, p = 0.001), but not between the documentary and the news condition in
terms of their comprehension of the covered topic. Thus, Hypotheses 1a and b are confirmed. Moreover, to test the effects of the moderator (c) viewing intention, a two-way
ANOVA was performed among the assigned conditions. The results showed that there was no main effect of viewing intention on comprehension, F (10, 100) = 1.01, p = 0.443 and no interaction effect of genre and viewing intention on comprehension, F (9, 100) = 0.80, p = 0.619. Thus, hypothesis 1c is rejected; viewing intention does not affect the association between genre and comprehension.
Figure 1. Comprehension by genre
The second hypothesis was tested using two mediation analyses, in which the separate relations between the three variables first had to be established to conclude if comprehension mediated the relationship between genre and (a) political participation and (b) interpersonal talk. The following relations will thus be assessed: (y) genre and comprehension, (x) comprehension and political participation OR interpersonal talk and (z) genre on political
4,93 5,54 4,72 4,2 4,4 4,6 4,8 5 5,2 5,4 5,6 5,8
News Satire Documentary
Comprehension of the topic of the video
24
participation OR interpersonal talk. As shown above, the first relation between (y) genre and comprehension proved significant, F (2, 119) = 7.08, p = 0.001, η² = 0.11.
Moreover, a linear regression between (x) comprehension and political participation was done for Hypothesis 2a. The results showed that the model was significant, F (1, 121) = 6.49, p = 0.012. However, the strength of the model was very weak, 5% of the variance in political participation can be explained by comprehension (R2 = 0.05). In addition, the
correlation between the two variables was weak, b* = 0.22, t = 2.55, p = 0.012. Each point up on the comprehension scale, increased intended political participation with 0.29 on a scale from 1 to 7. The relation (z) for genre on political participation was then tested using another linear regression. The model was not found significant, indicating that genre does not have a direct association with political participation, F (2, 120) = 0.02, p = 0.976. Thus, hypothesis 2a is supported. There is no direct relation of genre on political participation, but there is a mediating effect of comprehension. Genre was significantly correlated with comprehension and comprehension, in turn, with political participation.
To test Hypothesis 2b for the mediating effect of comprehension on the relationship between genre and interpersonal talk, two more linear regressions were conducted. The first linear regression for the relationship (x) between comprehension and interpersonal talk was conducted and found to be significant, F (1, 121) = 26.08, p < 0.001. Moreover, 17% of the variance in interpersonal talk could be explained by comprehension. The correlation was positive and moderate, b* = 0.42, t = 5.11, p < 0.001. Each point up on the comprehension scale could account for 0.65 points up on the scale that measured intended interpersonal talk. In addition, to test the relationship (z) between genre and political participation was tested using another linear regression. The results showed that the model was not significant and could therefore not be used to predict interpersonal talk based on genre, F (2, 120) = 0.34, p = 0.715. This leads to the conclusion that there is a mediating effect of comprehension on
25
interpersonal talk, confirming Hypothesis 2b. There is no significant relationship between genre and interpersonal talk, but there is an indirect effect via comprehension. Genre and comprehension are significantly correlated and comprehension and interpersonal talk as well.
Figure 2. Political engagement (in terms of political participation and interpersonal talk) by comprehension
Finally, the third hypothesis tested if all the above-mentioned effects were stronger for participants that could choose which video they watched. Thus, to check if genre still had an effect on (a) comprehension, an ANOVA among the self-selected conditions was conducted. The results were not significant, F (2, 119) = 1.00, p = 0.369, indicating that there were no significant differences between the conditions. Thus, Hypothesis 3a is rejected, since there is no association between genre and comprehension among the self-selected conditions, as opposed to the assigned conditions that did yield significant differences.
Hypothesis 3b proposed that the effect of genre on political participation was mediated via comprehension and that this effect was stronger for participants that self-selected the stimuli. Thus, the separate relationships between genre, political participation and
2,36 3,34 3,62 2,2 4,19 4,78 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Low comprehension Average Comprehension High comprehension
Average intended political engagement
26
comprehension had to be assessed, namely (y) genre and comprehension, (x) comprehension and political participation and (z) genre on political participation. As shown above,
relationship (y) genre and comprehension was not significant. Furthermore, to test the
relationship (x) between comprehension and political participation, a linear regression among the self-selected conditions was conducted. The results show that there is a significant
correlation between comprehension and political participation, F (1, 120) = 15.54, p < 0.001. To test the final association (y) between genre and comprehension, another linear regression between the self-selected conditions was performed. The results proved not significant, F (2, 119) = 2.32, p = 0.103. Thus, indicating that the model could not be used to predict political participation based on genre. The non-significant relationship of genre on comprehension between the self-selected conditions is different than between the assigned conditions, where there was a significant correlation. Moreover, the significant relationship between
comprehension and political participation is in line with the results from the assigned condition, just as the non-significant relationship between genre and political participation. However, hypothesis 3b is rejected, since the mediating effect of comprehension was not found, let alone be stronger, in the self-selected conditions than in the assigned conditions.
