Political Satire in the Theoretical Context: From a Linear to Ongoing Perspective

Political satire has emerged as a significant research topic in the field of political communication, focusing on how political signs are used to deliver humorous criticism against the hegemony, political status quo, opponents, or specific subjects (Agha Reference Agha2003; Gray et al. Reference Gray2009). While political signs refer to the “products” used to denounce targets, political satire goes beyond this by explaining the process of using these signs with humorous meaning for circulation (Kulkarni Reference Kulkarni2017). The purposes of political satire can be summarized as exposing criticisms, using humor and memes to persuade and motivate audiences, and encouraging political participation (Nabi et al. Reference Nabi2007; Cao and Brewer Reference Cao2008). Political satire serves as a communicative method to deliver persuasive criticisms against opponents in a “soft” manner, aiming to attract attention and foster civic engagement (Jones Reference Jones2009).

However, the existing literature on political satire primarily adopts a linear perspective, focusing on the effects on audiences and their responses to satirical messages. The studies of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report are some classic examples. Researchers adopted quantitative methods, mainly in experiments and surveys, to test the response of audiences in these two programs (e.g., effects of security levels and message persuasiveness results [LaMarre et al. Reference LaMarre2014], perceptions of the role of money in politics [Hardy et al. Reference Hardy2011], effects of attentiveness and knowledge [Xenos and Becker Reference Xenos2009], effects of age and education [Cao Reference Cao2008], level of political participation [Cao and Brewer Reference Cao2008], support for political institutions and leaders [Baumgartner and Morris Reference Baumgartner2006], etc.). This linear perspective follows a three-phase process: (1) production (e.g., messages from The Daily Show and The Colbert Report), (2) message delivery (e.g., experiments and surveys), and (3) response (e.g., response of audiences). The effects on audiences are the main focus. Figure 1 summarizes the approach of a linear perspective.

Figure 1.

Political satire in a linear perspective. Source: Author’s analysis.

This linear perspective neglects the rise of social media and the circulation of satirical content. The emergence of social media and user-generated websites has provided individuals with more channels and platforms in which to engage in politics, resulting in political satire being replaced by other forms of engagement (Luqui 2017). As argued by Yang and Jiang (Reference Yang2015), the significance of online political satire goes beyond content and becomes a participatory activity involving multiple people interacting through digital networks. Social media enables people to read and share satirical content and, more importantly, encourages more “user-generated” practices of re-creating distinct content in the political sign (Shifman Reference Shifman2014). In other words, audiences have the potential to become “reproducers” reacting and circulating political signs that can have lasting effects on society. As concluded by Shao (Reference Shao2009), users reproduce their own content for self-expression and self-actualization, leading to the construction of collective identity. This identity building motivates more audiences to become supporters.

Although the trend of reproduction has been recognized, a systemic theoretical framework is seldom explored. It is admitted that the concept of reproduction is not totally new (e.g., Spitulnik Reference Spitulnik1997; Rossolatos Reference Rossolatos2015). One of the pioneering frameworks was proposed by Agha (Reference Agha2011), who adopts the concept of “mediatization” and argues that communication is not a linear model from mediation to circulation (e.g., media talk in the article). Indeed, communication is an ongoing process that refers to the audience responding to the signs and making new meanings. This article builds on Agha’s framework and proposes a new framework that consists of three processes: (1) production, (2) message delivery and (3) reproduction. First, production involves the creation of satire. With the use of social media, production is not limited to mainstream media, politicians, and commentators; anonymous Internet users can also be creators (Yang and Jiang Reference Yang2015).

The second process is message delivery, which focuses on how satirical messages circulate to the public through mainstream and social media. Many studies have found that the “most attentive” sign is to circulate negative views and criticisms of the selected opponents that facilitate message delivery (Moody-Ramirez and Church Reference Moody-Ramirez2019). When users identify the most “circulative” satire, this facilitates networked circulation and interaction (Rahimi Reference Rahimi2015).

Reproduction is the third process. When audiences receive satirical messages, some of them may recognize political problems and become motivated to reproduce and circulate satirical messages (Shao Reference Shao2009). In other words, reproduction involves a self-motivated process by ordinary audiences to re-create satirical messages. This bottom-up process of collective reproduction attracts new supporters and sustains dissatisfaction with the authorities (Parsloe and Holton Reference Parsloe2018). In this process, audiences are no longer purely “recipients” for reading satirical messages but become “reproducers” for facilitating circulation. This is an ongoing model to attract new supporters to be reproducers for re-creation that is also known as “collective reproduction.” Shifman (Reference Shifman2014) summarizes that “operative signs” have two functions: (1) modes of hypersignification (the code becomes the focus of attention): the most direct way is to make use of this sign to generate new forms, meanings, and combinations for online circulation; and (2) prospective meme (the sign is perceived as the raw material for further circulation): supporters involve in transferring online memes into real-life political participation (e.g., Veg Reference Veg2016). This article adopts this framework to analyze the reproduction in (1) protests, (2) images, and (3) product designs.

