News
Why you seriously need to stop trying to be funny at work
Using humor at work can enhance relationships and creativity, but it carries risks. Instead of attempting to be funny, individuals should focus on “thinking funny” by challenging norms, collaborating for innovation, and tailoring their ideas for specific audiences to drive success. to stop trying to be funny at work
Last Updated on October 10, 2025 by Daily News Staff
Peter McGraw, University of Colorado Boulder; Adam Barsky, The University of Melbourne, and Caleb Warren, University of Arizona
How can you get ahead in your career and still enjoy the ride?
One solution offered in business books, LinkedIn posts and team-building manuals is to use humor. Sharing jokes, sarcastic quips, ironic memes and witty anecdotes, the advice goes, will make you more likable, ease stress, strengthen teams, spark creativity and even signal leadership potential.
We are professors of marketing and management who study humor and workplace dynamics. Our own research – and a growing body of work by other scholars – shows that it’s harder to be funny than most people think. The downside of cracking a bad joke is often larger than what you might gain by landing a good one.
Fortunately, you don’t have to tell sidesplitting jokes to make humor work for you. You can learn to think like a comedian instead.
Humor is risky business
Comedy works by bending and breaking norms – and when those rules aren’t broken in just the right way, it’s more likely to harm your reputation than to help your team.
We developed the “benign violation theory” to explain what makes things funny – and why attempts at humor so often backfire, especially in the workplace. Essentially, humor arises when something is both wrong and OK at the same time.
People find jokes funny when they break rules while seeming harmless. Miss one of those ingredients when you tell a joke and your audience won’t appreciate it. When it’s all benign and there’s no violation, you get yawns. When it’s all violation and not benign, you could end up triggering outrage.
It’s hard enough to get laughs in the darkness of a comedy club. Under fluorescent office lights, that razor-thin line becomes even harder to walk. What feels wrong but OK to one colleague can feel simply wrong to another, especially across differences in seniority, culture, gender or even the mood they’re in. https://www.youtube.com/embed/PhGe50BXb2M?wmode=transparent&start=0 The hit sitcom ‘The Office’ pokes fun at the cringeworthy jokes cracked by a hapless boss.
An advertising study
In our experiments, when everyday people are asked to “be funny,” most attempts land flat or cross lines.
In a humorous caption contest with business students, described in Peter McGraw’s book on global humor practices, “The Humor Code,” the captions weren’t particularly funny to begin with. However, the ones that were rated by judges as the most funny were often also rated the most distasteful.
Being funny without being offensive is of paramount importance. This is particularly true for women, as a robust literature shows women face harsher backlash than men for behavior seen as offensive or norm-violating such as expressing anger, acting dominantly or even “making asks” in negotiations. https://www.youtube.com/embed/_s8CUzXQ4G0?wmode=transparent&start=0 Don’t be that guy.
You might end up getting no respect
Research by other scholars who examine leader and manager behavior in organizations tells a similar story.
In one study, managers who used humor effectively were seen as more confident and competent, boosting their status. Yet when their attempts misfired, those same managers lost status and credibility. Other researchers have found that failed humor doesn’t just hurt a manager’s status – it also makes employees less likely to respect that manager, seek their advice, or trust their leadership.
Even when jokes land, humor can backfire. In one study, marketing students instructed to write “funny” copy for advertisements wrote ads that were funnier, but also less effective, than students instructed to write “creative” or “persuasive” copy.
Another study found that bosses who joke too often push employees into pretending to be amused, which drains energy, reduces job satisfaction and increases burnout. And the risks are higher for women due to a double standard. When women use humor in presentations, they are often judged as being less capable and having lower status than men.
The bottom line is that telling a great joke rarely gets you a promotion. And cracking a bad one can jeopardize your job – even if you’re not a talk show host who earns a living making people laugh.
Flip the script
Instead of trying to be funny on the job, we recommend that you focus on what we call “thinking funny” – as described in another of McGraw’s books, “Shtick to Business.”
