As the boundaries between information, entertainment, and politics blur, humor takes center stage. Humor seems to fill the void left by a political discourse with diminishing credibility. What does this shift in the state of democratic debate reveal? What does democracy gain (and lose) when humor not only exposes but also changes reality?
“These words are from Noam Shuster-Eliassi, an Israeli comedian who entered humor like others enter politics, after leaving demonstrations and activism at the United Nations for singing and engaged stand-up comedy. Does humor allow for the renewal of politics?”
The relationship between the two spheres remains turbulent. This is evidenced by Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez’s recent complaint against comedian Pierre-Emmanuel Barré (for comparing the police to Daech in a column on police violence) and comedian Guillaume Meurice’s new lawsuit at the industrial tribunal, contesting the early termination of his contract by his former employer France Inter following a joke about Benjamin Netanyahu.
These controversies are not isolated: one can also mention the one about the clothing appearance in a sketch on France 5 by comedian Merwane Benlazar (accused of Islamism due to his look) or the controversies surrounding comedian Sophia Aram, accused of “racism” by journalists from Le Parisien following a column where she mocked members of the flotilla heading towards Gaza, MEP Rima Hassan (nicknamed “Lady Gaza”) and activist Greta Thunberg (renamed “Miss Krisprolls”).
While these controversies are not new, as linguist Nelly Quemener points out, they seem to be taking on an unprecedented dimension: Guillaume Meurice’s joke, discussed in the National Assembly and Senate, provoked more reactions than some serious positions taken by political leaders.
The political and humorous spheres continue to overlap. Media discourse devices, increasingly playing on “infotainment” (the intersection of information and entertainment), often merge journalistic, political, and humorous speeches. It is common to see politicians, experts, artists, and comedians gathered around a set, blurring the boundaries of which discourse regime a particular intervention belongs to.
One prime example is Yann Barthès’ show “Quotidien,” presented as “a major news session that combines humor and irreverence.” Social media contributes to this genre blend by bouncing off serious information with jokes. These jokes can go viral and be picked up by traditional media outlets.
Political discourse and political humor intertwine to the point where it is not always easy to distinguish them. The devaluation of political speech, often perceived as empty and stereotypical, can lead to the projection of frustrated expectations onto other types of discourse, such as scientific or journalistic speech, along with humorous discourse.
The critical power of humor is undeniable. Political irony can help question and reconsider dominant political discourses by creating distance. However, political discourse should not be reduced to humor or irony. The balance between humor and political seriousness is sought after by many shows that alternate between cathartic humor and listening to analyses or proposals from non-comedian guests.
In conclusion, humor can be a step, a means. But if it becomes an end, it risks turning into ludism, where all discourse becomes a game, or cynicism, which points out the shortcomings of every discourse. Ridicule can become a temptation that reduces the world to a set of absurd discourses, leading to disengagement. Instead of helping us face politics, it can lead to desertion.
