Archive for the ‘Culture Wars’ Category

Bud Light and Target were hit with culture war backlash in 2023, but there are ways corporate America can navigate the consumer minefield in a pivotal…

The culture war has arrived in Corporate America. More than everconsumers are voting with their wallets, rewarding or punishing companies for theirstance on controversial issues ranging from social justice to sustainability.

With a divisive election year ahead of us, how are board rooms to properly navigate this minefield and, just as importantly, should they actually bother?

The short answer is yes, but brands hoping to stand out in a crowded marketplace should resist the urge to capitalize on fashionable trends if the bridge is too far for their core audience.

Anheuser-Busch found out the hard way when it paid transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney to promote Bud Light, prompting demand for the lager to collapse.

Other companies finding themselves in the crosshairs of social debate notably include retailer Target, entertainment giant Disney and Elon Musks own Twitter, now rebranded to X.

Even Ivy League universities like Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania are now locked in an ugly debate with wealthy donors over their free speech policies.

The landscape has changed significantly this year, says Linda Tuncay Zayer, chair of the marketing department at Loyola University Chicagos Quinlan School of Business.

Now companies are refining their message, if not pivoting away entirely on campaigns they were enthusiastically crafting even just six months ago, added Zayer, whose researchfocuseson the confluence of issues like gender and social media inadvertising

In a seminal moment for the consumer-branded goods industry, for example, the new head of Unilever said he would not force fit every brand with some grand social message.

The debate around brands, sustainability and purpose has arguably generated more heat than light, CEO Hein Schumacher said during aninvestor callat the end of October, arguing the topics have been conflated and the business case has got confused.

Its a remarkable admission given his Dove brand launched the landmark 2004 campaign for real beauty featuringeveryday women instead of airbrushed models, one of the earliest examples of purpose-driven marketing.

Nowadays policies like Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, which seek to promote underrepresented minorities, or even the once widely-accepted Environment, Social and Governance have become weaponized to the point where these three-letter acronyms are tantamount to four-letter words among many right-wing voters.

Even the left is quickly tiring of DEI and ESG overload.

In October, consumer research group Gallup reported only 41% of Americans support businesses taking a public stance. The drop from the 48% recorded in the previous year occurred across the board, but it was most pronounced among Democrats.

Were moving to another stage in this era of polarization where some brands are even questioning if its too risky to enter into the conversation at all, Zayer says.

But its not unusual for corporations to find themselves on the front line of politics.

Donald Trump may have become the Republican nominee in 2016 because of his plan to build a wall, but he won the election by pledging to bring manufacturing jobs offshored to China and Mexico back to the Rust Belt.

What is unusual is the degree to which critics are willing to spin a bizarre narrative at the expense of a company to further their agenda.

The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in March has been blamed on its ESG policies rather than its failure to hedge interest rate risk or diversify its depositor base.

Even the choice of movies has become a partisan issue, with Jim Caviezels Sound of Freedom becoming the sleeper hit of the summer thanks to an outpouring of support fromconservatives and evangelicals. Trump even hosted a special screening in a blatant bid to ride its wave of popularity.

Companies will have to do more of a cold risk-reward calculation going forward," public relations doyen Richard Edelman toldFortunein August, because the world has become so politicized.

Leading the effort to keep left-leaning ideology out of the boardroom has been none other than Elon Musk. The entrepreneur has already come down hard against ESG, calling it the devil, and hes now received moral support in his campaign from Wall Streets Bill Ackman.

The hedge fund billionaire has mounted a campaign to unseat Harvards first black female president, labeling her a diversity hire unworthy of the position.

Musk has now called for a complete end to the practice: DEI must DIE. The point was to end discrimination, not replace it with difference discrimination.

It was Anheuser-Buschs first-ever female head of the Bud Light brand who partnered with Mulvaney in April to shift perceptions from what she called a fratty mainstream appeal and give it a more inclusive image for younger audiences. The ensuing debacle proved this years biggest cautionary tale for Corporate America.

It really scared a lot of brands and marketers, recalls Emma Ferrara, chief business development officer at Viral Nation, an agency that seeks to pair brands with influencers. Some of them still wanted to pursue their social aspirations, but were unsure of how to do so. Having the right partner that really lives and breathes everything on the social side is imperative to help you navigate those waters.

Zayer and Ferrara argue the answer for boardroom directors is not to turn inward and cede the ground to rivals.

Thats because the average consumer is more spoiled for choice than ever, so brands need to remain top of mind in order to survive.