Hypothesis 3c suggested that the indirect effect of comprehension on interpersonal talk was stronger for participants that self-selected the stimuli. To test the mediating relationship of comprehension, the separate relationships first have to be assessed. The associations of (y) genre and comprehension, (x) comprehension and political participation and (z) genre on political participation were all separately tested. As shown above, there was found no significant relationship (y) between genre and comprehension, F (2, 119) = 1.00, p = 0.369. To test the association of comprehension on interpersonal talk, a linear regression among the self-selected conditions proved significant, F (1, 120) = 18.63, p < 0.001. Thus, there is a correlation between comprehension and interpersonal talk among the participants
27
that could choose which video they watched, b* = 0.37, t = 4.32, p < 0.001. Each point up on the scale of comprehension (ranging from 1-7) increased interpersonal talk with 0.37.
Moreover, the model was weak, since it could only predict 13% of the variance in
interpersonal talk (R2 = 0.13). A final linear regression was then performed to test the effect of (z) genre on interpersonal talk among the self-selected conditions. The results proved
significant, indicating that the model can be used to predict intended interpersonal talk based on genre, F (2, 119) = 7.76, p = 0.001. Moreover, 12% of the variance in interpersonal talk could be explained by comprehension (R2 = 0.12). The correlation between the self-selected news condition and comprehension was negative and moderate, b* = -0.22, t = -2.44, p = 0.016. This indicates that participants in the news condition had an average decrease of 0.88 in their comprehension of the topic compared to participants in the satire condition. There was also a significant positive, but moderate correlation between the self-selected documentary condition and comprehension, b* = .21, t = 2.38, p = 0.019. This indicates that participants in the documentary condition had an average increase of 1.2 in their comprehension of the topic compared to participants in the satire condition. These findings lead to the rejection of
Hypothesis 3c. The mediating effect of comprehension was not found in the self-selected conditions, as opposed to the assigned conditions where there were significant results for the mediation.5
Conclusion and discussion
5
A side note must be that the self-selected conditions did not have the same sample size as the assigned conditions and the difference between the conditions was quite big. Especially the results from the documentary condition should be viewed with caution, since it only entailed 15 participants.
28
The current study has looked into the effects of viewing satire compared to traditional news and a documentary on perceived comprehension of the subject of the video. The results show that satire is able to increase comprehension more than traditional news or a documentary. This is in line with the hybrid model of online and memory-based processing of information (Kim & Garrett, 2011). Satire encourages the use of heuristic cues by giving context (Young, 2013) to form or update someone’s “running tally” about a subject, while traditional forms of news are processed through memory (Kim & Vishak, 2008). Information processing through memory is more effortful, because people have to focus on details instead of rely on heuristic cues. Thus, the results from this study confirm the effects of satire on citizen’s perceived competence about their ability to comprehend political issues. However, the results also indicate that the extent to which participants viewed the videos with intention of being informed or entertained did not significantly affect the association between genre and comprehension. This opposes prior research that found that citizens that viewed a political talk show with the idea of being entertained, felt more informed by the excerpt (Mattheiß et al., 2013). A possible explanation could be that satire evokes different effects than political talk shows, since they are distinctively different genres (Holbert, 2005a).
This fact that this study’s findings found significant results for comprehension, leads to a critical note on previous studies that have measured the effects of satire by measuring recall and recognition. Since satire is processed online and therefore relies more on heuristic cues than factual details, participants watching satire might still be able to have taken notice of the main message of the video, while that would not have been measured when being asked about recalling facts. However, this notion is only valid when we employ the “Monitorial citizen” (Graber, 2003; Zaller, 2003) perspective where citizens do not need extensive factual details about politics to fulfill their duties as citizens.
29
Furthermore, this study has looked into the ability of satire to increase interpersonal talk and political participation. No direct effect was found of genre on interpersonal talk and participation, but as expected a mediating relationship via comprehension did prove
significant. Studies have shown that satire is able to spark public debate by eliciting negative emotions (Lee & Jang, 2017; Lee & Kwak, 2014) and increase political participation
(Hoffman & Young, 2011). This study’s findings specify these relationships by emphasizing the citizens feeling of comprehension as a mediator. As Becker (2011) rightly states, “the first step to restoring political trust begins with bolstering an individual’s faith in his or her ability to comprehend and effectively participate in the complicated spectacle that is politics” (p. 247). Citizens that are able to comprehend an issue, or at least have the feeling that they do, are more prone to discuss political issues among their peers and participate in the political process, as has been shown by the significant association in this study. Satire proves to be especially effective in conveying that comprehension, thus indicating the genre should be taken more seriously as a source of news.