In summary, political satire should be examined from an ongoing rather than a linear perspective, considering its lasting effects on audiences (Yang and Jiang Reference Yang2015). From this perspective, this article adopts an ongoing approach to analyze political satire through the case of Hong Kong. The concept of “collective reproduction” emphasizes the bottom-up process in which audiences become supporters and extend their influence by re-creating political signs. Figure 2 summarizes this alternative approach. It is proposed that political satire can be analyzed in three processes: (1) production (politicians, commentaries, or Internet users make use of a political sign and create a satirical message), (2) message delivery (both online and traditional media circulate the message throughout society), and (3) reproduction (audiences receive and become supporters to regenerate other forms for further circulation and exposure). After that, the ongoing process goes from supporters who make use of political signs to create new forms for further circulation. This figure is also adopted as the theoretical framework of this article.

Figure 2.

Political satire in an ongoing perspective. Source: Author’s analysis.

The Politics of Hong Kong

Since the transfer of sovereignty from the British to the Chinese government in 1997, the HKSAR has maintained a nondemocratic regime with limited electoral rights and civil liberties (Kwong and Wong Reference Kwong2017; Kwong Reference Kwong2018). The chief executive holds significant political power within the HKSAR political system, and the composition of the Chief Executive Election Committee has important implications for the distribution of this power. The committee is comprised of elites from the business, professional, social service, and political sectors, in line with the principle of “Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong.” In the 2017 election, the committee consisted of 1,200 elites, and according to the Basic Law Annex 1, any candidate for the position of chief executive must receive at least one-eighth of the nominations from committee members in order to run for election. In May 2020, electoral reforms increased the size of the committee to 1,500 members from the business, professional, social service, political, and China-affiliated sectors. Only members of the Chief Executive Election Committee have the power to nominate and vote for candidates for the position of chief executive. This institutional design allows the Chinese government to exert strict control over the composition of the committee, ensuring a majority of pro-China members.

Since 1997, Tung Chee-hwa and Donald Tsang were elected uncontested in 2002 and 2005, respectively, and competition for the position of chief executive began in 2007. In 2007, Donald Tsang received 649 votes (82.3 percent) out of 800; in 2012, Leung Chun-ying (C. Y. Leung) won 689 votes (60.9 percent) out of 1,200; and in 2017, Carrie Lam received 777 votes (65.5 percent) out of 1,200 and became the chief executive. For the current term, John Lee won 1,416 votes (99.16 percent) out of 1,500 in May 2022, with no competitors under the new electoral reform. The opposition has long criticized this chief executive election system as a “small-circle” election, as only a select few privileged individuals are able to participate (Wong and Kwong Reference Wong2020). This article focuses specifically on the political satire that took place during the administration of C. Y. Leung from July 2012 to June 2017.

Production: The Creation of the Political Nickname 689

In the context of Hong Kong, the use of political nicknames emerged as a prominent method for the opposition to deliver satirical messages about C. Y. Leung. After assuming the position of HKSAR chief executive in July 2012, C. Y. Leung faced a series of governance crises. In response, the opposition camp sought to strengthen their resistance and directly criticize the authorities. Wong Yuk-man, a legislator at the time and also a veteran journalist and former professor, played a pivotal role in advocating for radical forms of resistance, including filibusters and physical clashes in the Legislative Council. Drawing on his expertise in journalism and political satire, Wong created a political nickname to mock C. Y. Leung. This nickname was first revealed during a formal meeting of the Legislative Council on December 10, 2012, when Wong delivered a speech criticizing Leung as follows:

This speech caught the public’s attention, as it was unexpected for a legislator to use humor and a nickname to denounce the head of the HKSAR in a formal and open meeting. The speech quickly spread on both social and traditional media platforms. On Wong’s official YouTube channel alone, the video of the speech garnered over 275,000 views, a significant number for a political speech. Over the course of five years, 689 became a widely recognized nickname to refer to C. Y. Leung and the undemocratic system. Wong frequently mentioned this term in his speeches during Legislative Council meetings to remind the public and draw attention to the underlying message. On October 22, 2015, during C. Y. Leung’s last two question-and-answer sessions in the Legislative Council, Wong Yuk-man summarized the circulations for around three years and once again criticized the chief executive:

Message Delivery: Spread of 689 by Opposition Media

The next aspect to consider is the spread of the term 689 through the media. In Hong Kong, mainstream media can generally be divided into two political spectrums: pro-Beijing and prodemocracy. Similar to many nondemocratic regimes, the pro-Beijing media in Hong Kong have greater resources, and the Chinese government has effectively brought almost all mainstream media outlets into a united front (Fong Reference Fong2017). On the other hand, prodemocracy media outlets are limited in number and often face resource constraints. To expand their influence, prodemocracy media often employ satirical messages to criticize the authorities. Over the past few years, 689 has become a common term used by the opposition to communicate with the public and denounce C. Y. Leung’s performance.