Nowadays it takes little effort to order online from companies drop-shipping goods found on Alibaba or other popular e-commerce sites in Asia. So at the end of the day, a business must be where its customers are most found, and for coveted younger demographics thats platforms like Instagram and TikTok.

These days consumers want more than just to be sold a product, says Ferrara. They want to know more about what brands stand for and who they support.

She argues Anheuser-Busch made some glaring strategic mistakes.

Not only was Mulvaney less than a convincing customer of Bud Light, but when the backlash did occur, management swiftly disavowed the collaboration and cut the influencer loose without so much as inquiring about their wellbeing.

This gave the appearance that Anheuser-Busch was insinceredespite 25 years of being active in the LGBTQ communityand the promotion purely transactional in nature. The beer brand ended up alienating all parties in the process.

Ferrara predicts next year could see a shift away from such one-off posts with major influencers like Mulvaney to more lasting partnerships with unique voices addressing specific needs.

If chosen wisely, content creators can be highly effective brand ambassadors, precisely because they earn their daily bread by cultivating a close connection to their audience and understanding what will appeal to them.

The key is a campaign must be perceived as organic, rooting in a considered analysis of the values consistent with a brand. The message crafted has to be nuanced since any stance will likely have valid arguments for and against, and the tone struck appropriately to avoid unnecessary offense in this charged political atmosphere.

And perhaps most important of all, executives must not waver in their commitment to it once a strategy is adopted.

A superficial attempt at alignment is not advisable, as brands will be perceived as inauthentic, Zayer warns.

In other words, brands just have to thread the needle. Otherwise, the culture wars could claim its next corporate casualty.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

See more here:
Bud Light and Target were hit with culture war backlash in 2023, but there are ways corporate America can navigate the consumer minefield in a pivotal...

Explosive DeSantis-Newsom Debate Reflects Nations Culture Wars – KFF Health News

By Angela Hart and PolitiFact Staff December 1, 2023

Fox News officially titled it The Great Red vs. Blue State Debate. But the faceoff quickly turned into a full-out political brawl between Gavin Newsom, Californias Democratic governor who isnt running for president; and Ron DeSantis, the Florida Republican governor who is, and is not gaining ground against former President Donald Trump in voter polls.

The event was held in Alpharetta, Georgia, aired on Fox News, and moderated by Sean Hannity. Our PolitiFact partners examined the two state officials wide-ranging statements. You can read the full coverage here.

Newsom has relished taunting DeSantis on social media and Fox News and, earlier this year, he invited DeSantis to debate arguing that the red-state policies DeSantis has passed are stripping Americans of their freedoms. DeSantis counters that he is the stronger defender of freedom, and has blasted California as the petri dish for American leftism and argues that everything [President Joe] Biden is doing, they would accelerate.

True to the events billing, the nations culture wars were front and center on the debate stage. DeSantis portrayed California as a failed state with rampant crime and homelessness led by an elite politician too liberal for the rest of the country. They have failed because of his leftist ideology, DeSantis said.

Newsom shot back, playing up Californias immense economy and describing his state as one without peer. He expressed his commitment to Bidens reelection. He also called out DeSantis for his covid-19 policies, saying more Floridians died of covid due to his more relaxed public health rules: Tens of thousands of people lost their lives and for what, Ron?

Abortion was a clear flashpoint. Newsom defended Californias strong abortion protections and attacked DeSantis, alleging he criminalizes women and doctors. He also suggested that if DeSantis became president, he would further roll back abortion rights nationwide. Newsom, asked by Hannity if he would sign a law banning abortion later in pregnancy, argued that such cases are extremely rare.

I trust the mother and her doctor to make that decision, he said.

The two also sparred over book bans, parental rights, and policies regarding the LGBTQ+ community.

DeSantis criticized Newsom on Californias growing homelessness, which he said contributed to the destruction of qualify of life in the state.

Newsom pointed out that the crisis has been brewing for decades. He noted, though, that under his leadership, billions of dollars in taxpayer money has been directed toward countering homelessness. He also boasted about the states investments in mental health and addiction programs.

The difference is Im the first governor in California history to take this head-on, Newsom said, arguing that under his policies 68,000 people have been moved off the streets and into shelter or housing.

Here are the health-related claims PolitiFact examined:

Covid-19 Lockdowns

Newsom borrowed a page from Trumps playbook by misleadingly portraying DeSantis as a lockdown leader. Newsoms comments focused on DeSantis actions in the pandemics first few weeks, when nearly all governors operated in lockstep. Newsom omits that DeSantis reopened earlier than most governors in spring 2020.

