It’s trying to deceive the reader at first. “I think the Sixth Circuit ruling seemed to misunderstand what parody is,” says Mr Gillis. It argues that the court’s requirement that Mr Novak identify his work as a parody negates its very purpose. The Onion, which for years has fooled politicians and other news outlets into mistaking its own satirical articles for genuine news, saw a hole in the court’s argument. The court’s reasoning was that police “could reasonably believe that some of Novak’s Facebook activity was not parody”, in part because Mr Novak “delet comments that made clear the page was fake”. The case might have ended there, but when he filed a civil rights case over his arrest it was thrown out by the Sixth Circuit. Mr Novak was prosecuted, but found not guilty at trial. After receiving nearly a dozen calls from members of the public who didn’t get the joke, Parma police arrested Mr Novak, seized his electronics and charged him with a felony law that criminalises using a computer to disrupt police operations. In March 2016, Mr Novak created a Facebook page that parodied the Parma police department’s online page. The brief is centered around the case of Mr Novak, a resident of Parma, Ohio. He wrote most of the brief in one go, with input from The Onion’s own legal team and Mr Novak’s. “Our legal team looked at it, our editorial team looked at it, and we decided that it was not only interesting on its own merits, but it was also symbolic of the kind of protection that we want to see parody law afforded in the US, and has historically been afforded in the US,” Mr Gillis says. It became aware of the case through a mutual friend of the publication’s managing editor who was involved with the case. The Onion was founded in Wisconsin in 1988 as a small campus newspaper and grew to a valuation of $500m in 2016. “I hope it’s taken in the spirit that it’s intended, which is a sincere defence of parody, and why parody deserves this kind of historic space to operate, and why that should be kind of a blanket protection for all US citizens,” he told The Independent by phone this week. The brief is a departure from the staid language of a typical amicus brief, but that is precisely the point, according to its primary author, Mike Gillis, head writer at The Onion. They sweetly whisper ‘ stare decisis’ into their spouses’ ears,” before declaring its own writers “far more talented” than the “hack” Jonathan Swift. It further notes that “the federal judiciary is staffed entirely by total Latin dorks: They quote Catullus in the original Latin in chambers. This brief is submitted in the interest of at least mitigating their future punishment,” it reads. “As the globe’s premier parodists, The Onion’s writers also have a self-serving interest in preventing political authorities from imprisoning humorists. It is also, in parts, a work of parody itself. The brief is a spirited defence of parody as protected under the First Amendment. The Onion, known for its sardonic and irreverent headlines (“ Children, Creepy Middle-Aged Weirdos Swept Up In Harry Potter Craze”) and its use of humour to address serious issues such as mass shootings (“‘ No Way to Prevent This’, Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens”), filed a 23-page brief in support of Mr Novak on Monday.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |