This piece is the final form of an evolving, original text. The original text has been put through a series of experiments, exploring different genres to discuss the same topic. Throughout this process, the dominating factor that I was most inspired to refocus was the audience. And in this experiment, I think I was most effective in addressing who I had intended. My struggle with this process arose from having to continue down the beaten path in discussing this topic. My origin’s piece’s topic, paid leave, usually beckons a certain vernacular and setting. It’s the type of issue that, unless you’re readily involved in the discussion, the common person would readily dismiss. And this is in part due to the execution of this discussion - the how, the delivery.
Whether out of a willful ignorance of the audience or the authors’ inability to compel others, many folks who talk or write about this topic are only reaching so many people. Some think the issue doesn’t affect them, or that the legislative lexicon is a total snoozefest. From my experience and research, those left out could be fairly generalized as conservative, male or both. And so, in an effort to address this audience, I began to study The Colbert Report.
The Colbert Report is a satirical news program, hosted by a liberal playing the character of a conservative news pundit, Stephen Colbert. The host uses this character to satirize traditional conservative news sources, lampooning the “right” in offering outlandish takes on politics and pop culture. Though this humor can be polarizing, it’s shown to be effective in presenting a more palatable form of news. Despite The Colbert Report being likened to the “liberal elitist” comedy of Hollywood, it’s been able to touch base with the conservative audience that it’s seemingly jabbing at.
Some say that we are in a post-funny era of satire. In which, authors aren’t as conscientious of the consequences of their humor and focus more on the audience’s reactions, rather than their content. The Colbert Report walked this narrow line with care - crass and witty, but no hack. And so, I chose to replicate their style to do the same, to speak to the show’s audience, which (though it may seem surprising) actually included a fair number of conservatives.
The show uses humor to present Colbert’s take on politics and pop culture by highlighting the most extreme conservative sentiments as a hyperbolic representation of the common, conservative American, encouraging the less conservative to realize their moderateness. So, while liberals scoff and chuckle at the satire and conservatives are brought into the conversation, the audience is encouraged to have a more informed discussion and understanding.
That’s all why and how the formula for the show works. It’s satire that’s meant to inform and engage. This specific segment, “The Word,” works well in discussing a sole topic. In the show, these segments run full circle. The segment’s structure follows a fairly strict template. It introduces “the word” and proceeds to discuss the topic via monologue. The monologue is compartmentalized, offering one main point or line that is commented on/annotated by text boxes at Colbert’s screen right - statement, then response. The texts present the liberal perspective that is meant to represent the true message of the show. The segment is a concise demonstration of a juxtaposition of these different voices, liberal and conservative, within the satire. It’s effective in getting the same laughs that followers look for in the show while offering direct clarification regarding their intended message. Not to say that it’s meant to be taken too explicitly, but “The Word” does remove the mask a little to say what the show really means. That’s why I chose “The Word” - to replicate the same humor, audience, and transparent satire.
Though to put it plainly, this text pales in comparison to its inspiration in one apparent thing - being funny. It’s a really humbling experience to try to replicate an award-winning show’s script. Suprise! The show’s writers are older, more talented, actual professionals who are able to make references or jokes that way better suit the intended topic and audience. They’re able to be funny and make a point. And I got lost in this conflict of interest. I came in with the experience that being funny and making a point have their separate moments. To fix this, I’ve got a few ideas. I could freshen up on the history, pop culture and politics that someone Colbert’s age would be familiar with. That’d let me hone in on his voice and the voice of the show. Or, I could wait twenty years and see how I stack up against the competition.