So a couple of things. Just so ya know, when The Onion started in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, it did not loudly announce itself as satire the way people view it now. Early print issues were laid out exactly like a local newspaper.

Yep, I know. If you were riding the DC Metro in those days you'd find the paper edition in paper dispensers right next to the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal (pre-Murdoch ownership). I think I may have a couple of the old ones in a box somewhere.

You’re also wrongly assuming satire must: Be obviously humorous.

I never assumed satire had to be humorous. I said the Onion was satire, and it was humorous.

We’re Twilight Zone/Black Mirror,/J.G. Ballard/early cyberpunk (before the game) journalism, not current era Onion listicle satire.

You're making my point for me. All of those sources were known to the consumers as fiction and allowed to consumer to compare reality against that speculative future. You're not doing that. You are well aware that most folks that read what you're writing assume its true. You can't have it both ways.

And let’s not overlook the fact that tomorrow or the day after, or soon, many of my articles will no longer be fiction.

I think you've moved beyond satire and are headed toward disinformation now.

tl;dr: Explaining the joke, ruins the joke.

Well hang on, you just said your intent wasn't humor. Wouldn't that make your actions humor at the expense of people reading what you're making up?