Posted on 09/29/2014 3:38:42 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
No, FR is not trying to quash satire. However, it should be clearly labeled as such in the title. Some people seem to think it's great trickling our readers into falling for satire. It's not. A lot of people come to FR and scan the headlines clicking on articles of interest. If they're not familiar with the author or source, they may be misled and may even pass it on to others. No thanks.
If you post satire, please label it as "satire' in the title.
Thanks
These days it’s mighty hard to tell.
Having fallen for some satire in exactly this manner over the years, I appreciate the admonition.
Would it be possible to open a forum labeled “Satire” just like the “General Chat” and “Religion” forums? We might even want a separate forum for vanities.
Thank you. I have long thought that people that post satire should do that. Not everyone knows it isn’t satire, as you said.
Agreed.
Thanks, that needed to be said.
Thank you, sir.
(John’s been a naughty boy! He’s always got me wrong-footed...)
That Eric Holder to JPMorgan Chase article was a bit much, eh? People were sure ready to believe it....
These days it’s mighty hard to tell.
YES! NAILED IT< did youhear the one about Obama doing (insert unamerican activity here).... Oh wait that’s not satire....
I’m certain FR doesn’t want to be known as a site which posts false information, otherwise known as a liberal web site.
Thanks Jim,
I got tired of the satire stuff a long time ago.
Satire today, Policy tomorrow.
LOL! - someone beat me to the keyword addition...
You got that right. The real is so absurd that it’s difficult to distinguish from satire.
Q: How many Obama jokes are there?
A:Only two. All the rest are true.
Sorry, Jim, I disagree.
The power of satire is in its ability to string the reader along until the absurdity of the premise is exposed. Good quality satire, such as that written by John Semens, often does just that.
To be effective satire should never be obvious. Labeling it as such caters to the superficial, uninformed reader. We are better than that and should have a higher standard of expectation for our readers.
I don’t think John Semmens has ever been trying to “catch” anyone. In fact he has scolded me for thinking I was “caught” since that was not his intention.
It is just that so many real articles read like satire where it is hard to see where one starts and the other leaves off. It is amazing how many articles, particularly in the last 6 years, have prompted my question “satire?” with the sad reply “no.”
My humble suggestion: A clear “(satire)” in the title should alleviate any idea that “gotcha” is the point of the satire (and I repeat, John has never been about that).
And pulling satire articles with “No Thanks” is not in the spirit of raucous discussion you have established so well. Standard moderation is the keystone to free expression (within the FR rules).
Just my 2 cents...
Not hard to figure out the satire if you use the damn /s, ok?
Cutesy - poo stuff needs to be done well....or not done at all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.