“The best ideas come as jokes,” advertising legend David Ogilvy once said. “Try to make your thinking as funny as possible.”
But Ogilvy wasn’t telling executives to crack jokes in meetings. He was encouraging employees to think like comedians by flipping expectations, leveraging their networks and finding their niche.
Comics often lead you one way and then flip the script. Comedian Henny Youngman, a master of one-liners, famously quipped, “When I read about the dangers of drinking, I gave up … reading.” The business version of this convention is to challenge an obvious assumption.
For example, Patagonia’s “Don’t Buy This Jacket” campaign, which the outdoor gear company rolled out Black Friday in 2011 as a full-page ad in The New York Times, paradoxically boosted sales by calling out overconsumption.
To apply this method, pick a stale assumption your team holds, such as that adding features to a product always improves it or that having more meetings will lead to smoother coordination, and ask, “What if the opposite were true?”
You’ll discover options that standard brainstorming misses.
Create a chasm
When comedian Bill Burr has his fans in stitches, he knows some people won’t find his jokes funny – and he doesn’t try to win them over.
We’ve observed that many of the best comics don’t try to please everyone. They succeed by deliberately narrowing their audience. And we also find that businesses that do the same build stronger brands.
For example, when Nebraska’s tourism board embraced “Honestly, it’s not for everyone” in a 2019 campaign, targeting out-of-state visitors, web traffic jumped 43%.
Some people want hot tea. Others want iced tea. Serving warm tea satisfies no one. Likewise, you can succeed in business by deciding whom your idea is for, and whom it’s not for, then tailoring your product, policy or presentation accordingly.
Cooperate to innovate
Stand-up may look like a solo act. But comics depend on feedback – punch-ups from fellow comedians and reactions from audiences – iterating jokes in the same way lean startups may innovate new products.
Building successful teams at work means listening before speaking, making your partners look good, and balancing roles. Improv teacher Billy Merritt has described three types of improvisers. Pirates are risk-takers. Robots are structure builders. Ninjas are adept at both, taking risks and building structures.
A team designing a new app, for instance, needs all three: Pirates to propose bold features, robots to streamline the interface, and ninjas to bridge gaps. Empowering everyone in these roles leads to braver ideas with fewer blind spots.
Gifts aren’t universal
Telling someone to “be funny” is like telling them to “be musical.” Many of us can keep a beat, but few have what it takes to become rock stars.
That’s why we argue that it’s smarter to think like a comedian than to try to act like one.
By reversing assumptions, cooperating to innovate, and creating chasms, professionals can generate fresh solutions and stand out – without becoming an office punchline.
Peter McGraw, Professor of Marketing and Psychology, University of Colorado Boulder; Adam Barsky, Associate Professor of Management, The University of Melbourne, and Caleb Warren, Professor of Marketing, University of Arizona
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
STM Daily News is a vibrant news blog dedicated to sharing the brighter side of human experiences. Emphasizing positive, uplifting stories, the site focuses on delivering inspiring, informative, and well-researched content. With a commitment to accurate, fair, and responsible journalism, STM Daily News aims to foster a community of readers passionate about positive change and engaged in meaningful conversations. Join the movement and explore stories that celebrate the positive impacts shaping our world.
How to Protect Yourself from a Smartphone Scam
(Feature Impact) The first sign is unexpectedly losing access to your cell phone. Soon after, when you connect to Wi-Fi, the gravity of the situation sinks in: a criminal has gained access to your cell phone number and is trying to siphon money from your credit cards and bank accounts.
The scam is called SIM swapping, or SIM hijacking, and it’s a concern for law enforcement in the United States and abroad as more than 5,000 people have reported SIM swapping scams to the FBI since 2022. Older adults, caregivers and families can benefit from understanding the warning signs of SIM swapping and taking simple security steps to prevent it from happening.