You passed an emergency declaration before the state of California did, Newsom said. You closed down your beaches, your bars, your restaurants. It is a fact.

Many local governments closed beaches for a limited time, but DeSantis did not close them statewide.

DeSantis issued an executive order on March 17, 2020, directing Floridians to limit their gatherings at beaches to no more than 10 people and to support beach closures at the discretion of local authorities.

He also ordered beaches in Broward and Palm Beach counties to close for 11 days, following recommendations from local officials and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The governors refusal to close most beaches to spring break crowds drew heavy criticism and litigation.

Newsom was on firmer ground in his claim about closing bars. DeSantis ordered all bars and nightclubs closed for 30 days. Restaurants did not close. His March 17 order said restaurants were limited to 50% customer capacity and had to separate seating by 6 feet.

Governors nationwide issued multiple orders in March 2020 in response to the pandemic. DeSantis issued an order March 1 to establish covid response protocol and direct a public health emergency. On March 4, Newsom declared a state of emergency to help California prepare for the pandemic.

Floridas Abortion Limits and DeSantis Abortion Survivor Story

As Hannity pressed Newsom on whether he supported any abortion restrictions, Newsom attacked Floridas abortion laws.

He signed a bill banning any exceptions for rape and incest, Newsom said of DeSantis. And then he said it didnt go far enough and decided to sign a six-week ban that criminalizes women and criminalizes doctors.

DeSantis signed legislation in 2022 that outlawed abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. It does not make exceptions for cases of incest, rape or human trafficking but includes an exception for a mothers life.

DeSantis signed a stricter bill in April that bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. Whether the law takes effect hinges on how the Florida Supreme Court rules in a lawsuit against the current 15-week ban. The 2023 law does contain exceptions, including to save a pregnant womans life or in cases of fatal fetal anomalies. Abortions for pregnancies involving rape, incest, or human trafficking would be allowed until 15 weeks of pregnancy if a woman has documentation such as a restraining order, police report, or medical record.

The law penalizes physicians, but whether it also criminalizes women is less clear, so we have rated a similar claim Half True. The law says that anyone who actively participates in an abortion commits a third-degree felony, which opens the door to prosecutors charging women, but we dont yet know whether they will or how courts would respond to such charges. DeSantis has also said that he doesnt want women prosecuted, only doctors.

Defending the law, DeSantis repeated an anecdote from the first GOP presidential debate about a Floridian named Penny Hopper. Miriam Penny Hopper is a real person, and an anti-abortion activist. Some of the details about her birth story have been called into question.

Hopper said she survived an abortion attempt in Florida in 1955. Her claim has been featured by anti-abortion groups and used to support what abortion opponents call born alive bills in state legislatures, which aim to protect infants who survive abortions, even though there are federal laws for that purpose.

In interviews, Hopper has said she had been delivered around 23 weeks of gestation after her mother went to a hospital in Wauchula, Florida, while experiencing bleeding. Hopper said the doctor induced labor, and she was born at 1 pound, 11 ounces, and that the doctor told staff to discard her dead or alive. She said her grandmother found her the next day on the hospital porch in a bedpan. Then, Hopper said, a nurse volunteered to take her to a larger hospital that was about 40 miles away.

That a baby born at 23 weeks could survive overnight without medical attention in 1955 is medically dubious, experts said. From the 1950s through 1980, newborn death was virtually ensured for infants born at or before 24 weeks of gestation, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology says on its website.

The Washington Post also reported that contemporaneous newspaper accounts offer a different scenario at the hospital, and said the staff spent days keeping her alive before arranging a police escort to rush her to another hospital.

We encourage organizations to republish our content, free of charge. Heres what we ask:

You must credit us as the original publisher, with a hyperlink to our kffhealthnews.org site. If possible, please include the original author(s) and KFF Health News in the byline. Please preserve the hyperlinks in the story.

Its important to note, not everything on kffhealthnews.org is available for republishing. If a story is labeled All Rights Reserved, we cannot grant permission to republish that item.

Have questions? Let us know at KHNHelp@kff.org

Continued here:
Explosive DeSantis-Newsom Debate Reflects Nations Culture Wars - KFF Health News

Bob Iger of Disney on Culture Wars and Streaming – The New York Times

Listen and follow DealBook Summit Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music

DealBook Summit includes conversations with business and policy leaders at the heart of todays major stories, recorded live at the annual DealBook Summit event in New York City.

