How Satire Changes Our Opinion of Someone

Satire—the coupling of criticism and humor—has been a popular means to add a seemingly lighthearted touch to somewhat sensitive topics. 


For example, Saturday Night Live parodied quarterback Tom Brady during the NFL “Deflategate” investigation (which tried to find out if New England Patriots intentionally deflated footballs for the quarterback’s benefit). In one scathing sequence that portrays Brady as both airheaded and guilty, a reporter asks if he had anything to do with deflating the footballs. Brady replies, “Meeeee? Ab-so-lute-ly not! Honestly, I wasn’t even aware that footballs could be inflated or deflated.”

Many people find these efforts entertaining because they critique a target’s actions in a fun way that makes an audience smile or even laugh aloud. It’s also possible that “knocking down” a figure with wealth and power makes the viewer feel better about their own situation.

But how does the human mind respond to the person at the center of the satire? How are people’s perceptions of Justin Bieber, Tom Cruise, Taylor Swift, or Tiger Woods affected by watching or reading parodies of them? Given that satire contains criticism, it’s understandable that it could negatively affect a person’s reputation.

However, humor might also soften that critique or lighten the seriousness of a negative incident. The alternative possibility is that satire, despite involving humor, is more harmful than criticism alone because it may dehumanize its target through exaggeration.

So, which is it? Does satire soften the blow or sharpen the blade of criticism? Through an archival study and a series of experiments, we discovered that satire can be harmful, suggesting that it should be used with care.

How much harm can satire cause?

First, we looked at the spontaneous language people used in response to video clips either criticizing or parodying a situation. Across 40 videos posted to YouTube that involved different issues and different targets, people were more likely to use more dehumanizing language when commenting on satirical videos than criticism videos, we found.

For example, in response to a video critical of Jeff Bezos, one user talked about Bezos as “the second wealthiest man in the world,” whereas in response to a satirical video of Bezos, a user wrote, “Bezos is a bit more like Satan, than Mr. Rogers.” Whereas the first comment recognizes Bezos’s standing as a person, the second portrays him as more of a caricature.

Does this dehumanizing language matter for a person’s reputation? It seems so. As a second part of this study, we had over a thousand participants watch one of the YouTube videos. We then had these participants rate the reputation of the person they watched. People rated the reputation of the target of a satirical video more negatively than the target of a critical YouTube clip.

In a series of additional experiments, we found further evidence that satire can make its targets seem less human, which in turn makes it easier to treat them as lacking complex thoughts and emotions.

For example, in one experiment, we randomly assigned participants to view a meme of soccer manager José Mourinho that was either a critical or satirical statement about his coaching tenure. We then asked participants to rate his reputation and complete a measure of dehumanization regarding Mourinho. Although most of our U.S. sample were unfamiliar with Mourinho prior to this experiment, when compared to those who viewed the critical meme, those who viewed the satirical meme rated his reputation as lower and engaged in greater dehumanization.

In short, satire may seem like fun and games on the surface, but it can harm a person’s reputation above and beyond the event for which they are being criticized.

Making targets all-too-human

Concerns about the negative effects of satire made us wonder if a way to dull its sharpness exists. Given that satire can make people seem less than human, one possibility is to intervene in a manner that reminds people of the mocked person’s humanity. They too have family who love them, friends who care about them, and their own insecurities.

Building on this idea, we conducted an experiment where we exposed participants to a satirical video of former Juul CEO Kevin Burns. We selected videos that corresponded to either satire or direct criticism of Burns.

We did one thing differently from our prior experiments. For some participants, before they evaluated the reputation of Burns, we asked them to spend a moment imagining a positive and relaxed interaction with Burns: going for a walk with him, having a conversation over coffee, and so forth. The idea behind this prompt was that thinking about a calm and pleasant interaction with the target of satire could humanize this person, dulling satire’s dehumanizing edge.

We found that spending a moment imagining a positive interaction was sufficient to mitigate the negative effects of satire. People didn’t entirely forgive Kevin Burns—many still disagreed with his electronic cigarette company’s marketing approach—but satire no longer had a more negative sting than criticism.

This research offers a number of stepping stones to new ideas. For example, given the harmful effects of satire on reputations, what other means exist to mitigate the effects? Relatedly, might certain people or contexts minimize the deleterious effects of satire on a person’s reputation? For example, if an audience disagrees with the content of the satire—say, for instance, satire directed at a member of one’s own political party, favorite musician, or athlete—do they resist its negative consequences? These represent just some of the opportunities for future work in this area.

We also hope that our findings cause people to be more sensitive to their own reactions to satire. It’s easy for us to go along with the laughs, but we might want to remind ourselves that they may come at the cost of punishing (even if inadvertently) someone beyond their own actions. We do not expect, or suggest, that satire go away or for people to stop consuming such media. However, even taking a moment to consider the human being at the center of the joke might go a long way to giving them a more thoughtful evaluation.

Ultimately, by being more understanding and reflective about such a phenomenon, we can learn more about how both ourselves and others are quickly judged in our social world.