THE IMPLICATURE ANALYSIS ON KIKY SAPUTRI’S SATIRE IN LAPOR PAK

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Research

Humor is an important aspect of human communication that serves many purposes. It not

only makes people laugh, but it also allows people to connect, lighten difficult conversations,
(1993)
and even question social norms in a subtle way. According to Berger , humor employs a

variety of techniques, including satire, irony, exaggeration, and implicature, to allow speakers to
(2018)
express ideas in indirect but impactful ways. Martin and Ford also emphasize the

psychological and social effects of humor, which influence people's perceptions and attitudes.

Humor also plays a significant role in political studies, particularly as an effective tool for

delivering social criticism in an indirect yet powerful way. According to Nugraha (2023),

political humor serves as a medium for critique, resistance, and public engagement, enabling

individuals to discuss sensitive issues without direct confrontation. In this way, humor not only

facilitates discussions on serious topics but also acts as a protective mechanism for individuals

who wish to voice their opinions without fear. Additionally, humor provides emotional relief,

allowing people to laugh at frustrating or challenging situations while still acknowledging their

significance.

Humor in politics is not merely a source of entertainment but also holds the power to

shape public opinion. Through humor, political messages can be more easily accepted by society

due to their lighthearted and entertaining nature. For instance, satire is often used in mass media,

political comedy shows, or social media memes to critique government policies and political
figures. This aligns with Meyer’s (2000) argument that humor can be an effective persuasive tool

as it captures attention, builds shared understanding, and even influences audience attitudes

toward specific issues.

Humor’s ability to shape public perception is closely tied to its linguistic and cognitive
(1975)
mechanisms, which enhance its persuasive effect. Grice’s implicature theory explains how

communication extends beyond literal meaning by relying on implied messages, a strategy

commonly employed in political humor to enhance its persuasive effect. Instead of stating

criticism outright, speakers use indirect language to hint at deeper meanings, allowing the

audience to interpret the message on their own. This makes humor a subtle yet powerful way to

highlight societal issues without directly attacking individuals. According to Sperber and
(2021)
Wilson’s Relevance Theory in Castaldi , the effectiveness of political humor depends on

the audience’s ability to interpret contextual cues and connect them to existing political and

social knowledge. If the audience understands the references and context, they will find the

humor more meaningful and thought-provoking.

Beyond its rhetorical and cognitive aspects, this form of discourse manifests in

various styles, including parody and jokes, each contributing uniquely to its persuasive

impact. While it broadly encompasses all forms of amusement that elicit laughter and

emotional responses, parody and jokes serve as specific mechanisms through which deeper

messages are conveyed. Parody, according to Hutcheon (2000), imitates and distorts the

style, character, or elements of a work or individual to convey criticism or entertainment.

Meanwhile, jokes, as a more concise and structured form, often rely on surprising or

shifting audience expectations to provoke laughter. In the context of the television show

Lapor Pak, these three elements satire, parody, and jokes intertwine to create a
multifaceted and effective rhetorical effect, facilitating the delivery of social and political

criticism in an engaging and thought-provoking manner.

Satire, as a rhetorical device, plays a crucial role in subtly critiquing political figures and

policies by using irony, exaggeration, and sarcasm to expose contradictions and injustices. Satire

helps point out flaws in the government or society without directly attacking anyone, making it a

clever way to encourage change. It allows people to see problems from a different perspective

and think critically about issues they might otherwise overlook. Audience Reception Theory by
(2021)
Hall in Castaldi further suggests that individuals may interpret political humor differently,

either accepting, negotiating, or rejecting its underlying message based on their perspectives.

This means that while some people find political jokes funny and insightful, others might see

them as offensive or misleading, depending on their beliefs. The way people react to satire is

influenced by their political stance, personal experiences, and cultural background. In Indonesia,

shows like Lapor Pak exemplify how humor is strategically used to critique political issues in a

manner that remains entertaining. By making people laugh while discussing serious topics, these

shows help audiences think critically without feeling pressured or uncomfortable.

In addition to that, stand-up comedy is a form of live performance where comedians

deliver humorous monologues, often incorporating observational humor, satire, and personal
(2022)
anecdotes. According to Ahmad et al. , stand-up comedy serves as a cultural and social

commentary, providing a platform for comedians to critique societal norms, politics, and daily

life. Comedians often share stories about real-life situations that audiences can relate to, making

their jokes more engaging. By addressing common struggles and frustrations, they create a sense

of shared experience, making their performances more impactful. This form of performance

enables comedians to highlight everyday struggles and injustices through a comedic lens, making
complex issues more relatable to audiences. The performance style relies on timing, delivery,
(2023)
and audience interaction to enhance comedic impact. Nugraha define stand-up comedy as

one of the purest forms of comedic expression, where performers engage directly with audiences,

adjusting their material based on real-time reactions. This means comedians must be quick to

change their jokes or delivery depending on how the audience responds, keeping the

performance lively and entertaining. A joke that works for one audience may not work for

another, requiring comedians to be adaptable and creative. This unique format allows comedians

to establish a rapport with their audience, making the humor more engaging and impactful

specifically towards the target audiences of each comedian. By tailoring their material to their

audience’s interests and experiences, comedians can create a deeper connection and deliver more

effective humor.

