Yo mama’s so fat, she directly contributes to a robust economy.

I stole that title from the headline of this article featured on 23/6.com. It is a website primarily for satirical humor and is affiliated somehow with Huffington Post. With headlines like “Dennis Kucinich Wants to Hook Up With Ron Paul” and “These People Need to Have Their YouTubes Tied,” the website follows the number one rule of headline writing; grab the reader’s attention. Now, if you saw either of these headlines on the front page of your Arizona Republic this morning, I’d be willing to bet the delicious chocolate soymilk I’m currently drinking that you’d read the story with the funny headline first. And why not? Humans like to laugh; it’s why six comedies can be found among the twelve highest grossing movies from last Friday, it’s why shows like Family Guy, The Office, South Park, The Simpsons, Saturday Night Live and Scrubs (!) have found such astounding popularity among Americans and, unfortunately, it’s assured that “Laughter is the best medicine” will be the most clichéd and annoying proverb or all time.

This is where my question/topic for today comes in, at what point does the use of humor to make tedious stories more reader friendly interfere with basic reporting?

I would have to guess that the illustrations of Thomas Nast are probably one of the earliest examples of using humor to make politics interesting. I’m not sure I believe this, but according to Wikipedia, Nast created the Republican Elephant, the Democratic Donkey and the commonly accepted version of Santa Claus. He was a pretty intense guy, and his works opened the door to other editorial cartoonists. For the most part, humor in politics has historically been reserved for minority parties (the party not in power, not a party full of Asians or Hispanics). In present-day journalism, Steve Benson draws political cartoons for the Arizona Republic; he pokes fun at the Bush Administration, Hilary Clinton and pop culture in general (his archives).

Political cartoons can be likened with cheating in school. There are two kinds of students who try to cheat in school. There are smart people with no conscience who plan everything and are never caught, and there are the less-conniving, naïve bunch blatantly flipping through a test copy during the test and are caught every time. Political cartoons are funny if you’ve got the background knowledge to help explain exactly what the artist is trying to convey. But if you don’t keep up on the news, a bias-laden cartoon is only going to sway your opinions without your knowledge. Or you just won’t get it. I don’t get a lot of cartoons I see; but if nothing else, it’s funny to see how different artists portray George Bush. He is a characterature-friendly guy I suppose.

Because most people my age aren’t as interested in current events as their counterparts from the prior generation were, they look for humor to make the news more interesting. Cue The Daily Show/Colbert Report, but I’ve talked about them enough. However, as teenagers watch or read humorous commentary on an event, they are only getting the warped version of what happened. It’s a vicious cycle; the very reason thing that makes the news exciting creates a false image of what’s going on.

This doesn’t say much for my profession. Or mankind. People have decided that the factual truth is not exciting enough, so they should make it funny.

More on this later today…

Some political cartoons I found funny.

CNN/YouTube Debates.

Rudy hides the expenses.

Bush bashing.