How SIM swapping works
A SIM card, or its digital version known as an eSIM, helps connect a phone number to a carrier network. In a SIM swapping scam, a criminal collects basic information about their victim, such as their name, birthdate and address, to try to move the victim’s phone number to a SIM card or eSIM profile the criminal controls.
Once complete, the scammer gains access to accounts you may be logged into on your phone, such as bank accounts or credit card apps, without touching your phone or being near you.
How to protect yourself from SIM swapping scams
Preparation is the best protection against SIM swapping. Cell phone users should use strong, unique passwords for each online account – password managers are a helpful tool in creating complex and randomized passwords. Use two-factor authentication where it’s offered; this adds an extra layer of security when accessing sensitive accounts.
Next, consumers should protect personal information they share online, whether on social media or in texts or emails asking for identifying data, such as PIN numbers, birthdates or one-time security codes. Be wary of anyone pushing you to share personal information, particularly if they’re pushy with their request or make it sound urgent.
Check your mobile carrier to see if it offers SIM protection. For example, Verizon customers can toggle on a protection feature on the carrier’s website or app to lock lines on their account to help prevent SIM changes.
If you get an unprompted notification that your SIM has been changed, or otherwise suspect you’ve been targeted in a SIM swapping scam, contact your banks immediately and have them freeze your accounts, including ones the criminals may not have targeted yet. Next, work with your cell phone provider to help regain access to your mobile device. If you’re able, share as much information as possible with law enforcement so they can investigate, or at least document trends, in how often this scam occurs.
To find more advice to protect against smartphone scams, visit Verizon.com.
Photo courtesy of Shutterstock
SOURCE:
📰 Enjoying STM Daily News? Join the conversation!
💬 Leave a comment, share your thoughts, and subscribe to our newsletter for the latest stories, updates, and “News You Can Use This Moment!” delivered to your inbox.
Stay connected with STM Daily News!
STM Daily News
Supreme Court rules against trans girls participating in single‑sex sports, but leaves open larger questions of trans rights
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 30, 2026, that West Virginia and Idaho did not violate the Constitution by preventing transgender students from joining female sports teams, and that states can restrict who participates on women’s and girls sports teams based on a student’s sex assigned at birth.
Marie-Amelie George, Wake Forest University
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 30, 2026, that West Virginia and Idaho did not violate the Constitution by preventing transgender students from joining female sports teams, and that states can restrict who participates on women’s and girls sports teams based on a student’s sex assigned at birth.
This ruling, focused squarely on transgender students participating on single-sex sports teams, does not resolve other major questions that are important to trans rights. These issues include what bathrooms transgender or nonbinary students can use at school, as well as whether transgender individuals can update their names and gender markers on identity documents.
The court folded two related cases that address sports team participation at the middle, high school and college levels – Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J. – into one single decision that resolved both. The justices ruled 6-3 on the cases.
This ruling backs 25 other states that, over the past few years, have passed new laws restricting transgender students from participating on female sports teams.
Twenty-one states also have some sort of restriction on transgender and nonbinary students using school bathrooms designated by sex.
As a legal scholar and expert on LGBTQ+ rights, I believe that based on the court’s reasoning, it is likely that the conservative majority on the court would uphold states’ right to restrict school bathroom use based on sex assigned at birth. However, this ruling leaves bigger questions regarding transgender students’ broader rights in school, at work and elsewhere unanswered.
A political flash point
There were estimated to be fewer than 10 transgender athletes who participated in collegiate athletics in 2024.
But the issue of transgender students participating on sports teams is a hot-button issue for the Trump administration and Republicans, who argue that transgender female students have a biological advantage in competitive sports over athletes assigned female at birth.
The issue is nuanced and depends on factors including the athletes’ age and whether they have undergone gender-affirming hormonal therapy.
Some recent research shows that transgender female athletes who have undergone gender affirming hormone therapy have a comparable level of strength to cisgender female athletes.
What the rulings covered
At issue in these two Supreme Court cases were what protections Title IX – which bars sex-based discrimination in education programs and activities that receive federal funding – as well as the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment gave transgender students.