Another important aspect is that the media platforms for stand-up comedy have evolved

significantly, expanding beyond traditional live performances to television, streaming services,

and social media. With the rise of digital platforms, comedians now reach global audiences

through YouTube, Netflix, and other streaming services, democratizing access to comedy (Fahad

& Mustafa, 2024). This shift has given comedians more creative freedom, as they are no longer

restricted by television networks or live venues. This shift has allowed stand-up comedians to

experiment with different formats, including stand-up specials, sketches, and interactive online

content, broadening their reach and influence. Television shows like The Tonight Show and

Comedy Central Presents have historically been instrumental in popularizing stand-up comedy

by providing comedians with broader exposure. In Indonesia, platforms like YouTube and

TikTok have allowed emerging comedians to gain recognition without relying solely on

traditional media channels. Many comedians use these platforms to post short clips of their
performances, which can go viral and bring them more followers. This has made it easier for

comedians to build their names. These digital spaces also facilitate audience engagement through

comment sections and direct feedback, enhancing stand-up comedy. This instant feedback helps

comedians understand what people enjoy and adjust their material accordingly. They can see

which jokes get the best reactions and improve their routines based on audience responses.

As a result, the rise of social media has further transformed stand-up comedy by allowing

comedians to share short clips, test new material, and engage with audiences instantly. Platforms

like Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok have enabled comedians to adapt their performances to

shorter, fast-paced content that aligns with contemporary media consumption habits
(Satria Nugraha & Sanata Dharma Jl Affandi, 2023)
. This shift has also given rise to internet-based humor,

where memes, viral jokes, and online sketches nowadays have complemented traditional stand-

up formats. Furthermore, the accessibility of social media allows comedians to bypass industry

gatekeepers, offering direct engagement with their audience while fostering a more interactive

and participatory comedy culture.

Despite its evolution, stand-up comedy remains rooted in live performance, where the

interaction between comedian and audience is crucial. The medium’s adaptability to various

platforms demonstrates its cultural significance as both entertainment and a form of social

critique. Whether performed on stage or online, stand-up comedy continues to entertain and

educate audiences around the world. It remains one of the few art forms that can tackle serious

topics while still making people laugh. Live stand-up performances provide an irreplaceable

sense of immediacy and energy, creating an atmosphere that cannot be replicated through digital

media alone. The presence of a live audience adds spontaneity to performances, as comedians

often needs audience reactions, adjusting their delivery in real time to enhance comedic impact.
Comedians continue to use humor to navigate complex topics, challenge authority, and create

conversations about societal issues, reinforcing stand-up comedy’s role as a powerful medium of

expression. By making serious topics easier to talk about, comedians encourage discussion and

awareness among their audiences. This allows comedy to act as both a form of entertainment and

a tool for social change. As digital platforms continue to grow, stand-up comedy will likely

evolve further, blending live performance with online engagement to reach wider and more

audiences. he future of comedy may involve new forms of storytelling and interaction, keeping

audiences engaged in fresh and exciting ways.

Political satire is one of the most effective uses of humor, in which jokes are used to

criticize political figures and societal issues. Political humor allows criticism to be delivered

subtly, reducing the risk of backlash while conveying a powerful message. This approach is

particularly useful in places where direct political criticism may lead to controversy or even legal

consequences. In many cases, humor works by implying a meaning rather than explicitly stating

it, which makes it more appealing to viewers. By hiding criticism within humor, comedians can

engage audience’s attention who might avoid political discussions, making make important
(1975)
issues easier to understand. In this context, Grice's concept of implicature is essential for

understanding humor in political conversations.

Implicature refers to the implicit meanings that listeners must deduce from context and
(1975)
shared knowledge. Grice introduced the concept as a component of pragmatics, which

investigates how meaning is conveyed beyond literal words. He introduced the Cooperative

Principle, which states that conversations should adhere to four maxims, which is Maxim of

Quantity - Say as much as necessary, but not too much; Maxim of Quality - Be truthful; Maxim

of Relevance - Be relevance; and Maxim of Manner - Be clear and organized.

 However, humor frequently works by deliberately breaking these rules in order to convey

indirect meanings. For example, a comedian might provide excessive or insufficient information

(violating the Maxim of Quantity), make obviously false statements (violating the Maxim of

Quality), introduce unrelated topics (violating the Maxim of Relevance), or use ambiguous

phrasing (violating the Maxim of Manner). There are two kinds of implicature that play an

essential role in humor; Conversational implicature, which relies on the context of the

conversation to convey meaning, and Conventional implicature, which is tied to specific words

such as 'but,' 'even,' and 'however' that carry inherent implications regardless of context.

Conversational implicature is more relevant in political humor because comedians imply

a message rather than explicitly state it. For example, if a politician claims to have resolved a

major issue, a comedian might say, "Oh wow, so no more problems at all, right?" The audience

interprets this as sarcasm, implying disbelief or criticism of the politician's claim. This technique

allows comedians to question those in power while still avoiding direct accusations. Instead of

openly calling someone out, they let the audience figure out the joke on their own, which often

makes the joke more effective. This example illustrates how conversational implicature functions

as a subtle yet powerful communicative strategy in political humor. To further understand how

this strategy compares with other forms of indirect expression, it is important to examine its

relationship with satire, a genre that similarly relies on implication but differs in its level of

explicitness and intent.

Implicature and satire share similarities in conveying messages indirectly, but they

differ in approach and communicative intent. Implicature theory, introduced by Grice

(1975), explains that meaning in communication is not always explicitly stated but is

inferred through contextual cues provided by the speaker and understood by the listener.
In humor, implicature is often used to subtly convey criticism while avoiding direct

confrontation. Meanwhile, satire is a more explicit form of expression that critiques or

ridicules social, political, or cultural phenomena, often employing sarcasm or irony

(Simpson, 2003). The key difference lies in the level of explicitness implicature tends to be

more subtle and relies on the audience’s interpretation, whereas satire is more direct and

sharp in its criticism.

