Laugh? I Thought I'd Never Start

It's been a while since I've taken a crack at other online 'satire' sites, largely because I've been lucky enough to have avoided any really shit sites for quite some time. However, it has been my recent misfortune to stumble across the site of a self-styled 'humourist' whose output - whilst prolific - is truly woeful in terms of quality. Now, I don't want to start one of those pathetic 'flame wars' which seem so beloved of some denizens of the web, so I'm not going to name the miscreant or his (I assume it's a he) site. Nevertheless, I will outline exactly why I think that his stuff is utter bollocks. Most fundamentally - it isn't funny. Simply stringing together a lot of expletives, interspersing it with 'characters' with 'hilarious' (and in the case of ethnic characters, often racist) names, spouting vitriol on some vaguely topical theme, isn't really satire. The thing I find most uncomfortable about these 'stories' (if, indeed, we can grace these 'narratives', which generally seem to consist of a list of loosely-linked 'gags', with such a term), is the racism (black people are regularly referred to as 'very sun-tanned', for instance) and knee-jerk reactionary attitudes which seem (to me) to pervade them. All of the 'stories' seem designed to confirm the narrow-minded prejudices of their audiences. Perhaps I've misunderstood it all these years, but surely the point of satire is to challenge established norms and conventional wisdom, thereby inviting readers to reassess their own views and prejudices? It certainly shouldn't be reinforcing the status quo.

Mind you, maybe I shouldn't be so hard on someone who is clearly a rank amateur. Supposed professionals are equally capable of writing utter crap and claiming that it is satire. Some of the weakest so-called 'satire' I've read over the past twelve months has come from a site which proudly proclaims that its authors are newspaper journalists, as if this somehow qualifies them to write satire. Sadly, they've taken the lazy route and, having seen a couple of episodes of The Thick of It, think that all you have to do to write cutting-edge satire is throw together some topical references, mention the names of a couple of politicians, smother it in expletives and adopt a tone of weary cynicism. Sadly,what they've forgotten to include is any wit, originality or imagination. Unfortunately, this site seems to get a fair amount of traffic and coverage in the wider media. It is a favourite for being referenced by pseudo-celebrity bloggers. I suppose that I shouldn't be surprised as it is precisely the sort of 'satire' site which appeals to the mainstream - slick and non-threatening. Like the amateur I lambasted earlier, its stories never actually challenge the conventional world-view held by the majority of mainstream readers. They like it because, whilst the swearing makes it seem 'edgy', there's nothing in it which will make them feel uncomfortable. Best of all, from their point of view, it has 'credibility' because it is written by 'professionals', who surely must know what they're talking about, mustn't they? Well, not really. But if you like your satire bland and toothless, then it is definitely for you. Personally, I think I prefer to stick to producing my 'underground' satire site - we may be offensive, but we're never bland!