American online commentary is divided into two camps over the shocking murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson: Those who are mocking his death and those upset by the jokes. The author of the recently published "Wisecracks: Humor and Morality in Everyday Life," David Shoemaker, a professor in ethics and public life at Cornell University, says that the darker-than-darkly humorous comments and the horrified responses to them are compatible forms of righteous blame.
Shoemaker says: “What those engaged in dark humor are actually taking as their object of fun often seems to be the deliciously ironic setback of a deliberately faceless corporation, one that is taken to dole out coverage of healthcare in a callous and cold, even kingly, calculative fashion. These funny-makers are making light of a harm to The Corporation, a blobject seen as deserving sarcasm and mockery. They are schadenfreude-ing the pain caused to a company that is taken not to care about pain.
“But those who are horrified by this humor are focused on a different object, namely, a fellow human being, one whose own death was surely not deserved. Those who are horrified empathize with this fellow human. Both reactions are deeply human and understandable, even though they are in deep tension.
“Some humor—mockery, sarcasm, and satire—can be a really effective way to deliver the sting of angry blame, a way of highlighting for public ridicule someone’s wrongdoing. It is also a violence-free, and so morally preferable, way of blaming. This is why it's a crucial part of our ethical lives, an effective way of keeping each other in line that’s much safer and morally better than angry finger-wagging or retributive violence.”
For interviews contact Ellen Leventry, (607) 288-3784, eel2@cornell.edu.
More News from A&S
TikTok heading to SCOTUS: ‘Constitutional freedoms versus national security’
Government and technology