Political humor is widely used in Indonesian media, especially in talk shows like Lapor

Pak, which combine comedy and current events. Kiky Saputri, one of its hosts, is well-known for

her ability to use humor in interviews with political figures. Instead of directly questioning or

confronting politicians, she frequently uses indirect but sharp jokes to keep her interactions

entertaining and thought-provoking. Her approach makes the show engaging, as it balances

humor with political messages, making sure that audiences remain entertained while being subtly

informed about current affairs.

Kiky's comedic style relies heavily on conversational implicature. She frequently deviates

from Grice's maxims for comedic effect, allowing her to make political statements without

explicitly stating them. For example, if a politician makes an ambitious promise, she might

jokingly say, "Pasti besok langsung beres ya, Pak?" ("It'll definitely be fixed by tomorrow,

right?"). While the literal meaning implies agreement, the implication is skepticism and

criticism, which the audience interprets based on the context. By making her questions as sound

playful, she encourages politicians to respond in a similarly relaxed manner, which sometimes

leading them to reveal more than they intended.

This indirect mode of communication not only engages the audience but also allows for

reasonable denial; if a joke is criticized, the comedian can claim it was a joke rather than a
serious critique. This technique is particularly useful in political discussions, where direct

criticism can be contentious. As a result, political humor, especially when using implicature, is

an effective way to entertain people while also making them think about important political and

social issues.

1.2 Statement of Problem & Research Questions

Despite the growing use of conversational implicature in Indonesian political humor,

academic research on this topic is limited. Many studies on implicature focus on advertising,

legal discourse, and classroom interactions, but few look into its role in political talk shows. This

study aims to fill that gap by investigating how Kiky Saputri employs conversational implicature

in her jokes when interacting with political guests on Lapor Pak.

In this research, the research questions are as follows:

1. How does Kiky Saputri use implicature in her jokes when addressing politican guests on

Lapor Pak?

2. What types of implicature are present in Kiky Saputri’s jokes on Lapor Pak?

1.3 Research Objective & Significance

This study is significant because it improves our understanding of how conversational

implicature is used as a strategy in humorous political discourse. The study, which examines

actual conversations between Kiky Saputri and politicians, will help advance pragmatics,

sociolinguistics, and media studies, particularly in Indonesia. It will also provide insights into

how humor can be used for both entertainment and political engagement.
 Furthermore, this research looks at how comedians use indirect language to address

political issues, making criticism more acceptable to the public. In an era where political

discussions are frequently sensitive or polarized, media professionals, linguists, and the general

public must understand how implicature allows for subtle but impactful commentary.

This study, which focuses on conversational implicature in Kiky Saputri's political

humor, will shed light on how linguistic strategies shape political discourse and public

perceptions. It will also demonstrate how humor influences political discourse, demonstrating

that jokes are more than just entertainment; they are an effective mode of communication.

Moreover, this research highlights how comedians use indirect language to address political

issues, making criticism more acceptable to the public. In an era where political discussions are

often sensitive or polarized, understanding how implicature allows for subtle but impactful

commentary is valuable for media professionals, linguists, and the general public.

By focusing on conversational implicature in Kiky Saputri’s political humor, this study

will shed light on how linguistic strategies influence political conversations and public

perceptions. It will also demonstrate the role of humor in shaping political discourse, proving

that jokes are more than just entertainment, they are a powerful form of communication.

1.4 Scope & Limitation

The scope of this research is focused on Kiky Saputri's use of implicature in jokes while

interacting with political guests on Lapor Pak talk show. The analysis will be limited to:

1. Selected episode with politican guests only that will be chosen based on the presence of

political humor.

2. Verbal communication only, excluding gesture and non-verbal cues.

 3. The use of Implicature in Kiky Saputri’s jokes when addressing politican guests on Lapor

Pak.

CHAPTER 2

THEORETICAL REVIEW

2.1 Implicature

One fascinating aspect of language use is implicature, a concept introduced by Grice

(1975), which refers to utterances that convey meanings beyond their literal interpretation.

Implicature requires contextual analysis rather than relying solely on the explicit words or

sentences used by the speaker. According to Grice (1975), implicature is an embedded meaning

that must be interpreted based on various contextual factors, including the speaker's culture,

religion, and beliefs. This means that understanding an utterance's true intent often requires

considering the speaker's background and social environment, as these elements influence how

meaning is conveyed and perceived.

The theory that forms the foundation of this study is H.P. Grice’s Theory of Implicature,

which is a crucial concept in the field of pragmatics. Implicature is a fundamental concept in the
(Ekoro & Gunn, 2021)
field of pragmatics, introduced by H.P. Grice . It refers to what is suggested

in an utterance, even if it is not explicitly stated. Grice’s Theory of Implicature posits that

effective communication is governed by the Cooperative Principle. This principle is based on the

idea that participants in a conversation work together to achieve understanding.

 Implicature is a concept in pragmatics that explains how speakers often communicate

meanings beyond their literal words. According to Grice (1975), implicature occurs when the

meaning of an utterance goes beyond what is explicitly stated, requiring listeners to infer the

intended message based on context. Implicature allows speakers to convey additional meanings

indirectly, often making communication more engaging and nuanced.

Grice categorized implicature into two main types: conventional implicature and

conversational implicature. While both involve implied meaning, they differ in their dependence

on context. Conventional implicature is tied to specific words, whereas conversational

(Rhamadani et al., 2022)
implicature is derived from the context and interaction between speakers .

