Abstract
This study explores the semiotics of humor and political disaffection in the online feedback discourse evaluating party performance in a post-election era in Nigeria’s democratic practice. It examines the incongruities in multimodal digital humor as semiotic resources of subversive play to criticize a political party for its perceived weak program-to-policy linkage. Data for the study comprise some purposively sampled political internet memes which were deployed to express political disaffection at the party All Progressives Congress (APC) in the first half (2016–2017) of its four-year (2015–2019) tenure. The study applies Algirdas J. Greimas’ semiotic theory by drawing upon the notions of narrativity and modalities to read the selected political internet memes, which run profound social commentaries on the anxieties and frustrations of the ordinary citizens in a failing economy, thereby underpinning the thrust of the theory, which lies not only in the signification of texts but also in the signification of the living experience. The study reveals the power of signs evidenced in the deployment of objects, behaviors, practices, images, and symbols within the socio-economic sub/culture of the production of the internet memes to configure backlashes of democratic deficits relating largely to worsening poverty, hunger, struggle for survival, and political cynicism in an emerging democracy.
Acknowledgements
I would like to express appreciation to Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Christian Mair for being an amazing academic host while I was carrying out this research as Visiting Humboldt Scholar at the Department of English, University of Freiburg, Germany.
Research funding: This study was funded by the Alexander von Humboldt (AvH) Foundation, Germany.
References
Abutu, Odoh P. & Ku Hasnita Ku Samsu. 2017. 2015 presidential election in Nigeria: Reasons why incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan lost to Buhari. IOSR Journal of Business and Management 19(5). 132–141.10.9790/487X-190506132141Search in Google Scholar
Badir, Sémir. 2017. Semiotics and discourse studies. Gragoatá, Niterói 22(44). 1049–1065. https://doi.org/10.22409/gragoata.v22i44.33548.Search in Google Scholar
Barendregt, Bart & Florian Schneider. 2020. Digital activism in Asia: Good, bad, and banal politics online. Asiascape: Digital Asia 7. 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1163/22142312-bja10004.Search in Google Scholar
Beaufort, Maren. 2018. Digital media, political polarization and challenges to democracy. Information, Communication & Society 21(7). 915–920. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2018.1451909.Search in Google Scholar
Becker, Amy B. 2011. Political humor as democratic relief? The effects of exposure to comedy and straight news on trust and efficacy. Atlantic Journal of Communication 19. 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2011.622191.Search in Google Scholar
Borodenko, Marina & Vadim Petrovsky. 2021. The semiology of humor: Developing the “countersign” model. The European Journal of Humor Research 9(2). 7–25. https://doi.org/10.7592/ejhr2021.9.2.553.Search in Google Scholar
Brandenburg, Heinz, Fraser McMillan & Robert Thomson. 2019. Does it matter if parties keep their promises? The impact of voter evaluations of pledge fulfillment on vote choice. APSA Preprints. https://preprints.apsanet.org/engage/apsa/article-details/5dc16b5522a8410012028167 (accessed 10 October 2021).10.33774/apsa-2019-p13l5Search in Google Scholar
Brants, Kees & Karin Voltmer (eds.). 2011. Political communication in postmodern democracy: Challenging the primacy of politics. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230294783Search in Google Scholar
Brock, Maria. 2018. Political satire and its disruptive potential: Irony and cynicism in Russia and the US. Culture, Theory, and Critique 59(3). 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2018.1496843.Search in Google Scholar
Brouard, Sylvain, Emiliano Grossman, Isabelle Guinaudeau, Simon Persico & Caterina Froio. 2018. Do party manifestos matter in policy-making? Capacities, incentives and outcomes of electoral programmes in France. Political Studies 66(4). 903–921. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321717745433.Search in Google Scholar
