Date of Award

Spring 8-1-2008

Document Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Arts (MA)

Department

Communication

First Advisor

Jay Clarkson

Second Advisor

Darlene Hantzis

Third Advisor

Christopher Berchild

Abstract

Out of context, many of the unenlightened comments that come from characters on shows like The Simpsons, Family Guy or South Park seem offensive and prejudiced. However, many assume the audience rejects the more problematic elements of these characters' actions because the audience interprets the texts satirically. Little research has been conducted, however, to determine if these shows position readers to negotiate a progressive meaning from the story. I worry that those who passively view the texts may produce meanings that reinforce stereotypes and prejudices. Furthermore, proponents of media literacy have advocated the use of satirical texts without the benefit of research supporting their effectiveness. Using two episodes of the show Family Guy, I conduct a close textual analysis of satire. Based on the results of this study, I argue that problems can arise when the producers fail to construct a text to constrain readers to understand a preferred message. It cannot be assumed that satire serves to produce a progressive reading. If the non-satiric reading is problematic, the use of satire may emphasize that message. Although these problems do exist, this study argues that in ideal situations satire does effectively alter a literal interpretation of a text.

Download

Share

COinS