Parodies: Positive editing or negative editing?

I enjoy watching parodies from different YouTube channels. Most of them are really funny that I go on for a few minutes just watching parodies. 

Parodies involve a lot of editing. Unlike copyediting and substance editing, editing parodies should have other motives for changing the content of another person’s writing, film or song but still use a lot of the elements used in the original work. The changes are made in the content to either make fun or critic someone’s original work. Though YouTube has a lot of videos that are just trying to be funny, there are also some that bring both comic effect and substance.

I think parodies are both positive and negative.

Pros

• It helps publicize the original song, film or book. Whenever I watch parodies, it makes me want to watch the original and check out its content.
• It encourages thinking. There are parodies that go beyond just being funny. There are those that criticize the original works and prove a lot of good points.

Cons

• The owners of the original works might feel disrespected. We know that writers, film producers, and songwriters put a lot of effort in their work. Some of them might feel bad if their work is used just for fun, like the makers of the film Downfall who banned the YouTube parodies of the film.
• It may show cons of buying some products and might encourage people not to buy.

Overall, I think the effects of parodies still depend on the contents of the parodies. I have here two parodies from YouTube. One is just trying to be funny and the other one proves a point.

This is a parody, which criticizes how iPad is just a bigger version of iPod Touch and nothing more. I think for some people, it might make them think twice about buying an iPad if they already own an iPod touch.

This is a parody that just turned the Bruno Mars' song Just The Way You Are to something really hilarious.