Finally, this study assessed whether the motivation to view a video could increase the aforementioned effects by letting participants choose the type of video that they would like to watch. This proved not significant, since the effects that were found in the assigned conditions in relation to comprehension, political participation and interpersonal talk did not yield
significant results among the self-selected conditions. Self-selection versus assigning
conditions allows a researcher to assess if the effects are true or only forced-treatment effects (Gaines & Kuklinski, 2011). Young (2013) argues that the key to understanding, processing and understanding satire is the ability to ‘get the joke’. Thus, one would expect that the effects of satire would differ between the assigned and self-selected conditions in terms of an
increase. If participants are not motivated to process the information, one would expect that satire would not have any effects on comprehension. Since this was not the case, the results of
30
the assigned conditions should be considered with caution. They might be mere treatment effects, since the effects could not be replicated among the self-selected conditions. A small side note however should be that the sample size of the documentary condition was too small for good comparison, so these findings should be used as tentative results. If the results could not be replicated due to the differing sample sizes, the results of the assigned conditions show great promise. Even participants are “forced” to watch satire, an increase in comprehension is evident.
The fact that the used stimuli were actual videos taken from the shows further
increases the external validity, but somewhat reduces the internal validity since the videos do differ in terms of imagery and use of correspondents. Another limitation is the use of self-selected versus assigned condition, because this made it difficult to create conditions that were equal in sample size. Thus, any results taken from the self-selected versus assigned conditions should be interpreted with caution until further research has shown similar effects. Furthermore, the scale used for comprehension did prove reliable, but was somewhat adapted and translated from Mathheiss et al. (2013) which used it in testing comprehension of a political talk show. Thus, to secure the validity and reliability, future studies should assess whether the scale can be used in different languages and for different genres. Finally, the use of actual footage from the news, a satire show and a documentary may have been a liability, since the chosen topic (TTIP and CETA) is quite controversial and therefore different outlets report on it in different ways. Although the news condition was supposed to be objective, it did use a tone of voice that was not critical and more or less supporting of the treaty, whereas the opposite was true for the other two conditions. This may have interfered with the
relationship that the conditions could have on interpersonal talk and participation. If all three conditions were critical of the treaty, this might have resulted in different findings.
31
In conclusion, this study has contributed to the knowledge about the effects of satire and its ability to aid its viewers in perceiving themselves as informed voters. This is not only helpful for the scientific field, but also shows that satire serves democracy by increasing citizens feeling of comprehension. The increase in comprehension was found to increase political engagement in terms of interpersonal talk and political participation. Thus, satire can indirectly influence political engagement. Moreover, on a methodological level, this study has shown how to improve the classical experimental design by adding self-selected conditions. This allows researchers to distinguish if the effects of the stimuli also hold true in a more natural setting where citizens can choose the media that they prefer, as they do in real life. Finally, due to the significant findings of comprehension not only as an effect of viewing satire, but as a mediator between satire and interpersonal talk and political participation, it specifies the conditions that go into political engagement. This can help both research, as democracy as a whole.
32
References
Abrams, M. H. (1999). A Glossary of Literary Terms, Seventh Edition (7th ed.). Orlando: Heinle & Heinle. Retrieved from
http://www.ohio.edu/people/hartleyg/ref../abrams_mh.pdf
Adoni, H., & Cohen, A. A. (1978). Television Economic News and the Social Construction of Economic Reality. Journal of Communication, 28(4), 61–70.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1978.tb01657.x
Baum, M. A. (2003). Soft News and Political Knowledge: Evidence of Absence or Absence of Evidence? Political Communication, 20(2), 173–190.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600390211181
Baum, M. A., & Jamison, A. S. (2006). The Oprah Effect: How Soft News Helps Inattentive Citizens Vote Consistently. The Journal of Politics, 68(4), 946–959.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00480.x
Baym, G. (2005). The Daily Show: Discursive Integration and the Reinvention of Political Journalism. Political Communication, 22(3), 259–276.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600591006492
Baym, G., & Jones, J. P. (2012). News Parody in Global Perspective: Politics, Power, and Resistance. Popular Communication, 10(1), 2–13.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2012.638566
Becker, A. B. (2011). Political Humor as Democratic Relief? The Effects of Exposure to Comedy and Straight News on Trust and Efficacy. Atlantic Journal of Communication,
19(5), 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2011.622191
Becker, A. B. (2013). What about those interviews? the impact of exposure to political comedy and cable news on factual recall and anticipated political expression.