Bulatovic, Marina. 2019. The imitation game: The memefication of political discourse. European View 18(2). 250–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/1781685819887691.Search in Google Scholar
Chen, Hsuan-Ting, Chen Gan & Ping Sun. 2017. How does political satire influence political participation? Examining the role of counter- and proattitudinal exposure, anger, and personal issue importance. International Journal of Communication 11. 3011–3029.Search in Google Scholar
Cloete, Anita. 2019. Revisiting the social and religious value of humor. Stellenbosch Theological Journal 5(2). 81–94.Search in Google Scholar
Cruz, Cesi, Philip Keefer, Julien Labonne & Francesco Trebbi. 2020. Making policies matter: Voter responses to campaign promises. https://www.tse-fr.eu/fr/seminars/2021-making-policies-matter-voter-responses-campaign-promises (accessed 10 November 2021).10.3386/w24785Search in Google Scholar
Dadlez, Eva M. 2011. Truly funny: Humor, irony, and satire as moral criticism. The Journal of Aesthetic Education 45(1). 1–17. https://doi.org/10.5406/jaesteduc.45.1.0001.Search in Google Scholar
Dan Asabe, Abdullahi J. 2017. The new political climate in Nigeria: Change or status quo? Academy of Social Science Journal 2(10). 993–999.Search in Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J. 2020. Citizen politics: Public opinion and political parties in advanced industrial democracies. London: SAGE.Search in Google Scholar
Duval, Dominic & Francois Pétry. 2019. Time and the fulfillment of election pledges. Political Studies 67(1). 207–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321718762882.Search in Google Scholar
Dynel, Marta & Fabio I. M. Poppi. 2021. Caveat emptor: Boycott through digital humor on the wave of the 2019 Hong Kong protests. Information, Communication, and Theory 24(15). 2323–2341. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2020.1757134.Search in Google Scholar
Džanić, Nihada D. & Sanja Berberović. 2017. #ForgiveUsForWeHaveSinned: Conceptual integration theory and political internet humor. European Journal of Humor Research 5(2). 4–22. https://doi.org/10.7592/ejhr2017.5.2.dzanic.Search in Google Scholar
Elinder, Mikael, Henrik Jordahl & Panu Poutvaara. 2015. Promises, policies and pocketbook voting. European Economic Review 75. 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2015.01.010.Search in Google Scholar
Gal, Noam. 2019. Ironic humor on social media as participatory boundary work. New Media & Society 21(3). 729–749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818805719.Search in Google Scholar
Gluscevskij, Dmitrij. 2017. Methodological issues and prospects of semiotics of humor. Sign Systems Studies 45(1/2). 137–151. https://doi.org/10.12697/sss.2017.45.1-2.09.Search in Google Scholar
Gornostaeva, Anna. 2019. Irony and communicative values in political discourse: Intercultural and interpersonal communication. International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education 10(4). 4154–4159. https://doi.org/10.20533/ijcdse.2042.6364.2019.0507.Search in Google Scholar
Gornostaeva, Anna & Maria Semenovskaya. 2018. Humor and irony in modern political discourse. In Proceedings of ADVED 2018: 4th international conference on advances in education and social sciences, 590–594. Istanbul, 15–17 October.Search in Google Scholar
Greimas, Algirdas Julien. 1989. On meaning. New Literary History 20(3). 539–550. https://doi.org/10.2307/469352.Search in Google Scholar
Greimas, Algirdas Julien. 1995. Toward a topological semiotics. Nordic Journal of Architectural Research 8(4). 65–81.Search in Google Scholar
Hakoköngäs, Eemeli, Halmesvaara Otto & Inari Sakki. 2020. Persuasion through bitter humor: Multimodal discourse analysis of rhetoric in internet memes of two far-right groups in Finland, 1–11. Social Media + Society (April).10.1177/2056305120921575Search in Google Scholar
Harker, Mark. 2013. Psychological sweating: A systematic review focused on aetiology and cutaneous response. Skin Pharmacology and Physiology 26. 92–100. https://doi.org/10.1159/000346930.Search in Google Scholar
Hayder, Mohammed & Hani Kamil Al-Ebadi. 2021. Techniques of satire in political speeches. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology 18(10). 2865–2876.Search in Google Scholar