Implicature Theory, as introduced by Grice (1975), explains how meaning can be

conveyed indirectly through conversation, often relying on shared assumptions and context

rather than literal expressions. For instance, in the example where Person 1 asks whether bus X

has passed and Person 2 responds, “I’m waiting for it,” the literal answer does not directly

respond with “yes” or “no,” yet Person 1 understands the implication that the bus likely hasn’t

passed because if it had, Person 2 wouldn’t still be waiting. This hidden but understood meaning

is called a conversational implicature, derived from the assumption that speakers generally

cooperate in conversation and adhere to what Grice terms the Cooperative Principle (CP). CP is

composed of four maxims: Quantity (give the right amount of information), Quality (be truthful),

Relation (be relevant), and Manner (be clear). When a speaker seems to violate one of these

maxims, listeners intuitively infer an implicature to preserve the assumption of cooperation.

These implicatures can be conventional, relying on societal or linguistic norms (e.g., the use of

“but” suggesting contrast), or conversational, relying more on context and intention. Importantly,

implicatures are cancelable and context-dependent, yet they often carry significant
communicative weight, allowing for nuanced, polite, or subtly expressive interactions. Grice

emphasizes that even in informal or “tribal” conversations, some level of shared conversational

logic exists, enabling effective communication through the calculation of what is implied rather

than explicitly stated.

2.1.1 Conventional Implicature

Conventional implicature refers to meanings that are inherently attached to specific words,

regardless of context. Unlike conversational implicature, which depends on how a sentence is

used in an interaction, conventional implicature is fixed and consistent across different

(Rhamadani et al., 2022)
conversations . Certain words, such as “but,” “even,” “therefore,” and

“yet,” inherently imply additional meanings. These words do not change their implicature based

on conversation but always introduce an expected contrast, emphasis, or consequence. These

triggers are classified into three main types based on their linguistic form: lexical, paroemic, and

syntactic, which facilitates their identification and classification within discourse (Bezugla et al,

2023).

1. Lexical Implicature

Lexical implicature depends on specific words or lexical units that carry semantic

presuppositions. For example, in the Ukrainian language, the verb розбудити (‘to wake

someone up’) presupposes that the person was asleep (я спав). Similarly, nominal phrases such

as її мама (‘her mother’) presuppose the existence of the referent mentioned—in this case, the

mother of the person being referred to (Bezugla et al, 2023).

 Consider the following discourse:

“Я запрошував, але її мама не зносить машин”

(“I invited her, but her mother can’t stand cars.”)

Implicature: Her mother will also be coming.

Trigger: the noun phrase “її мама”

This implicature is considered conventional because the meaning is accessible even outside

of a specific conversational context, solely based on the semantic properties of the lexical unit

(Meibauer, 2001).

2. Paroemic Implicature

Paroemic implicature is triggered by phraseological units such as aphorisms, proverbs, and

sayings. The meaning of this implicature depends on both the paroemic expression and the

surrounding discourse context. For instance, the Ukrainian proverb Старої любові й іржа не

їсть (“Old love does not rust”) implies that the speaker or the addressee still harbors old feelings

of love (Bezugla et al, 2023). In discourse:

“Старої любові й іржа не їсть”

Implicature: You are still in love with them.

Although the referent can shift according to context, the implicature remains fixed due to the

semantic structure of the expression.

3. Syntactic Implicature

Syntactic implicature is associated with fixed syntactic patterns that form rhetorical

structures such as rhetorical questions, rhetorical affirmations, or rhetorical imperatives. These

patterns are referred to as phrase templates because they are not freely constructed but rather

have conventionalized effects (Bezugla et al, 2023). For example:

“Мені саме тепер до драматургії”

(“As if I’m in the mood for drama right now.”)

Implicature: I don’t want to go to the theater.

Trigger: rhetorical affirmative structure

These syntactic constructions are not free in form, and when filled with certain lexical

content, they conventionally generate specific implicatures. As Fleischer (1997) notes, these

constructions exist at the boundary between syntax and phraseology.

2.1.2 Conversational Implicature

In Tamburini (2023) Conversational implicature refers to a pragmatic inference that begins

with the premise that a speaker says something (for example, q), from which it is concluded that

the speaker actually intends to convey something else (for example, p). Thus, the basic structure

of conversational implicature follows this pattern of reasoning:

 The speaker says q

 Therefore, it can be inferred that the speaker means p

The core idea in Grice’s theory of implicature lies in the act of implicating—that is, when a

speaker intends to communicate more than what is explicitly stated. In many cases, this act of

implicating resembles everyday notions such as hinting, suggesting, or implying.

Grice identifies three main types of conversational implicatures, categorized based on

whether or not the speaker adheres to the conversational maxims:

 1. Implicatures that observe the maxims: These occur when the speaker fully complies with

the cooperative principle and all four conversational maxims (quantity, quality, relation,

and manner).

2. Implicatures that arise from blatant flouting of maxims (what Grice terms exploitation):

This type, sometimes referred to as Group-C implicatures, occurs when the speaker

intentionally violates a maxim, relying on the hearer to infer the intended meaning

precisely because of the violation. Importantly, the cooperative principle is still assumed

to be in effect, so the violation becomes a clue for interpretation.

Grice also distinguishes between particularised and generalised conversational

implicatures:

 Particularised implicature: Arises in specific contexts and depends heavily on shared

background knowledge or situational cues.

 Generalised implicature: Does not require special context to be understood and tends to

arise more universally from conventional usage.

