Piazza 1

The Art of Parody: Gerrymandering for Change, and Hope, or Whatever

From Vox to Fox News, media outlets across the political spectrum have offered their

takes on what gerrymandering is and how it should be addressed. Yet, the issue seems to receive

little attention at the national level: Donald Trump has no mention of it on his campaign

platform, and for most democratic candidates it’s merely a footnote or corollary to another policy

deemed more important. Whether this is because presidential candidates think most voters won’t

care about gerrymandering or because they personally don’t prioritize it, it falls upon local

organizations to take a stance on gerrymandering. One such organization, One Virginia 2021,

attempted to spread their message about gerrymandering leading up to the 2016 election with a

video entitled “Vote Jerry Mandering.” This video uses statistical reasoning and a comedic

approach to emotional appeal to encourage voters to take civic action on gerrymandering.

The advertisement uses data on incumbency to make an argument for why

gerrymandering undermines democracy. Towards the beginning of the video, fake political

candidate “Jerry Mandering” notes that “heck, every single member of the general assembly who

was already in office got reelected last year.” By alerting the viewer of Virginia’s incumbency

advantage (the structural advantage current officeholders have over challengers, often caused by

gerrymandering), he suggests that elections are much more frequently a result of systematic

advantages than the democratic will of the people. If the audience holds traditional democratic

ideals, they will see a problem with this and question why their vote isn’t the most important

factor. Jerry then furthers his argument by asserting that the incumbency seen in Virginia is

“thanks to the commonwealth’s unfair redistricting process.” By citing a specific advantage that

incumbents have, he turns an entire audience of engaged voters against the gerrymandering

practices utilized by the officials they often vote for.

 Piazza 2

After making its own argument about gerrymandering, the video turns its audience’s

emotions against candidates who support it. After proclaiming that he will “listen to your ideas”

and “work tirelessly for your causes,” Jerry inserts a letter from a constituent into a paper

shredder and shows an extended clip of him playing golf. By juxtaposing Jerry’s grandiose

promises with his lackluster deliveries, the video questions yet another value held by many

Americans: trust in one’s government. Americans tend to believe that they can trust their

representatives because they are the electorate who can vote them out. However, by calling this

into question, the video angers audiences by showing them the complete disregard a candidate

with guaranteed victory can have for their voter base.

In order to effectively use the appeals to logic and emotion that it does, the video relies

on its status as parody of a political advertisement, making an argument about gerrymandering

while simultaneously mocking current political candidates. The video begins with Jerry

declaring, “Virginians need change, and hope, or whatever, and I’ll bring change, and hope, or

whatever.” The video references the bold statements that politicians make about their

constituencies and their needs, but subverts this by adding “or whatever,” suggesting the

candidate has no concern for the desires of the voter base. This mocks typical campaign ads,

implying that candidates only say what they think the voters will want to hear instead of what

voters truly believe. Towards the end of the ad, Jerry explains why politicians do this by stating

that he is “probably, totally running unopposed.” He delivers this statement with a casual and

nonchalant tone, likely because he knows he is an incumbent candidate. By contrasting the

“standard” format of the political ad with his statements that he’s clearly going to win, the video

ties the previously established corruptness of political candidates to the practice of

gerrymandering.
 Piazza 3

One Virginia 2021’s parody advertisement is more persuasive than many other forms of

media which make similar arguments because it more readily presupposes certain ideas into its

audience. To see this, one can compare the political ad to two pieces of rhetoric which are also

against gerrymandering: an article from The Atlantic expressing a negative opinion about a

Supreme Court case, and a quote from Barack Obama written in the font Gerry, whose letters are

gerrymandered districts. An appeal to common ideas is effective because the audience has those

ideas before being told any arguments by the rhetor. In the article from The Atlantic, author

Steve Israel presents the statistic that only 21 congressional districts in the United States are

considered competitive. However, instead of relying on common values like fairness to let the

audience come to a conclusion, he goes on to explain how this is a result of the current political

climate. This may make his argument more logically sound, but it also makes it less

approachable and compelling from the perspective of the audience. The quote in Gerry is a bit

better in this respect: it lets the audience use ideas like fairness and what a good district should

look like to come to a problematic realization about the font’s existence. However, this relies

somewhat heavily on ideas that not everyone shares: for example, there aren’t as many people

that have pondered what a good district looks like as there are that have, say, watched a political

advertisement. This is where One Virginia 2021’s ad really shines. Psychology professor

Francesca D’Errico noted in her paper The Bitter Laughter that parody which effectively

recategorizes its target “triggers more negative emotions, and in particular indignation, that in

turn lead to more negative evaluations of the target.” In other words, when a rhetorical work uses

a shared piece of knowledge directly to make an argument (as in parody) rather than simply

relying on it for the audience to understand it, the audience will react more strongly.
 Piazza 4

All this discussion of whether this kind of rhetoric is effective inevitably returns to the

initial question: does it succeed as a civic call to action, and ultimately as a catalyst for change?

The strength of the rhetorical strategies proves it is persuasive at the local level where it was

aired; however, does that matter since politicians don’t seem to care about gerrymandering at the

national level? The answer is that it absolutely does. Encouraging citizens to get involved with

local activist organizations like One Virginia 2021 is one of the most effective calls to action

possible. This can be seen through examples the Pennsylvania League of Women Voters, a local

organization who spurred the recent redistricting in the state. For better or for worse, changing

practices like gerrymandering comes down to promoting local and state level organizations, and

One Virginia 2021 has successfully heeded that call.

 Piazza 5

Works Cited

Bishara, Hakim, et al. “Maps of Gerrymandered Districts Are Turned Into a Typeface.”

Hyperallergic, 7 Aug. 2019, hyperallergic.com/512685/maps-of-gerrymandered-districts-

are-turned-into-a-typeface/.

D'Errico, Francesca, and Isabella Poggi. “‘The Bitter Laughter’. When Parody Is a Moral and

Affective Priming in Political Persuasion.” Frontiers in Psychology, Frontiers Media S.A.,

9 Aug. 2016, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4977313/.

Steve Israel, Zach Wamp. “As Bad as Citizens United.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company,

27 June 2019, www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/gerrymandering-decision-

worst-long-time/592843/.

YouTube. (2019). Vote Jerry Mandering. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-

zMqxdNUDOo