Little v. Hecox challenged Idaho’s 2020 law that allows only students whose sex was designated female at birth to participate on girls and women’s school sports team.
Lindsay Hecox, a transgender female student at Boise State University, alongside a cisgender student, filed a lawsuit against the state in 2020. Hecox, now 24, could not try out for the school’s track and cross country team because of the law. She instead ran at the club level.
In West Virginia v. B.P.J., a transgender middle school student athlete named Becky Pepper-Jackson similarly sued the state so she could continue participating in track and field. Pepper-Jackson won a state title in girls shot put in May 2026.
The state’s 2021 Save Women’s Sports Act requires public middle schools, high schools and colleges to designate all school athletic teams by biological sex.
Understanding Title IX and how it applies
The Supreme Court determined that states are permitted to restrict sports team participation under Title IX and its regulations, which explicitly permit schools to have separate male and female sports teams.
The opinion started by emphasizing there are “enduring” physical differences between males and females, and that if there were unified sports teams, females could be at a disadvantage.
“Separate sports teams for biological males and biological females are reasonable: Given the inherent physical differences between the sexes, allowing only biological females to play on women’s and girls’ teams can reduce the risk of physical injury and ensure fair competition,” the court ruled in its opinion on West Virginia v. B.P.J., authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett joined the ruling.
Pepper-Jackson argued that this part of Title IX did not have relevance to her case because she had taken puberty blockers and never gone through male puberty.
As a result, she argued, she did not have heightened levels of testosterone or other physical differences that could raise the concern of a competitive advantage over cis female students in sports. She also posed no physical safety concerns for her teammates.
The court’s majority rejected this argument, saying that the Title IX regulations did not speak to this issue. The court recognized that although the laws might produce unfair results for someone like Pepper-Jackson, this did not make the restrictions improper.
The court added that Pepper-Jackson and other students in her position need to take up their concerns with state legislatures.
The court’s liberal wing – Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson – agreed with the conservative majority that the laws did not violate Title IX.
The role of the equal protection clause
The court also addressed the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says that the government must apply its laws fairly and cannot treat people differently without a valid reason.
The court’s conservative majority ruled that the laws distinguished based on sex, and as a result they scrutinized the laws more carefully. However, the court concluded that the athletic restrictions nevertheless passed constitutional muster.
Here, too, the court’s majority cited the interests of safety and competitive fairness as important justifications for the laws.
The liberal justices disagreed with their colleagues’ analysis. In their view, the laws were too broad to satisfy the Constitution, because they banned transgender girls who had never experienced male puberty from female sports teams.
A side step
The decision is a narrow one. The court went to great lengths to emphasize that it was focused on sports, and that the court was not being asked about transgender people’s rights more broadly.
In the court’s telling, sports are unique because competition depends on the physiology and physical differences between those assigned male and female at birth. That is important, because there are few circumstances in which the physical differences between males and females continue to be relevant.
In the past, many occupations and schools were sex-segregated. Today, bathrooms, school sports teams, changing facilities, some college residence halls, juvenile detention centers and prisons are among the last places that remain segregated by sex.
Moreover, the court avoided ruling on the constitutional standard that should apply when transgender people are discriminated against. Under constitutional doctrine, courts will more closely scrutinize laws that discriminate against historically powerless minority groups, such as people of color and women.
One of the open questions in transgender rights litigation is whether transgender people qualify for that more searching review.
This case did not resolve that issue.
The court’s narrow ruling on transgender athletes ultimately did not resolve other key issues for transgender rights, which the court will likely be asked to address at a later date.
Marie-Amelie George, Associate Professor of Law, Wake Forest University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
📰 Enjoying STM Daily News? Join the conversation!
💬 Leave a comment, share your thoughts, and subscribe to our newsletter for the latest stories, updates, and “News You Can Use This Moment!” delivered to your inbox.