In Grice’s framework, the act of saying that p requires satisfying two main conditions:

1. p must be closely related to the conventional meaning of the utterance.

2. The speaker must actually intend to communicate p.

If either of these conditions is not met, then, according to Grice, the speaker has not truly

said p. In cases where the speaker does not intend the literal meaning, but still wishes to convey

something indirectly (as in figurative language), Grice introduces the notion of “making as if to
say”. This involves pretending to assert a literal meaning in order to trigger a different, intended

interpretation in the listener’s mind.

Furthermore, Grice argues that conversational implicatures cannot occur without an

utterance or a pretense of utterance. However, the article explores an extended view in which

silence in the presence of shared communicative norms—may also generate implicatures. In such

cases, a speaker can imply something merely by remaining silent, provided there is a recognized

norm being violated. This extension pushes the boundaries of what qualifies as a conversational

implicature, suggesting that certain types of pragmatic inference function similarly to

conventional implicatures even in the absence of verbal expression.

2.1.3 Types of Conversational Implicature

Grice (1975) further classified conversational implicature into two types:

1. Generalized Conversational Implicature

The implied meaning is understood without needing specific context.

Example: “A man walked into the room.”

Implicature: The man is not known to the speaker because no name was mentioned.

2. Particularized Conversational Implicature

The implied meaning depends on a specific context and cannot be understood without

it.

Example:

A: “Where is the fried chicken?”

B: “Look at the cat; it looks very happy.”

 Implicature: The cat ate the chicken, but this meaning only makes sense in the given

situation.

2.1.7 Satire as a Form of Communication

Satire functions as a rhetorical device that uses humor, irony, and exaggeration to critique
(2003)
societal norms, political figures, and institutional structures. Simpson highlights that satire

often operates through implicature, as it delivers critical messages indirectly, allowing for a more

nuanced and layered form of communication. This indirectness is particularly valuable in

political discourse, where direct criticism may provoke backlash or censorship. In framing

critiques in a humorous context, satirists can address sensitive issues while maintaining

engagement and avoiding overt confrontation. The use of implicature in satire encourages

audiences to read between the lines, fostering critical thinking and active interpretation of the
(Oswald, 2023)
underlying messages .

In contemporary contexts, satire has emerged not only as a tool for entertainment but also

as a legitimate means of political engagement and social commentary. According to Holm

(2018), the 21st century has witnessed a growing integration between comedy and politics,

evident in the increasing popularity of politically driven comedy shows, such as The Daily Show,

Veep, and Spitting Image. These platforms utilize humor to dissect current events and public

policies, transforming complex issues into accessible discourse.

Moreover, the influence of satire is not confined to professional media productions. The

proliferation of satirical content online—ranging from political memes, gifs, and comedic

podcasts to social media commentary—has further solidified satire’s position in everyday

political dialogue. These forms allow the public to engage in political critique in creative,
humorous ways, blurring the boundaries between entertainment and activism (Holm, 2018;

Baym & Jones, 2013).

Interestingly, satire’s cultural relevance is reinforced by the rise of comedian-politicians,

such as Volodymyr Zelensky in Ukraine and Beppe Grillo in Italy, demonstrating that humor is

not just a tool to critique power, but also a viable path to attaining it. These figures exemplify

how comedic personas can resonate with the public and challenge traditional political norms,

turning satire into both commentary and strategy (Milburn, 2018).

Furthermore, the global spread of satirical practices highlights its adaptability across

cultures. In authoritarian contexts like China, satire emerges subtly through social media, such as

the use of Winnie the Pooh as a proxy to mock President Xi Jinping—leading to censorship of

the character online (Freudenstein, 2020). Such instances underscore satire’s capacity to navigate

restrictions and foster resistance.

Ultimately, satire functions as more than comedic relief; it has become an essential

communicative form that enables critique, provokes thought, and encourages public engagement

with political and social issues. As Critchley (2002) and Jones (2010) suggest, satire can be both

intellectually subversive and emotionally resonant, providing a space where laughter becomes a

mechanism for resistance. This makes satire a powerful instrument in shaping public discourse,

especially in media-saturated, politically dynamic environments.

2.1.7 Differences between Implicature and Satire

Implicature is a concept in pragmatics introduced by Paul Grice (1975) in his

Cooperative Principle and Conversational Implicature theory. Grice explained that meaning
in conversation is not solely dependent on explicit speech but also on how listeners

interpret implicit meanings based on context and conversational norms. Implicature allows

humor to emerge through violations of conversational maxims, such as the maxim of

quality (delivering something not entirely true) or the maxim of relation (saying something

seemingly irrelevant but ultimately contributing to the humor). In Lapor Pak!, implicature

is often used to subtly deliver social criticism, requiring the audience to infer the intended
(Khairunas et al., 2020)
meaning behind dialogues or skits .

Meanwhile, satire is a form of expression in literature and communication that aims

to criticize or mock social, political, or cultural phenomena, often through humor, irony, or

sarcasm. According to Hutcheon (1994) in Irony’s Edge: The Theory and Politics of Irony,

satire functions as a critical tool that uses humor as its main mechanism to convey deeper

messages. Unlike implicature, satire is more direct in its criticism, using exaggerated or

ironic portrayals to highlight societal flaws. In Lapor Pak!, satire is employed to ridicule

government policies, public figures’ behavior, or social issues in an entertaining yet sharp
(Hindawi & Aadili, 2022)
manner .