International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25(3), 344–356.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edt014
Becker, A. B., & Goldberg, A. B. (2017). Entertainment, Intelligent, or Hybrid Programming? An Automated Content Analysis of 12 Years of Political Satire Interviews. Atlantic
Journal of Communication, 25(2), 127–137.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2017.1293670
Bennett, S. E. (1988). "Know-Nothings" Revisited: The Meaning of Political Ignorance Today. Social Science Quarterly, 69(2), 476–90. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ374283
33
Broadcasting, 27(4), 359–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158309386502
Blumler, J. G., & Coleman, S. (2015). Democracy and the Media-Revisited. Journal of the
European Institute for Communication and Culture, 22(2), 111–128.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2015.1041226
Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (2000). Demanding Choices: Opinion, Voting, and Direct
Democracy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Brewer, P. R., Young, D. G., & Morreale, M. (2013). The Impact of Real News about Fake News: Intertextual Processes and Political Satire. International Journal of Public
Opinion Research, 25(3), 323–343. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edt015
Burton, S. J. (2010). More than entertainment: The role of satirical news in dissent,
elaboration and democracy. Retrieved from The Pennsylvania State University (ETDA
11542).
Cao, X., & Brewer, P. R. (2008). Political Comedy Shows and Public Participation in Politics.
International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20(1), 90–99.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edm030
Cho, J., Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., McLeod, D. M., Scholl, R. M., & Gotlieb, M. R. (2009). Campaigns, Reflection, and Deliberation: Advancing an O-S-R-O-R Model of
Communication Effects. Communication Theory, 19(1), 66–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.01333.x
Combe, K. (2015). Stephen Colbert: Great satirist, or greatest satirist ever? The International
Communication Gazette, 77(3), 297–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048514568763
Comedy Central Press. (2017, March 2). The Daily Show with Trevor Noah Scores Record
Ratings in February and is the Only Daily Late Night Talk Show to Grow with Both Total Viewers and Adults 18-49. New York. Retrieved from
http://press.cc.com/press- release/2017/03/02/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-scores-record-ratings-in-february- and-is-the-only-daily-late-night-talk-show-to-grow-with-both-total-viewers-and-adults-18-49
Craig, S. C., Niemi, R. G., & Silver, G. E. (1990). Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items. Political Behavior, 12(3), 289–314.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992337
Cuddon, J. A. (1991). The Penguin Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory. London: Penguin Books. Retrieved from https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/177359/the-penguin-dictionary-of-literary-terms-and-literary-theory/
34
matters. New York, NY: Yale University Press. Retrieved from
https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/libro?codigo=12863
Delli Carpini, M. X., & Williams, B. A. (2001). Let Us Infotain You: Politics in the New Media Age. In W. L. Bennett & R. M. Entman (Eds.), Mediated Politics (pp. 160–181). Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers Druckman, J. N., Green, D. P., Kuklinski, J. H., & Lupia, A. (2011). Cambridge Handbook of
Experimental Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from
http://groups.polisci.northwestern.edu/researchpool/Handbook.pdf
Eveland, W. P., & Garrett, R. K. (2014). Communication Modalities and Political Knowledge.
The Oxford Handbook of Political Communication.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.013.018
Feldman, L., Stroud, N. J., Bimber, B., Feldman, L., Stroud, N. J., & Wojcieszak, M. (2013). Assessing Selective Exposure in Experiments : The Implications of Different
Methodological Choices. Communication Methods and Measures, 7(3), 172–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2013.813923
Feldman, L., & Young, D. G. (2008). Late-Night Comedy as a Gateway to Traditional News: An Analysis of Time Trends in News Attention Among Late-Night Comedy Viewers During the 2004 Presidential Primaries. Political Communication, 25(4), 401–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600802427013
Ferri, G. (2013). Satire, Propaganda, Play, Storytelling. Notes on Critical Interactive Digital Narratives. In G. Koenitz, H., Sezen, T.I., Ferri, G., Haahr, M., Sezen, D., Catak (Ed.),
Interactive Storytelling (pp. 174–179). Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-319-02756-2.pdf#page=186
Fowler, A., & Margolis, M. (2014). The political consequences of uninformed voters.
