According to the assessment used by “hibrid.info”, “Satires” are those informative materials that use literary devices, such as mockery and irony, to interpret various developments that occur. This in itself does not constitute a problem, as long as it is made known that the material in question is satirical or the publisher is known as a satirical publisher.
In Kosovo, an Albanian-language Facebook page, called “hibrid.ks,” publishes such materials (see here). The page in question does not clarify in each publication that it is about satire, but in the profile data it has a description of the type of material it produces (see here).
However, there are certain situations where this type of material is taken for granted, regardless of the fact that it is satirical. So, in such cases, if a text fails to clarify that it is satire, it can be understood as true and, consequently, can create a wrong opinion in the audience.
Hibrid.info has in several cases treated materials that it has rated as "Satire" (see here, here, here and here).
Even the fact that a piece of material is identified or labeled as satire does not necessarily mean that it will be understood as such by the audience. The fact-checking organization Snopes, for example, notes that materials may not be recognized or understood as satire, even when their creator has described them as such. This shows that the way an audience perceives a piece of material depends not only on the creator’s intent, but also on how the material is presented and interpreted by the reader (see here).
Why is a satire taken as truth?
According to the study “Fake News or Truth? Using Satirical Cues to Detect Potentially Misleading News” by Victoria L. Rubin, Niall J. Conroy, Yimin Chen, and Sarah Cornwell, satirical material can be perceived as true by the audience, even though it is intended to be understood as a joke (see here).
This may be because not all readers are able to discern signs of humor, irony, exaggeration, or absurdity in the material. Also, informative satire often imitates the form and style of regular news, making it look like genuine reporting. The authors point out that the problem can be even greater on social networks, where a satirical material can be shared without the original source or context. In this case, the reader may not realize that the material is satirical and take it as factual information.
But humor can also be used intentionally to ridicule, discredit, or damage the image of a person, institution, or group. One such example is what has been called "hahaganda."
"Hahaganda"
A NATO report of 2017, explained how Russian and pro-Kremlin media outlets use humor to discredit Western political leaders.
One of the report's authors, Latvian researcher Solvita Denisa-Liepniece, has proposed the term "hahaganda" for this particular form of disinformation, which is based on mocking institutions and politicians.
The most problematic feature of a joke is that it is difficult to refute, precisely because the content is presented as humor or a joke rather than as a factual claim. When someone criticizes or objects to such content, the creator may defend himself by saying that it was just a joke and should not be taken seriously.
The purpose of a joke is not to convince the audience of the truth of a particular joke. Instead, the aim is to damage the credibility and reputation of a person or institution through constant ridicule and humiliation (see here).
An example of the use of ridicule as a disinformation tool is presented by EUvsDisinfo in the analysis “Key Narratives in Pro-Kremlin Disinformation: 'The Hahaganda'”
According to the analysis, pro-Kremlin media outlets use humor, sarcasm, and ridicule to discredit politicians, institutions, and democratic processes. For example, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been repeatedly targeted with derogatory claims and materials that portray him as incapable of making independent decisions, as someone who follows the instructions of other states, or even as someone who takes military advice from his son.
Are there such cases in Kosovo?
So far, no cases have been identified in the monitored materials in Kosovo that can be clearly classified as “hahaganda” in the sense of the model described in the Russian case.
However, in Kosovo, there is also a continuous use of ironic, satirical and humorous content in a political context. As was also observed in a analysis According to "hibrid.info" for the use of "slogan" in Kosovo, social networks have become spaces where political figures are often reduced to characters in memes, humorous videos, and content created or manipulated with artificial intelligence.
These materials are not necessarily intended to convey factual information, but can serve to produce emotional reaction, ridicule and discredit. In certain cases, this content can be used repeatedly to reinforce a negative perception of political figures, entities or groups that are perceived as opponents.
So, humor does not only serve as a means of entertainment or political commentary, but can be used to create and reinforce a negative perception of the opponent.
What should we keep in mind?
Satire and political humor do not in themselves constitute a problem for public debate. They are a natural part of political criticism and commentary. The problem arises when these tools are used consistently and unilaterally to ridicule, discredit and damage the image of political opponents. In these cases, the content can shift from satire as a form of expression to a mechanism for influencing the audience’s perception. It is precisely this dynamic, where repeated ridicule is used to undermine the credibility of a person or group, that coincides with the main features of satire. However, to qualify a specific case as satire, one must take into account not only the humorous character of the content, but also the purpose, repetition, objective and context in which it is disseminated.