The main difference between implicature and satire lies in their communication

approach and purpose. Implicature is a pragmatic strategy that relies on conversational

context and implicit understanding. This means that the audience must be aware of the

background or situation to grasp the hidden meaning in a conversation

(Musa & Mohammed, 2022)
. On the other hand, satire has a more explicit structure in its delivery.

While it still employs techniques like irony and hyperbole, satire is often more

straightforward in conveying its criticism. Whereas implicature hides meaning behind

spoken words, satire makes its critical message clearer, though still wrapped in humor. For
instance, a skit in Lapor Pak! portraying a corrupt official receiving an award directly

highlights flaws in the system, using exaggerated narratives and character actions. The

effectiveness of implicature and satire in humor also depends on the audience. Implicature

is subtler and relies on individual interpretation, meaning that only those with a good

understanding of pragmatics can fully grasp the intended humor

2.1.8 Political Communication and Implicature

Political discourse is often characterized by indirect meanings, ambiguity, and hidden

messages, making it a complex and layered form of communication. According to Gharabeh

(2024), political language is intentionally crafted to persuade, obscure, and influence public

perception through rhetorical and strategic communication techniques, including implicature.

This indirectness allows politicians to communicate sensitive or controversial ideas without

making explicit statements that could lead to direct criticism or accountability. Moreover,
(1975)
Grice’s implicature theory specifically suggests that much of political language operates

through implication rather than explicit articulation, enabling politicians to shape narratives,

manipulate public opinion, and maintain plausible deniability. In many cases, political figures

use euphemisms, coded language, or humor to deflect scrutiny while still conveying their

intended messages. For example, political speech often contains ambiguous statements that allow

multiple interpretations, providing to audience without committing to a definitive perspective.

2.1.9 Stand-Up Comedy as a Medium of Social and Political Commentary

Stand-up comedy is more than just entertainment; it serves as a form of social and political

commentary that allows comedians to address controversial topics in a way that is engaging,
(2023)
thought-provoking, and culturally relevant. Hammett et al. describes stand-up comedians
as modern-day social critics who use humor to highlight societal contradictions, injustices, and

power imbalances. Unlike formal political discourse, which is often constrained by diplomatic

language and institutional decorum, stand-up comedy provides a space for raw, unfiltered

expressions of social critique. Through observational humor, satire, and parody, comedians can

discuss taboo subjects such as government corruption, economic inequality, and social injustice
(2023)
in ways that resonate with the public. On the other hand, Nugraha argue in which stand-up

comedy is a performative discourse where timing, tone, and delivery shape the audience’s

reception and interpretation of comedic material. As humor thrives on relatability, comedians

must be attuned to the socio-political climate, ensuring that their jokes align with public

sentiment while challenging dominant narratives. The live nature of stand-up performances

allows comedians to interact with audiences in real time, testing their material and adapting it

based on audience reactions. This interactive aspect makes stand-up comedy a dynamic medium

where societal critique is not just presented but also negotiated between the performer and the

audience.

2.1.10 The Role of Media in the Evolution of Stand-Up Comedy

The dissemination of stand-up comedy has evolved significantly with the rise of digital

media, allowing comedians to reach wider and more diverse audiences beyond traditional live

performances. Historically, stand-up comedy was confined to live venues such as comedy clubs,

theaters, and festivals, limiting its reach to those who could physically attend performances.

However, with the advent of television, stand-up gained mainstream popularity through

programs like The Tonight Show and Comedy Central Presents, which provided comedians with

national and even international exposure (Becker, 2024). These television platforms helped

establish stand-up as a recognized form of entertainment while shaping comedic styles and
trends. The digital revolution further transformed the stand-up industry, democratizing access to

comedy through streaming services like Netflix, YouTube, and TikTok, where comedians can

now share their performances without relying on traditional media gatekeepers. This shift has

then enabled emerging comedians to build audiences independently, fostering a more diverse and

inclusive comedy landscape and audiences. Social media platforms, in particular, have changed

how stand-up is consumed, with comedians posting short-form content, engaging in real-time

discussions with fans, and testing new material through viral clips (Becker, 2024; Nugraha,

2023).

2.1.11 Grice’s Cooperative Principle and the Maxim Theory

Grice (1975) introduced the Cooperative Principle, which suggests that effective

communication follows four conversational maxims:

a. Maxim of Quantity: Providing the right amount of information.

b. Maxim of Quality: Being truthful and avoiding falsehoods.

c. Maxim of Relevance: Staying relevant to the topic.

d. Maxim of Manner: Being clear and orderly in communication.

Political humor often deliberately flouts these maxims to create implicature, forcing

audiences to infer deeper meanings. For example, comedians may exaggerate a politician’s

promise to highlight its implausibility, violating the Maxim of Quality. Similarly, irony and

sarcasm break the Maxim of Manner, requiring audiences to decode hidden criticism. These

violations enhance the comedic effect while subtly delivering political commentary
(Bavetsia, 2023)
. This technique is particularly prevalent in Indonesian stand-up comedy, where performers
like Kiky Saputri use indirect language to critique political figures while maintaining humor. In

violating conversational maxims, comedians create a layered form of communication where

humor serves not only as entertainment but also as a means of resistance, engagement, and

public discourse. This strategic use of implicature in political humor reflects the power of

language to subvert dominant narratives while keeping audiences critically engaged

(Alam et al., 2022)
.

According to Grice’s (1975) Cooperative Principle, effective communication relies on a set

of conversational norms known as the Gricean Maxims, which include the Maxims of Quantity,

Quality, Relevance, and Manner. Each of these maxims serves as a guideline for ensuring that

contributions to a conversation are as informative, truthful, relevant, and clear as necessary for

mutual understanding. However, in certain forms of discourse particularly in satirical language

these maxims are deliberately flouted, not to disrupt communication, but to convey deeper

meanings through implicature (Hamdi, 2024).