Stay connected with STM Daily News!
amusement and theme parks
Mattel Adventure Park and VAI Resort Continue to Grow, But Opening Date Remains Uncertain
Get the latest update on Mattel Adventure Park and VAI Resort in Glendale, Arizona. Construction continues in 2026, but officials have yet to announce an opening date.
GLENDALE, Ariz. — One of Arizona’s most anticipated entertainment developments continues to make visible progress, but visitors eager to experience Mattel Adventure Park and VAI Resort will likely have to wait longer.
Located near State Farm Stadium in Glendale, the massive VAI Resort project and the adjacent Mattel Adventure Park have been under construction for several years. While the development has transformed the skyline west of Phoenix, recent updates indicate that neither attraction currently has a confirmed opening date.
New Reports Suggest Further Delays
Recent reports published in spring 2026 indicate that VAI Resort officials continue to maintain their policy of announcing an opening date approximately nine months before welcoming guests. Because no such announcement has been made, industry observers and local media outlets now believe a 2026 opening is becoming increasingly unlikely.
The uncertainty extends to Mattel Adventure Park, which was originally expected to open in 2022 before being delayed multiple times. After missing its latest target of late 2025, references to a specific opening date were removed from public materials. Park representatives have stated that they currently have no update regarding an opening timeline.
Construction Continues Across the Property
Despite the delays, construction remains active throughout the resort and theme park complex. Visitors traveling along Loop 101 can easily spot the towering Hot Wheels-themed roller coasters that have become some of the most recognizable structures on the site.
Drone footage and construction updates posted throughout 2026 show ongoing work on hotel towers, entertainment venues, infrastructure, and various attractions within Mattel Adventure Park.
The official VAI Resort website continues to promote its future offerings, including luxury accommodations, restaurants, entertainment venues, retail spaces, and the world’s first Mattel Adventure Park.
What Guests Can Expect
When completed, Mattel Adventure Park is expected to feature attractions inspired by some of Mattel’s most recognizable brands, including:
- Barbie™ Beach House
- Hot Wheels™ Bone Shaker™: The Ultimate Ride
- Hot Wheels™ Twin Mill™ Racer
- Thomas & Friends™ attractions
- Masters of the Universe-themed experiences
- Mattel Games-themed attractions and activities
The park will be Arizona’s first fully themed indoor-outdoor amusement park and is designed to offer experiences for guests of all ages.
Meanwhile, VAI Resort is planned to include four hotel towers with approximately 1,100 rooms, a large entertainment district, multiple restaurants, retail shopping, convention facilities, and a state-of-the-art amphitheater designed to host major concerts and events.
A Growing Vision
One factor contributing to the project’s lengthy timeline appears to be the continued expansion of the resort’s scope. Developers have repeatedly described VAI as a destination that has evolved far beyond its original vision, adding new hospitality, dining, entertainment, and retail components over time. Earlier project statements noted that these expansions affected scheduling for the adjacent theme park.
The development remains one of the largest tourism and hospitality projects currently underway in Arizona, with investments estimated at more than $1 billion.
Looking Ahead
For now, both VAI Resort and Mattel Adventure Park remain works in progress. Construction activity continues, new attractions are still being promoted on official websites, and developers have shown no indication that the project has been abandoned. However, without an announced opening date, Arizona residents and visitors will need to remain patient as Glendale’s ambitious entertainment destination moves closer to completion.
While many expected to be riding Hot Wheels coasters by now, the latest updates suggest that the world’s first Mattel Adventure Park is still a destination for the future rather than the present.
Related External Links
- Mattel Adventure Park Official Website
- VAI Resort Official Website
- City of Glendale Economic Development News
- State Farm Stadium Official Website
- Visit Glendale Arizona Tourism Guide
- Epic Resort Destinations
📰 Enjoying STM Daily News? Join the conversation!
💬 Leave a comment, share your thoughts, and subscribe to our newsletter for the latest stories, updates, and “News You Can Use This Moment!” delivered to your inbox.
Stay connected with STM Daily News!