Higgie, Rebecca. 2017. Public engagement, propaganda, or both? Attitudes toward politicians on political satire and comedy programs. International Journal of Communication 11. 930–948.Search in Google Scholar
Hodson, Gordon & Cara C. MacInnis. 2016. Derogating humor as a delegitimization strategy in intergroup contexts. Translational Issues in Psychological Science 2(1). 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000052.Search in Google Scholar
Huang, Ying. 2019. Hyperboles in advertising: A serial mediation of incongruity and humor. International Journal of Advertising 39(5). 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2019.1686331.Search in Google Scholar
Ijere, Thomas C. 2015. Democracy and development in Nigeria: An appraisal of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) sixteen years. International Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Studies 2(9). 1–7.Search in Google Scholar
International Republican Institute. 2020. The role of political parties in Nigeria’s fledgling democracy. https://www.iri.org/sites/default/files/iri-policybrief-nigeria_political_party.pdf (accessed 30 October 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Jennings, Will, Gerry Stoker & Twyman Joe. 2016. The dimensions and impact of political discontent in Britain. Parliamentary Affairs 69. 876–900. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsv067.Search in Google Scholar
Katsina, Aliyu M. 2016. Peoples democratic party in the fourth republic of Nigeria: Nature, structure, and ideology. SAGE Open, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016651910.10.1177/2158244016651910Search in Google Scholar
Kennedy, John, Christopher Alcantara & Dave Armstrong. 2021. Do governments keep their promises? An analysis of speeches from the throne. Governance 34. 917–934. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12548.Search in Google Scholar
Korkut, Umut, Aidan McGarry, Itir Erhart, Hande Eslen-Ziya & Jenzen Olu. 2020. Looking for truth in absurdity: Humor as community-building and dissidence against authoritarianism. International Political Science Review 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512120971151.Search in Google Scholar
Lacerda Nobre, Ângela. 2017. Semiotics, decision sciences and value systems: Greimas contributions to the emergence of XXI century meaning-making challenges. In AFS 2017 Congrès de l’Association Française de Sémiotique. Paris: UNESCO May 30–June 2. http://hdl.handle.net/10400.26/22614 (accessed 11 October 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Landowski, Eric. 2013. Une semiotique a refaire? Galaxia 26. 10–33. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1982-25532013000300002.Search in Google Scholar
Lassen, Inger. 2007. A discourse analytical study of decontextualization and literacy. In Anne McCabe, Mick O’Donnell & Rachel Whittaker (eds.), Advances in language and education, 217–235. London & New York: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Martinez-Mira, Maria-Isabel. 2014. The immigration debate in the 2012 US presidential election and the role of rhetoric. Anglistik 25(2). 107–124.Search in Google Scholar
Mansergh, Lucy & Robert Thomson. 2007. Election pledges, party competition, and policymaking. Comparative Politics 39(3). 311–329.Search in Google Scholar
McCarthy, Michael & Ronald Carter. 2004. “There’s millions of them”: Hyperbole in everyday conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 36. 149–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(03)00116-4.Search in Google Scholar
Meyer, John C. 2000. Humor as a double-edged sword: Four functions of humor in communication. Communication Theory 10(3). 310–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2000.tb00194.x.Search in Google Scholar
Naurin, Elin. 2014. Is a promise a promise? Election pledge fulfilment in comparative perspective using Sweden as an example. West European Politics 37(5). 1046–1064. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2013.863518.Search in Google Scholar
Nieubuurt, Joshua T. 2021. Internet memes: Leaflet propaganda of the digital age. Frontiers in Communication 5. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2020.547065.Search in Google Scholar