Apple Daily, the only prodemocracy newspaper (ranked 12 by Alexa in Hong Kong on July 1, 2017), extensively utilized this form of satire, with 2,287 mentions of 689 in their news reports from December 11, 2021, to June 30, 2017. Two relatively neutral newspapers also featured reports and commentaries mentioning this nickname (824), while the pro-Beijing newspapers had the fewest mentions (238). This clearly demonstrates that 689 was a recurring term in the political narrative of prodemocracy media. They frequently used this term as a substitute for C. Y. Leung’s full name to capture people’s attention and remind the public that the chief executive was elected with only 689 votes.

During interviews, all the participants acknowledged the significance of mainstream media in terms of reach and circulation. With the spread of opposition media, the general population in Hong Kong, regardless of their political affiliations, had heard of and become familiar with 689. The consensus among the interviewees was that mainstream media remained an important channel for conveying opposition messages to supporters and facilitating further circulation. Political satire such as 689 served to encapsulate an “inherent distrust in the Chief Executive” (interview 13), express “strong demands for democratic reforms” (interview 3), and encourage citizens to “share and circulate the content” (interview 6). This sentiment was reflected in the remarks of an interviewee regarding the role of mainstream media in message delivery:

Reproduction: Political Satire from an Ongoing Perspective

One crucial function of political satire is to wait for people to discover, circulate, and engage with it (Yang and Jiang Reference Yang2015). Political satire covered by the media is recognized as originating from everyday interactions, spreading throughout society and allowing the audience to conceptualize politics in everyday terms (Tsakona and Popa Reference Tsakona2011). In the context of this article, collective reproduction refers to how ordinary citizens regenerate and integrate the political nickname to criticize the chief executive. In this regard, political memes can be reproduced by supporters in three ways: through (1) real-life protests, (2) the creation of new images for online circulation, and (3) product design (e.g., Shifman Reference Shifman2014). These three methods reflect how supporters further engage with and participate in politics through the use of 689.

The first indicator is the integration of 689 into political protests. Since the 1980s, Hong Kong people have become increasingly active in pressuring the government for a better quality of life and greater political rights. This wave of civil society activism intensified after 1997, and political protests have become the most common tactic used by the opposition to exert pressure on the government. As a result, some international media and Western researchers have labeled Hong Kong a “city of protest” (Dapiran Reference Dapiran2017). In recent years, social movement organizations have intentionally incorporated the nickname of C. Y. Leung into their protest slogans, framing their hatred and dissatisfaction with the chief executive. As one interviewee explained, “‘689’ has become a symbol of political protests” (interview 13). Table 1 and figure 3 provide further illustrations of this trend.

Table 1.

Major Political Campaigns Adopting the Term 689 by Social Movement Organizations

Source. Author’s analysis. Data adapted from Wisenews search engine.

Figure 3.

689 in protest. Protesters used “Final battle with 689! Unite and defend our Hong Kong” as a protest slogan. Source: HK01 (2016).

The second indicator involves the creation of new images for online circulation. Table 2 and figure 4 showcase significant events on platforms like Facebook where ordinary citizens generate content to condemn the chief executive. Some political signs are intentionally posted to criticize 689 (e.g., “Down with 689 Café”) while others (e.g., CY689 and D7689) may reflect supporters coincidentally coming across this term in their daily lives and finding it amusing and worthy of circulation. Consequently, these signs are embedded in unrelated contexts and nonpolitical products. As one interviewee noted, “Anonymous citizens have integrated this satire into their daily lives to continuously express their dissatisfaction” (interview 4).

Table 2.

Re-creation of 689 though Online Promotion

Source. Author’s analysis; Data adapted from Wisenews search engine.

Figure 4.

D7689 in Facebook post. Prodemocracy supporters cleverly incorporated the sign “D7689” into a Puma t-shirt, a registered trademark for a supposedly nonpolitical product, on Puma’s official Facebook page. As a result, Puma was compelled to issue an official apology for their ill-advised marketing stunt. Source: Hong Kong Free Press 2016.

The third indicator of supporters’ reproduction can be seen in “product design.” Some opposition parties and retailers have attempted to reprint the political nickname 689 on their products, further facilitating its circulation. Table 3 and figure 5 highlight important examples of how this message has been integrated.