Electoral Studies, 34(1), 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2013.09.009
Fox, J. R., Koloen, G., & Sahin, V. (2007). No Joke: A Comparison of Substance in The
Daily Show with Jon Stewart and Broadcast Network Television Coverage of the 2004
Presidential Election Campaign. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 51(2), 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838150701304621
Gaines, B. J., & Kuklinski, J. H. (2011). Experimental Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects Related to Self-Selection. American Journal of Political Science,
55(3), 724–736. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1540-5907.2011.00518.x
35
Political Participation in the United Kingdom. Parliamentary Affairs Parliamentary
Affairs Advance Access Publication, 59(8), 299–313. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsl004
Glazier, R. A. (2014). Satire and Efficacy in the Political Science Classroom. Political
Science & Politics, 47(4), 867–872. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909651400119X
Graber, D. A. (2003). The Rocky Road to New Paradigms: Modernizing News and Citizenship Standards. Political Communication, 20(2), 145–148.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600390211163
Green, L., & Mehr, D. R. (1997). What alters physicians’ decisions to admit to the coronary care unit? The Journal of Family Practice, 45(3), 219–26. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9300001
Grofman, B., Owen, G., & Feld, S. L. (1983). Thirteen theorems in search of the truth. Theory
and Decision, 15(3), 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00125672
Hardy, B. W., Gottfried, J. A., Winneg, K. M., & Jamieson, K. H. (2014). Stephen Colbert’s civics lesson: How Colbert Super PAC taught viewers about campaign finance. Mass
Communication and Society, 17(3), 329–353.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2014.891138
Hendriks Vettehen, P. G. J., Hagemann, C. P. M., & Van Snippenburg, L. B. (2004). Political Knowledge and Media Use in the Netherlands. European Sociological Review European
Sociological Review, 20(5), 415–424. https://doi.org/10.1093
Hmielowski, J. D., Holbert, R. L., & Lee, J. (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.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2010.542579
Hoffman, L. H., & Young, D. G. (2011). Satire, Punch Lines, and the Nightly News:
Untangling Media Effects on Political Participation. Communication Research Reports,
28(2), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2011.565278
Holbert, R. L. (2005a). A Typology for the Study of Entertainment Television and Politics.
American Behavioral Scientist, 49(3), 436–453.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764205279419
Holbert, R. L. (2005b). Back to Basics: Revisiting, Resolving, and Expanding Some of the Fundamental Issues of Political Communication Research. Political Communication,
22(4), 511–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600500311436
Holbert, R. L. (2013). Developing a Normative Approach to Political Satire: An Empirical Perspective. International Journal of Communication, 7(1), 305–323. Retrieved from
36
http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1933/855
Hollander, B. A. (2005). Late-Night Learning: Do Entertainment Programs Increase Political Campaign Knowledge for Young Viewers? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic
Media, 49(4), 402–415. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4904_3
Hooghe, M., & Marien, S. (2013). A comparative analysis of the relation between political trust and forms of political participation in Europe. European Societies, 15(1), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2012.692807
Ikeda, K., & Huckfeldt, R. (2001). Political Communication and Disagreement Among Citizens in Japan and the United States. Political Behavior, 23(1), 23–51.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017617630744
Jerit, J., Barabas, J., & Clifford, S. (2013). Comparing Contemporaneous Laboratory and Field Experiments on Media Effects. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(1), 256–282. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nft005
Jones, J. P. (2005). Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Jong, J. de. (2012, June 21). Feiten met een snufje fantasie: educatieve animatiesequenties in
documentaires. Universiteit Utrecht. Retrieved from
https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/243618
Katsikopoulos, K. V. (2010). Psychological Heuristics for Making Inferences: Definition, Performance, and the Emerging Theory and Practice. Decision Analysis, 8(1), 10–29. https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.1100.0191
Kim, J., Wyatt, R. O., & Katz, E. (1999). News, Talk, Opinion, Participation: The Part Played by Conversation in Deliberative Democracy. Political Communication, 16(4), 361–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846099198541
Kim, Y. M., & Garrett, K. (2011). On-line and Memory-based: Revisiting the Relationship Between Candidate Evaluation Processing Models. Political Behaviour, 34(2), 345–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-011-9158-9
Kim, Y. M., & Vishak, J. (2008). Just laugh! You don’t need to remember: The effects of entertainment media on political information acquisition and information processing in political judgment. Journal of Communication, 58(2), 338–360.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00388.x
King, A. J., Jensen, J. D., Carcioppolo, N., Krakow, M. M., & Sun, Y. (2015). Comparing Theories of Media Learning: Cognitive Mediation, Information Utility, and Knowledge Acquisition from Cancer News. Mass Communication and Society, 18(6), 753–775.