Obadare, Ebenezer. 2009. The uses of ridicule: “Infrapolitics” and civil society in Nigeria. African Affairs 108(431). 241–261. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adn086.Search in Google Scholar
Okolie, Aloysius-Michaels, Chukwuemeka Enyiazu & Kelechi E. Nnamani. 2021. Campaign propaganda, electoral outcome and the dynamics of governance in the post-2015 presidential election in Nigeria. Cogent Social Sciences 7(1). 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2021.1922180.Search in Google Scholar
Okolo, Philips O. & Tari M. Karimo. 2017. Change mantra in Nigeria: The promises and expectations. EBSU Journal of Social Sciences Review 7(1). 146–155.Search in Google Scholar
Owen, Olly & Zainab Usman. 2015. Briefing: Why Goodluck Jonathan lost the Nigerian presidential election of 2015. African Affairs 114(456). 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adv037.Search in Google Scholar
Petry, François & Benoıt Collette. 2009. Measuring how political parties keep their promises: A positive perspective from political science. In Louis M. Imbeau (ed.), Do they walk like they talk?, 65–80. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-0-387-89672-4_5Search in Google Scholar
Pew Research Center. 2019. Many across the globe are dissatisfied with how democracy is working. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/04/29/many-across-the-globe-are-dissatisfied-with-how-democracy-is-working/ (accessed 10 October 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Sezgin, Ayşe A. 2018. Political humor in the social network sites. Studies in Media and Communication 6(1). 70–77. https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v6i1.3320.Search in Google Scholar
Silvestri, Lisa E. 2018. Memeingful memories and the art of resistance. New Media and Society 20(11). 3997–4016. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818766092.Search in Google Scholar
Stewart, Katherine, Talitha Dubow, Joanna Hofman & Christian van Stolk. 2016. Social change and public engagement with policy and evidence. Cambridge: RAND.10.7249/RR1750Search in Google Scholar
Taecharungroj, Viriya & Pitchanut Nueangjamnong. 2015. Humor 2.0: Styles and types of humor and virality of memes on Facebook. Journal of Creative Communications 10(3). 288–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973258615614420.Search in Google Scholar
Tarasti, Eero. 2017. The semiotics of A. J. Greimas: A European intellectual heritage seen from the inside and the outside. Sign Systems Studies 45(1/2). 33–53. https://doi.org/10.12697/sss.2017.45.1-2.03.Search in Google Scholar
Tesnohlidkova, Olivera. 2021. Humor and satire in politics: Introducing cultural sociology to the field. Sociology Compass 15(1). 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12842.Search in Google Scholar
Thomson, Robert. 2011. Citizens’ evaluations of the fulfillment of election pledges: Evidence from Ireland. The Journal of Politics 73(1). 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381610000952.Search in Google Scholar
Thomson, Robert, Royed Terry, Elin Naurin, Joaquín Artés, Rory Costello, Laurenz Ennser-Jedenastik, Mark Ferguson, Petia Kostadinova, Catherine Moury, François Pétry & Katrin Praprotnik. 2017. The fulfillment of parties’ election pledges: A comparative study on the impact of power sharing. American Journal of Political Science 61(3). 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12313.Search in Google Scholar
Threagold, Terry. 1986. Semiotics-ideology-language. In Terry Threadgold, Elizabeth A. Grosz, Gunther Kress & Michael A. K. Halliday (eds.), Semiotics ideology language, 15–60. Sydney: The Sydney Association for Studies in Society and Culture.Search in Google Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun A. & Walter Kintsch. 1983. Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
van Wessel, Margit. 2010. Political disaffection: What we can learn from asking the people. Parliamentary Affairs 63(3). 504–523. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsq004.Search in Google Scholar
Young, Dannagal G. 2017. Theories and effects of political humor: Discounting cues, gateways, and the impact of incongruities. In Kate Kenski & Kathleen H. Jamieson (eds.), The Oxford handbook of political communication, 1–17. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