Table 3.

689 in Product Regeneration

Source. Author’s analysis. Data adapted from Wisenews search engine.

Figure 5.

689 in towels. The Democratic Party marketed towels featuring the image of C. Y. Leung, with the intention of “cleaning with 689 faces.” Source: RTHK (2015).

Collective Reproduction of 689

In many political contexts, leaders are often denounced with various nicknames by opponents, commentators, and the media. Similarly, opposition politicians and media in Hong Kong have coined numerous nicknames for C. Y. Leung, raising the academic question of which one is more popularly used and why. Bippus (Reference Bippus2007) conducted empirical research on audience perceptions of political humor and identified the timing of production and the amusement it generates as two key factors in determining the effectiveness and “high quality” of satire. These factors can also be applied to the case of Hong Kong.

Throughout his administration, C. Y. Leung was denounced by four main nicknames: 689 (referring to the chief executive having received only 689 votes), “Wolf Ying” (cunning wolf), “Lufsig” (cunning wolf and a three-word phrase in Cantonese associated with female genitalia), and “Liar Ying” (a liar). Among these, 689 is the most popular nickname used by both the media and ordinary people. Figure 6 demonstrates the media coverage of these nicknames during C. Y. Leung’s term in office, clearly showing that 689 received the most coverage compared to the other three. Additionally, figure 7 reveals the nickname coverage on the three largest online forums in Hong Kong.

Figure 6.

C. Y. Leung’s nickname coverage in newspapers from July 2012 to June 2017 (N = 4,855). Source: Author’s analysis. Data is based on the analysis of thirteen newspapers in Hong Kong. Of the 4,855 newspaper articles, 3,349 are from “689,” 1,044 are from “Wolf Ying,” 426 are from “Lufsig,” and 36 are from “Liar Ying.”

Figure 7.

C. Y. Leung’s nickname coverage in online forums from July 2012 to June 2017 (N = 66,231). Source: Author’s analysis. Data is based on the analysis of discuss.com.hk (ranked 5 by Alexa in Hong Kong on July 1, 2017), hkgolden.com (ranked 25 by Alexa in Hong Kong on July 1, 2017), and uwants.com (ranked 32 by Alexa in Hong Kong on July 1, 2017). Among all coverage, 62,853 posts are from “689,” 1,710 are from “Wolf Ying,” 265 are from “Lufsig,” and 1,403 are from “Liar Ying.”

The popularity of 689 can be explained by the timing of its production. During the chief executive election of 2012, Henry Tang, the former chief secretary for administration and initially seen as the preferred candidate of the Chinese government, was defeated due to scandals involving illegal structures at his home. Although C. Y. Leung eventually emerged as the victor, he faced challenges in the election debates from both Henry Tang and Albert Ho, a prodemocracy candidate, regarding his alleged mention of deploying antiriot police and using tear gas to handle protests. At that time, there was also a soundbite from Henry Tang criticizing C. Y. Leung as a “liar” that initially shaped people’s perception of his integrity. About 10 days before he officially took office, it was revealed that C. Y. Leung had built two unauthorized structures at his luxury houses (Ming Pao Daily News 2012). This controversy received significant attention, providing an excellent opportunity for Wong Yuk-man to label Leung as “Mr. 689” in his speech and shift the focus from the illegal structures to Leung’s integrity. This political satire successfully captured the attention of both the media and ordinary Hong Kong people, making it memorable and attractive.

The amusement caused by 689 is another factor contributing to its popularity. Effective political satire can reduce the time costs associated with learning about political issues by providing entertainment (Baum Reference Baum2003) and attract supporters for creative reproduction to extend circulation (Rahimi Reference Rahimi2015). As observed from the interviews, the opposition integrated a humorous nickname into their criticisms, linking them to the existing legitimacy problems of the chief executive and the undemocratic political system. During the interviews, most participants acknowledged that this message had a “persuasive effect” on the audience regarding the political challenges they faced. The process of satirical reproduction infused new and creative elements into the original satire, enhancing its “circulation sustainability” and fueling continuous dissatisfaction with the administration (interviews 11 and 15). One participant explained this phenomenon:

During the interviews, most interviewees expressed positive views on circulating the 689 sign to foster collective solidarity among prodemocracy supporters. One participant explained why this meme can stimulate political participation:

Another interviewee shared observations that this meme facilitates solidarity building within the prodemocracy camp:

However, it is important to note that a political sign like 689 is unlikely to have any substantive effect compared with other stronger political factors. This article primarily relies on qualitative methods to examine the mechanisms of satirical production, message delivery, and reproduction. The next step would be to systematically test the correlation between the usage of satire and political participation in a quantitative study, considering the characteristics of “user-generated” content.