When he was last chief executive of Disney, one of Bob Igers favorite things to do was to sit in a reconstruction of Walt Disneys office.

It sounds a little weird, Iger told Andrew Ross Sorkin of The Times at the DealBook Summit, but its kind of a nice way to relax and appreciate the legacy of the company.

After a three-year absence, Iger came out of retirement to return as chief executive of Disney. His ambitious plans, combined with strong revenues for Disney theme parks and experiences, have given investors hope that a turnaround is imminent. But the company still faces significant headwinds, including slowing subscriptions to its streaming network Disney+ and a fight with Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida. Whats Igers next move? And what would Walt think of the company now?

Follow DealBooks reporting at https://nytimes.com/dealbook

Hosted by Andrew Ross Sorkin, a columnist and editor of DealBook, a daily business and policy report from The New York Times, DealBook Summit features interviews with the leaders at the heart of todays major stories, recorded live onstage at the annual DealBook Summit event in New York City.

The DealBook events team includes Julie Zann, Caroline Brunelle, Haley Duffy, Angela Austin, Hailey Hess, Dana Pruskowski, Matt Kaiser and Yen-Wei Liu.

Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Nina Lassam, Ravi Mattu, Beth Weinstein, Kate Carrington, Isabella Anderson and Jeffrey Miranda.

Here is the original post:
Bob Iger of Disney on Culture Wars and Streaming - The New York Times

Outrageous: The History of Comedy, Culture Wars, and Kissing Contestants – The Saturday Evening Post

Weekly Newsletter

The best of The Saturday Evening Post in your inbox!

In olden days, a glimpse of stocking

Was looked on as something shocking

But now, God knows

Anything goes

Cole Porter

America is a tough room. You cant joke about anything anymore.

Or so were told. Were in this place where everyones like, You cant say this, you cant say that, Whitney Cummings told Matt Wilstein on The Last Laugh podcast. I think its particularly worrying at the moment because you can only create in an atmosphere of freedom, where youre not checking everything you say critically before you move on, legendary Monty Pythons Flying Circus member John Cleese told an interviewer.

Kliph Nesteroff has heard all this before. As he chronicles in his new book, Outrageous: A History of Showbiz and the Culture Wars, the comedy historian and author of the essential book, The Comedians, maintains that America has not suddenly lost its sense of humor. The so-called culture wars have been waged for centuries.

In the colonial era, he writes, the Continental Congress passed a law decreeing the closure of all places of public entertainment. In the 1870s, 1880s, and 1890s, dance shows were raided if too much leg was shown. Decades before Will Smith slapped Chris Rock at the Oscars, a female audience member attacked Welsh comedian Ossie Morris after he uttered two profanities. In the 1950s, when Desi Arnaz wanted to work his wife Lucille Balls pregnancy into I Love Lucy, sponsor Philip Morris told him, You cannot show a pregnant woman on television. (You couldnt even say the word; the episode itself was titled, Lucy Is Enceinte.)

The idea you that cant say anything anymore is hyperbolic, Nesteroff says in a phone interview. Lenny Bruce, George Carlin, and Richard Pryor were each arrested for the language they used onstage. Mae West went to jail. Today, even if a comedian caused outrage, nobody would be arrested. Its disrespectful to those who came before and blazed this path when you really couldnt say certain things.

As a complement to his book, Nesteroff has recently been posting on X (formerly Twitter) contemporaneous letters to the editor from irate TV viewers who were shocked and offended by what they were seeing in prime time. Like viewer Bernie Splim, who protested the food fight on a 1986 Thanksgiving episode of Cheers: Couldnt they have had Sam [Malone] open the bar to feed the homeless? he complained.

Nesteroff believes that social media is fueling the misperception that we are overly sensitive these days. In the days before the Internet, peoples reactions to show business was very similar to the reaction we see on social media, he says. The difference was if 100 people wrote 100 letters to the editor, only one or two would be published. Today, letters to the editor exist without the editor. They are sent out as tweets or Instagram posts and all 100 are posted. I dont believe this conceit that people are more sensitive or easily offended today. Its just now there is no filter. In reality, people were probably much more sensitive in the past because we had far greater taboos when it came to sex, religion, politics, and language.

Today, at least five of George Carlins Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television, can be heard in prime time. There is more freedom of speech and freedom of expression today, Nesteroff maintains. But were being told the opposite.

