Satire Project: 12/8/2021

English, Ms. Bice

Completed by: Brain Spradley, Cooper Anderson, Mark Negus

Project: Write a 750 word satire article that targets a deep and relevant topic. Include secondary
“targets” and incorporate multiple types of satire in the project.

I chose to showcase this piece because it was very unique and thus more revealing compared
to most other English assignments I’ve ever done. As mentioned in my “About” page, I love
comedy and film and try to incorporate what I observe in the best of those mediums into my
writing, but this is the first time I’ve really tried to put that much comedy in a piece. Additionally,
working with two other like minded peers helped me to bounce off ideas better and test my
ideas. Because it was three of us, every new idea for the project had to be approved (found
funny) by all three of us, so it pushed me to think outside the box for ideas that would align with
my peer’s visions. As a result, I am very proud of what we made with this piece, and I think the
uniqueness of the assignment showcases a different side of my English understanding.

This assignment taught me satire. It is easy to look at a slide with definitions or gloss over an
Onion article, but it takes much more to actually create effective and meaningful satire. Our
article achieved this by having a clear aim and breaking down the issue to a fundamental level
in order to create effective satire, which is always rooted in some sort of truth. In our case, we
used many satirical elements like hyperbole, invection, parody, and wit to get at the (truth
centered) idea that Facebook is trying to dodge serious criticism by simply changing its name. In
the title we used wit (“safe space for hate speech…”) to mock (because the oxymoron is
humorous) how Facebook somewhat has become a cesspool of hate speech. In the article
itself, we parodied the lackluster statements Facebook released when addressing the
allegations by comparing it to some current slang and internet jokes which demonstrate a laid
back and apathetic attitude towards the situation. Besides a few more satirical elements like
those, I learned how big of a difference the little things can be with regards to how effective the
message is. Making acronyms silly (URMOM, ZUCK), adding fake ads, and adding an editor's
note with an accompanying article give the piece much more realism, and fake credibility, which
contributes to making the message very clear. On a scale of 1-4 in terms of the satirical
effectiveness, I would rate the article a 4. We had clear targets (plural) which were rooted in the
truth of the situation, and used a range of techniques to get our message across. Performance
wise, I would give myself a 4 as well. I obviously didn’t create the project on my own, but
because I had two classmates to test ideas with, I didn’t settle until the ideas we had were
agreed upon to be good. I was able to research and identify clear targets to satirize, make sure
elements of the article were clear and satirical when my peers were drafting, but most of all I
was able to learn from my peers' perspectives. Some elements of the piece I initially disagreed
with, but ultimately I was open enough to learn from them and use to develop my own satirical
style.

In the future I might have changed the way I approached the storytelling structure of the piece.
While we were able to identify good targets and effectively sterilize them, there is a clear drop
off in quality towards the end of the article with some loosely connected jokes. Going forward I
can learn from the storytelling aspects of the article to make more cohesive and interesting
stories, which best capture whatever message I have.