One of the most frequently flouted maxims in satire is the Maxim of Quality, which

stipulates that speakers should not say what they believe to be false or lack adequate evidence

for. In satirical texts or performances, this maxim is often intentionally violated through the use

of exaggeration, hyperbole, or ironic statements that are clearly untrue or absurd on the surface.

For example, a satirical cartoon might depict a political figure as a literal puppet, thereby making

an obviously false assertion in order to symbolically critique that person’s lack of autonomy. By

blatantly flouting the Maxim of Quality, satire invites the audience to look beyond the literal

meaning and infer the intended criticism or commentary (Holifatunnisa & Wulyandari, 2023).

Satire also commonly flouts the Maxim of Relevance by drawing seemingly unrelated or

unexpected comparisons, thereby disrupting logical flow in ways that provoke thought or
highlight contradictions in societal norms, ideologies, or political rhetoric. For instance, a

satirical piece might compare a trivial consumer product to a major political scandal, not because

they are truly related, but to emphasize how disproportionate media attention can distort public

priorities. This deliberate violation of relevance is not random; rather, it functions as a rhetorical

device that prompts readers or viewers to reconsider taken-for-granted assumptions or to detect

underlying ironies within the comparison (Holm, 2023).

Through the strategic exploitation of these maxims particularly those of Quality and

Relevance satire operates on multiple communicative levels. On the surface, it entertains,

amuses, and engages through humor and wit. However, at a deeper level, satire often

communicates serious social, political, or moral critiques, relying on the audience’s ability to

recognize implicatures and reconstruct the speaker’s true intentions. In this way, satire becomes

a powerful tool not only for entertainment but also for social commentary, encouraging critical

thinking and active interpretation among its audience (Holm, 2023).

2.1.12 The Impact of Political Humor on Public Perception

Political humor plays a crucial role in shaping public perception by influencing how
(2025)
audiences interpret political events, figures, and ideologies. According to Younas et al. ,

exposure to political satire can reinforce skepticism toward political leaders, as humor often

highlights contradictions, inefficiencies, and ethical failings in governance. In presenting

political issues in an entertaining and accessible manner, satire lowers the barrier to political

engagement, making complex or controversial topics more digestible for a broad audience.

Humor’s ability to critique without direct confrontation also makes it an effective tool for
challenging authority in restrictive environments, where overt criticism may be censored or
(2021)
penalized. Stuart Hall’s Audience Reception Theory in Castaldi suggests that political

humor is subject to multiple interpretations depending on audience background, political stance,

and ideological alignment. Some audience members may adopt a dominant reading, fully

aligning with the comedian’s critique, while others may negotiate the message, partially agreeing

but modifying its meaning based on their perspectives. Meanwhile, oppositional readers may

also reject the critique minorly or entirely, interpreting the humor in ways that shift or even

contradict the comedian’s intended meaning. This diversity of interpretation highlights the

complexity of humor as a communicative tool, as it can simultaneously reinforce and challenge

dominant narratives.

2.3 Previous Studies

Several studies have been conducted in the field of implicature, Sembiring et al. (2023)

conducted a study that analyzes the use of implicature in Mamat Alkatiri’s stand-up comedy

performance titled Somasi. Through qualitative research, the study examines how Mamat

employs implicature to subtly critique societal and political issues. The researchers observed that

the comedian frequently flouted Grice’s maxims to deliver layered messages, allowing audiences

to infer deeper meanings behind his humorous remarks. Context and audience background

played a crucial role in the interpretation of these jokes, as familiarity with social and political

issues was necessary to grasp their full implications. The findings suggest that implicature not

only facilitates the delivery of critical content but also ensures that the humor remains engaging

without alienating the audience. In embedding social commentary within comedic narratives,

Mamat maintains a balance between entertainment and critique. The study highlights the

effectiveness of implicature as a tool for addressing sensitive issues in public discourse.

 Khusnita (2023) conducted an in-depth investigation into the implicatures found in Gus

Dur’s humorous statements, which are well-known for their subtle social and political critiques.

The research focuses on how violations of Grice’s maxims contribute to implicit messaging in

these jokes. In categorizing the implicatures into various illocutionary acts, representative,

expressive, directive, and commissive, the study sheds light on the communicative functions

behind Gus Dur’s humor. These functions often include criticizing the government, challenging

societal norms, and mockingly commenting on individual behaviors. The research found that

implicature plays a crucial role in making these jokes more palatable while delivering

meaningful critiques. Furthermore, it is found in the study that, in embedding critical messages

within humor, Gus Dur avoids direct confrontations and maintains widespread appeal. Khusnita's

study provides a structured framework for analyzing the implicit aspects of political and social

humor.

Kinasih & Marsella (2023) conducted an in-depth analysis of television satire in Lapor Pak!

by examining Kiky Saputri’s roasting of Anies Baswedan, a segment that gained viral attention

for its sharp political humor. The study explored how satirical presuppositions and discourse

structures shape the effectiveness of roasting comedy on television. Using Critical Discourse

Analysis (CDA) and Jones’ (2015) heuristic structures of television satire, the research examined

the elements that make Kiky Saputri’s satire widely accepted and impactful. The study found

that Kiky’s humor relies on pragmatic presuppositions, irony, and indirect criticism, allowing her

to critique political figures while maintaining a humorous and socially acceptable tone.

