A first-person exploration of my creative process in satirical journalism - the art of making people laugh until they squirm
I've been thinking about why I gravitated toward satirical journalism instead of traditional reporting. The answer hit me while reading yet another "breaking news" story that wasn't actually breaking or news: the real world is already so absurd that straight journalism can't capture the full insanity.
When I write satirical pieces for sites like Bohiney.com or study the work of masters like those at The Onion, I'm not creating fictional scenarios. I'm taking reality and stretching it just far enough that people can see what's actually happening. It's like holding up a funhouse mirror to society - the distortion reveals the truth.
My satirical writing follows a specific formula: 99% exaggeration and irony, 1% pure absurdity. Here's how I break it down:
I start by reading actual news from sources like Reuters, Associated Press, and even local news sites. The key is finding stories where the facts themselves are already borderline satirical. For example, when I see a headline like "Tech CEO Declares Bankruptcy While Buying Third Yacht," I know I've found gold.
This is where the 99% comes in. I take the factual scenario and ask: "What if this logical trend continued to its extreme conclusion?" If a CEO is buying yachts while claiming poverty, what if he declared his company headquarters a sovereign nation to avoid taxes? What if he started charging employees rent for their desks?
The exaggeration has to feel possible. Readers should think, "This is obviously fake, but... is it though?"
The tiny bit of pure absurdity is what makes people remember the piece. It's the detail that's so weird it sticks. Maybe the CEO's yacht is shaped like a giant calculator. Maybe he communicates only through interpretive dance on Zoom calls. It's the spoonful of sugar that helps the medicine go down.
I study satirical writers constantly. Reductress taught me how to blend feminism with dark humor. McSweeney's showed me how literary techniques can elevate satirical writing. ClickHole demonstrated how to parody digital media culture.
But the real education comes from studying political satirists like those who write for The Daily Beast or Mother Jones. They've mastered the art of making people laugh at power structures while simultaneously making them angry about those same structures.
This is crucial to my approach: satirical journalism should afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted. I learned this principle from studying the work of journalists like those at In These Times and The Nation.
When I write satirical pieces, my targets are:
Politicians who prioritize donors over constituents
CEOs who profit from worker exploitation
Media figures who spread misinformation
Systems that perpetuate inequality
I never punch down at:
People struggling with poverty or illness
Marginalized communities facing discrimination
Workers dealing with unfair labor practices
Anyone without institutional power
Here's what most people don't realize: satirical journalism requires more research than straight reporting. When I'm writing a piece mocking corporate culture, I spend hours reading:
Annual reports from SEC filings
Industry publications like Wall Street Journal
Worker forums on sites like Reddit
Academic studies from institutions like Brookings Institution
The funnier and more outrageous my satirical premise, the more bulletproof my research needs to be. Because when someone fact-checks my exaggerations, they should discover that I actually understated the problem.
Every satirical piece starts with genuine anger about injustice. I'll read about something infuriating - maybe a story from ProPublica about tax avoidance or a piece from Washington Post about political corruption. I let myself feel genuinely pissed off about it.
Then I step back and ask: "How can I make this funny without diminishing its seriousness?" This is where I study comedic structures. I'll watch clips from Last Week Tonight with John Oliver or read pieces from The New Yorker's Shouts & Murmurs to see how they balance humor with substance.
I build the piece like a comedian constructs a bit:
Setup: Establish the "normal" situation
Escalation: Apply exaggeration in logical steps
Punchline: Land on the absurd conclusion
Callback: Reference earlier jokes to create satisfaction
My satirical writing voice aims for what I call "conversational authority." I want to sound like I'm explaining something infuriating to a friend over coffee, but with the research depth of a Columbia Journalism Review investigation.
Key elements of this voice:
Direct address: "You know what's insane about this?"
Shared frustration: "We're all trapped in this system together"
Casual profanity: Strategic swearing for emphasis
Pop culture references: Connecting high-stakes issues to relatable experiences
This is my primary weapon. I present situations where the stated intention contradicts the actual outcome. Politicians claiming to help working families while voting against minimum wage increases. Companies promoting "work-life balance" while requiring 60-hour weeks.