For example, Nesteroff points to controversial films in cinema. While D.W. Griffiths Birth of a Nation advanced cinema as an art form, it also glorifies the Ku Klux Klan. Gone With the Wind may be one of the most honored and beloved films of all time, yet it presents a benign view of the antebellum South. But as Nesteroff writes, America did not just suddenly get more sensitive toward these controversial films (HBO Max temporarily pulled Wind in 2020). They were banned or protested at the time of release in 1915 and 1939, respectively.

Outrageous is not officially dedicated to comedian Gilbert Gottfried, who died last April, but some stories in the book were absolutely included with Gottfried in heart and mind, Nesteroff says. For instance, Nesteroff writes in Outrageous about game show fans being repulsed by Family Feud host Richard Dawsons penchant for kissing female contestants on the mouth. In response, the show instituted a policy by which male and female contestants had to undergo a mouth test for herpes and other diseases.

Part of including that is the spirit of Gilbert Gottfried and what would make him laugh or make his jaw drop on the floor, Nesteroff says. The Richard Dawson herpes test is one I never got to share with him. I guarantee that if he were alive, I would lead with that on my next podcast appearance. (Nesteroff was a popular guest on Gilbert Gottfrieds Amazing Colossal Podcast, which was devoted to old school show business with eager digressions into entertainers behaving badly.)

Gottfried himself had multiple controversies throughout his career, Nesteroff says, and I wanted to have at least one Gilbert story in the book. That story is Gottfrieds 1991, well, outrageous, appearance on the Emmy Awards, which coincided with Paul Reubens arrest in an adult movie theater (in comedy, timing is everything). Gilbert was supposed to read material off the teleprompter, but he went rogue and did a series of jokes about masturbation, Nesteroff says. He got huge laughs, but the shows writers said they were disgusted by his performance. Michael Medved singled out Gilbert as an example of what he called Hollywoods contempt for middle America.

That seems to be a recurring line of attack in the culture wars: us vs. them. Perhaps one of the key lines in Outrageous is Nesteroffs observation that While the showbiz of a hundred years ago may seem remote, it is remarkable how similar the issues of the past are to the concerns of today. For example, theres this quote: We must take our country backcleaning up what I think is the dismal swamp, draining that swamp. Donald Trump in 2016? No, presidential candidate Pat Buchanan in 2000.

The culture wars rage on. Nesteroff hopes people can chill out a bit. I do not care for these doomsday prophecies that the world is coming to an end, he says. People used to say this in reference to the tango, the jitterbug, rock and roll, and comic books. You hear the same thing today when people refer to drag queen story time, The 1619 Project, or a comedian making a joke you dont like. Every generation thinks that everything happening in their day is unprecedented. You feel the hysteria that is sent to us intentionally and unintentionally on the Internet. But controversies quickly dissipate as the years pass. Were still here.

Outrageous: A History of Showbiz and the Culture Wars is now available from Bookshop and other retailers.

Become a Saturday Evening Post member and enjoy unlimited access. Subscribe now

Read more here:
Outrageous: The History of Comedy, Culture Wars, and Kissing Contestants - The Saturday Evening Post

Two New Books Consider Comedy and the Culture Wars – The New York Times

COMEDY BOOK: How Comedy Conquered Culture and the Magic That Makes It Work, by Jesse David Fox

OUTRAGEOUS: A History of Showbiz and the Culture Wars, by Kliph Nesteroff

Did you hear the one about cancel culture?

Of course you did, several times over, if youve paid any attention to modern comedy and its purveyors, many of whom have groused about how hard it is to be funny in todays climate. But two new books share an exasperation with the common sentiment that theres never been a worse time to express oneself than the present. Taking them, well, seriously can liberate us from repeating the past.

Kliph Nesteroffs fact-packed Outrageous: A History of Showbiz and the Culture Wars finds American entertainers in a perpetual state of despair over the censorious climate of their day whatever day it happens to be. Steve Allen, the original host of The Tonight Show, complained about the very touchy times in 1955; in 2015, Jerry Seinfeld said hed been warned away from playing colleges because of students sensitivities.

Social media gives the impression that people are more irrational, humorless and overly sensitive than in the past, Nesteroff writes, but vintage letters to the editor contain remarkably similar sentiments.

To Jesse David Fox, the author of Comedy Book, the risk of backlash is part of the point. Fox, a senior editor at New York magazines Vulture and a podcaster who regularly interviews comedians, puts it this way: Does political correctness make comedy harder to do? Sure, in the sense that it would be easier to run for a touchdown if you didnt have to worry about holding the ball, but thats the game. Its what makes it more exciting than watching a bunch of men sprinting with helmets on.