Additionally, the research highlighted how television provides a safe space for political satire,

where figures like Anies Baswedan can engage in their own satirization while managing public

perception. The findings suggest that roasting in political satire serves both as entertainment and
as an alternative form of public discourse, allowing citizens to engage with political criticism in a

more accessible way. Kinasih & Marsella’s study provides a framework for understanding how

humor, satire, and linguistic strategies intersect in televised political discourse, reinforcing the

role of media as a platform for both comedy and political engagement.

Guţu Ion (2024) explores the strategic use of implicature in political discourse, highlighting

how indirect communication shapes public opinion and political narratives. The research

emphasizes that politicians frequently violate conversational maxims to subtly communicate

their intentions while avoiding direct accountability. Therefore, through a detailed analysis of

political speeches and media statements, the study demonstrates how implicature allows for

nuanced messaging that engages diverse audience segments. This approach not only enhances

public engagement but also mitigates risks associated with explicit messaging in politically

sensitive contexts. The findings reveal that indirect communication through implicature can

strengthen persuasive appeals and maintain political credibility. The study also underscores the

importance of linguistic tools in contemporary political communication, where layered meanings

play a significant role in shaping public perception.

Ahmad, F., Alam, S., & Kaur, A. (2022). Performative retrieving of humour for socio-political subversion: stand-
up comedy as a form of creative resilience. Cogent Arts and Humanities.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2022.2131968

Alam, M. M., Khan, M. S., & Aman, F. (2022). Application of the Cooperative Principle to Political Talk-
shows and Interviews in Pakistani Context. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry (TOJQI), 13(1),
424–430.
Bavetsia, E. (2023). VERBAL IRONY IN FILMS AND THE TEEN AUDIENCE : EMOTIONAL RESPONSES
FROM. February.
Berger, A. A. (1993). Anatomy of Humor. In Professors Are from Mars®, Students Are from Snickers®.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003446484-3
Castaldi, J. (2021). A multimodal analysis of the representation of the Rohingya crisis in BBC’s Burma with
Simon Reeve (2018): Integrating Audience Research in Multimodal Critical Discourse Studies.
Multimodal Communication. https://doi.org/10.1515/mc-2020-0014
Ekoro, D. E., & Gunn, M. (2021). Speech Act Theory and Gricean Pragmatics: A Review. LWATI: A Journal
of Contemporary Research, 18(4), 130–143.
Grice, H. P. (1975). “Logic and conversation,” in Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. Eds P. Cole and J. J.
Morgan, (New York, NY: Academic Press), 41–58.
Gutu, I. (2024). IMPLICATURE AND INDIRECT COMMUNICATION IN CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL
MESSAGING. 280–286.
Hammett, D., Martin, L. S., & Nwankwọ, I. (2023). Multiple For(u)ms of Resistance: Humour, Agency and
Power. In Humour and Politics in Africa. https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529219715.003.0002
Hidayati, F., & Mahmud, M. (2022). Conversational implicature in the green book movie. Journal of English
Literature and Cultural Studies (JELCS Journal), 1(1), 50–62.
Khairunas, S., Sidauruk, J., Desi Pratama, R. M., & Dwi Natalia, T. O. M. (2020). Conversational Implicature
in Beauty and Beast Movie Directed by Bill Condon. Wanastra: Jurnal Bahasa Dan Sastra, 12(1).
https://doi.org/10.31294/w.v12i1.7459
Khusnita, A. S. (2023). the Implicature of Humor Utterances in. 1–65.
Kinasih, P. R., & Marsella, E. (2023). An Analysis of Television Satire on Kiky Saputri’s Roasting in Lapor
Pak! Journal of Pragmatics and Discourse Research, 3(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.51817/jpdr.v3i1.282
Martin, R. A., & Ford, T. E. (2018). The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. In The Psychology
of Humor: An Integrative Approach. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2016-0-03294-1
Musa, R. E. I., & Mohammed, B. K. (2022). The Role of Conversational Implicature in Daily Conversations –
What Matters, Content or Context? Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(5).
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1205.08
Oswald, S. (2023). Pragmatics for argumentation. Journal of Pragmatics, 203, 144–156.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.12.001
Prof. Dr. Fareed Hameed Al-Hindawi, & Lecturer: Nesaem Mehdi Al-Aadili. (2022). Pragmastylistics: The
Integration of Pragmatics and Stylistics. Journal of the College of Basic Education, 24(101).
https://doi.org/10.35950/cbej.v24i101.6638
Rhamadani, S. N. F., Arifin, M. B., & Setyowati, R. (2022). the Study of Conversational Implicature in a Star
Is Born Movie. Ilmu Budaya: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Seni, Dan Budaya, 6(2), 333–347.
Satria Nugraha, D., & Sanata Dharma Jl Affandi, U. (2023). Mocking Laughter: The Political Humor of
Indonesians Portrayed in Newspaper Cartoons. Seloka: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra Indonesia,
12(3), 266–278.
Sembiring, R. A., David, C., Silalahi, M., Butar-, J. H., & Marbun, J. (2023). An Analysis of Implicature in
Stand-up Comedy : Mamat Alkatiri ’ s Jokes “ Somasi .” 3, 332–339.
Simpson, P. (2003). On the Discourse of Satire: Towards a Stylistic Model of Satirical Humor. Journal of
Literary Semantics. https://doi.org/10.1515/jlse.2005.34.1.74
Younas, S., Ullah, B., Khan, R. U., Gul, S., & Khan, Y. (2025). Satire: A double-edged sword in English
literature. Journal of Social Sciences Research & Policy, 3(1), 83–96.