Most editorial cartoons make a forceful point in a playful manner.  I think the artful combination of wit and cheeky criticism explains their popular appeal and potential effectiveness, but also hints at a possible limitation.  Historical studies of political cartoons (see Backer, 1996 and Neiman Reports, 2004) describe the ways in which Martin Luther in the 16th century, Benjamin Franklin in the 18th century, and people like Thomas Nast and Herb Block in the 19th and 20th centuries, respectively, satirized the political economies of their day through illustration.

More recently, in 2005, the Zeitschrift Entwicklungspolitik and the Third World Journalists’ Network sponsored a cartoon competition on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).  Entitled “Millennium Development Goals for a More Equitable Future and Global Partnership”, the competition received 190 entries from Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, and Scandinavia.  The entries visually depict a wide range of international development issues covered by the MDGs, such as poverty reduction, environmental conservation, and gender equality. 

I carried out a pilot content analysis on the 34 entries from G8 countries, since they provide a sizable share of official development assistance toward achieving the MDGs.  Given the research-supported belief that the news media influence policy, it is important to take stock of the ways in which visual editorials from these countries depict development issues.  A majority of the these entries demonstrate competitive relationships between rich and poor countries through visual metaphors.  For example, one entry shows a chess board with all the pawns on one side pitted against all the higher ranking pieces on the other.  Less than a fifth of the cartoons present collaborative relationships between the developed and developing world.  A large majority of the entries, three-fourths, depict pessimistic themes and only a fourth show optimism.  In sum, I found competition and pessimism as dominant content in most cartoon entries from the G8.

How might communication studies interpret these findings?  Well, both visual and political communication scholars have argued that evocative visuals are more persuasive than the spoken or written word.  Moreover, there is historical documentation of popular belief in the power of political cartoons toward shaping public opinion.  In Dirty Politics: Deception, Distraction, and Democracy, Kathleen Hall Jamieson writes that at the end of the 19th century, “So outraged were California legislators about being pilloried in cartoons that in 1899 passed an anticartoon law forbidding caricatures that reflected on character” (1992, p. 46).  In 2005, the same year the MDG cartoon competition was held, the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons resulted in a global controversy that led to the outbreak of violence on the streets of various major cities in the Middle East and Africa.

So what does all this say about the possible impact of editorial cartoons on international development?  Proponents of political illustration would argue that satirizing relationships between the Global North and South can conscienticize audiences and serve as incentives for rich country political elites to work harder toward achieving the MDGs.  Critics might say that a steady stream of competitive and pessimistic depictions might lead to cynicism toward development and public detachment from international affairs.

The answer probably lies somewhere in the middle.  Editorial cartoons are able to make powerful arguments with irreverence.  When well executed, humorous elements tend to take off the visceral edge and, perhaps, lead to more thoughtful consideration of development issues and challenges.  There are exceptions, of course, such as the Jyllands-Posten controversy.  In most cases, however, the genre combines the authority of the journalist in elucidating public affairs and the immunity of the court jester from royal reprimand.  That this form of political communication can conscienticize without being preachy is its strength.  Distracting its audience from recognizing the gravity of the situation with a punch line may be its limitation.

Photo credit: Flickr user  Sbocaj