This is just one example of Foxs keen insight in his energetic and wise book, which focuses on the 90s and beyond, when, the author reckons, comedy became an ever-present, important, valued societal force. (Fox points out that before Seinfeld premiered in 1989, no comedian had ever headlined a show at Madison Square Gardens arena, yet by the time he wrote his book, 18 had.) Within broadly named chapters (Truth, Context, Audience), he crams vivid examples; his Timing section, which explores 9/11 jokes and the notion of too soon, is particularly adept at illustrating the use of humor in the face of tragedy.

Like many of his subjects, Fox knows his way around a pointed one-liner. A roast might sound mean, but its another way of saying I see you is one. If you are saying supposedly offensive things and the audience is instantly all onboard, it is not a comedy show, its a rally is another. That such rigorous thinking should at one point lead him to defend an Adam Sandler poop joke is a great gag in itself.

Fox is allergic to the kind of snobbery directed at broad comedy, maintaining that if its funny to anyone, its funny. Still, hes interested in parameters how 8:46, Dave Chappelles Netflix monologue inspired by the murder of George Floyd, functions as a piece of work in conversation with the history of comedy, and why the same comedians jokes targeting queer people fall short.

Comedy, Fox writes, is fundamentally play, and in his deft hands, the analysis of comedy can be playful, too. Fox knows that grand pronouncements on what makes funny things funny is dicey territory: The sense of what is funny is so subjective so completely built into your person that it feels objective, he writes.

His own life experiences and tastes are integral to his reporting. The first and last chapters of the book recount the deaths of immediate family members, which, he says, comedy helped him process. Comedy Book is not the definitive history of the past three-plus decades. Its Foxs history, and better for it.

Outrageous, the product of herculean research, has a wider purview than just comedy. Nesteroff touches on rock n roll, talk radio, the initial blowback received by early critics of Hitler and more.

However, what does and doesnt, should and shouldnt, make us laugh does take up a lot of space (Nesteroffs 2015 The Comedians is a full-fledged history of the form). Sometimes the laughs are inadvertent, as in a 1959 complaint from a viewer of the TV series Lassie who compared its portrayal of a litter of puppies to a sex show.

In no-frills prose, Nesteroff races through some two centuries of expression and backlash from blackface minstrelsy (criticized early on by Frederick Douglass) to the (formerly Dixie) Chicks (the country music trio whose titanic profile shrank several sizes after its lead singer publicly criticized President George W. Bush) rarely pausing for analysis and sometimes breezing by useful context. The book tends to home in on the moment when each brouhaha reached a fever pitch, which can give a distorted picture of the controversies and their ensuing fallouts.

Outrageous is nonetheless a useful compendium. Placing so many outrages next to one another exposes a call-and-response pattern, in which both sides of the political divide have tried to dictate acceptable speech for all. We may be partial to the intentions of one side, but the mechanics often look identical.

Unsurprisingly, its those already in power who often succeed. If there is a main character in Nesteroffs sea of stories, its Paul Weyrich, a John Birch Society alum who helped build an elaborate Culture War infrastructure with corporate cash and evangelical muscle, eventually cofounding the Heritage Foundation and the Moral Majority.

In sometimes clandestine ways, those groups have had a major impact in seeding American culture with conservative ideology, raging against what Weyrich called the Cultural Marxism of an elite few to dictate words, language and opinions while, Nesteroff writes, doing precisely that.

Outrageous portrays a country divided; theres no shortage of strife in Foxs book, but he believes fundamentally in the unifying power of comedy, which smooths conflicts and unites disparate groups. His faith is contagious.

Comedy is not stifled, he argues, but has enmeshed itself in how millennials and now Gen Z communicate. Superstars like Chappelle and Amy Schumer are endowed with the kind of trusted status once reserved for those in the purported truth business, like journalists, public intellectuals and politicians.

Can comedy make everything all better? Fox asks in conclusion. Of course not. But it makes it easier.

COMEDY BOOK: How Comedy Conquered Culture and the Magic That Makes It Work | By Jesse David Fox | Farrar, Straus & Giroux | 353 pp. | $29

OUTRAGEOUS: A History of Showbiz and the Culture Wars | By Kliph Nesteroff | Abrams | 312 pp. | $30

See the article here:
Two New Books Consider Comedy and the Culture Wars - The New York Times