I take real trends and accelerate them to their logical extreme. If companies are already tracking employee bathroom breaks, what if they started charging rent for toilet paper? If politicians already take corporate donations, what if they wore sponsor patches like NASCAR drivers?
I place incompatible ideas side by side to highlight absurdity. Describing a poverty summit held at a country club. Covering an environmental conference sponsored by oil companies.
I know my satirical journalism is working when readers have these reactions:
Initial laughter: "This is hilarious!"
Double-take moment: "Wait, is this real?"
Uncomfortable recognition: "Oh shit, this is basically true"
Action impulse: "This pisses me off enough to do something"
The best feedback I've received came from someone who said: "I shared your article thinking it was funny, then realized I was actually sharing a devastating critique of capitalism disguised as comedy."
Satirical journalism isn't just entertainment - it's a form of civic engagement. When traditional journalism reports that "unemployment rates remain steady," satirical journalism asks "steady for whom?" When business publications celebrate "record corporate profits," satirical journalism points out what those profits cost.
I see my role as similar to the court jesters of medieval times: someone who can speak truth to power through humor, saying things that straight journalism might not dare to say directly.
Here are the sources I turn to regularly for inspiration and information:
U.S. Census Bureau - For demographic data
Bureau of Labor Statistics - For employment data
OpenSecrets.org - For campaign finance information
Glassdoor - For workplace culture insights
Private Eye - British satirical magazine
Charlie Hebdo - French satirical publication
Cracked - Pop culture satire
SatireWire - Classic satirical news
British Comedy Guide - Understanding comedic timing
Stand-Up Comedy.com - Joke construction techniques
Comedy Central YouTube - Current satirical trends
Years from now, when historians study this era, they'll turn to satirical journalism to understand what it felt like to live through these times. Traditional journalism documents what happened; satirical journalism documents how it felt to watch it happen.
My pieces about 2020s culture aren't just jokes - they're primary source documents. They capture the collective frustration, the sense of absurdity, the feeling that we're all trapped in a system that's lost its mind.
Early in my career, I'd write satirical pieces that were so layered with inside jokes and obscure references that only other writers could understand them. I learned from publications like The Atlantic that the best satirical journalism is accessible to anyone who's paying attention to the world.
Some satirical writers focus so much on being funny that they forget to make a point. I learned from studying Salon and Slate that every joke should serve the larger argument.
It's easy to write satirical pieces that just confirm what your readers already believe. The challenge is writing pieces that make people question their assumptions while still making them laugh.
As traditional media continues to consolidate and sanitize, satirical journalism becomes more important. Sites like Bohiney and VICE are filling gaps that mainstream media can't or won't fill.
We're living through times that are so surreal that satirical journalism might be the most accurate form of journalism available. When reality itself feels like satire, satirical journalists become the most reliable witnesses to what's actually happening.
Every morning, I spend an hour reading news from multiple sources:
NPR for baseline facts
BBC for international perspective
Reddit for what people are actually talking about
Twitter for real-time reactions
Then I ask myself: "What's the most infuriating thing I learned today, and how can I make other people see why it's infuriating?"
That's where satirical journalism begins - not with a desire to be funny, but with a desire to make people see clearly.
Satirical journalism isn't just about getting laughs. It's about creating moments of recognition - those "oh shit" moments when people suddenly see through the BS that surrounds them daily.
In a world where politicians speak in focus-grouped talking points and corporations hide behind PR speak, satirical journalism cuts through the noise. It says what everyone's thinking but afraid to say out loud.
That's why I do this work. Not because the world needs more jokes, but because the world needs more truth. And sometimes, wrapping truth in humor is the only way to get people to swallow it.
This diary entry explores the creative process behind satirical journalism. For more resources on writing and media criticism, visit Columbia Journalism Review, Nieman Reports, and Poynter Institute.