I don't know if I'd classify Norm's latest material as anti-humor or not, I mostly wanted to post that Andy joke.
But if I were to think of the concept of "anti-humor" I think of it more tweaking with the delivery to make it falsely predictable, Norm almost always stretches out the setup and fiddles with it. He's got this whole bundle of 1920's/1930's jokes that he tells but because he's telling it, the setup becomes four minutes long for what when you remove all that Norm adds is like a first graders joke. Tim and Eric and Eric Andre Show is more absurdist but in a lot of their skits they'll do no punchline or an implied punchline or vice versa. Robot Chicken does a lot of straight punchline where just the image = the reference you need for the setup.
Another would be Norm's facetious learning about Hitler routine. It's multi-layered, he knows it's multi-layered but he doesn't care, the humor is what matters and so he does it because it's funny. That becomes anti-humor in this day and age where doing multi-layered jokes intentionally and designing them as such IS common stand-up instead of them being spontaneous and not requiring beats to hit which is what Norm and others do in their stand up. Louis CK touches on it in that roundtable with him Jerry, Chris Rock and Gervais, he knows the punchlines and the beats and everything inbetween can be different everytime he tells the joke. The other three don't do that, Aziz doesn't do that, most comedians don't do that.
I've seen the argument that Jerry Seinfeld is now "anti-humor" because everyone else lifted the observational part of his jokes that make people laugh because for whatever reason US SHARING LIFE EXPERIENCES IS FUNNY, without his perfect construction and sly punchlines, so he drifted from the former. Same with how his show was groundbreaking and then everyone else tried to copy it but Always Sunny is the only one to take its core joke (that the main characters are morally deficient and not really to be liked/seen as heroes/etc.) to the logical extrapolation of it. (Chuck Lorre's written about this and disliked it, so I suppose if Seinfeld = humor, then Two and a Half Men/Big Bang Theory are anti-humor too.)
In that four comedians thing they also discuss owing the audience. Jerry is of the mind that the audience comes to see a specific show and the comedian owes it to them to deliver what they want. Norm and Louis CK don't care...Tim and Eric don't care...they care more about whether it's funny to them and their mates.
Norm mentions the Bob Saget roast, but the audience didn't get it at all, it was dead silent according to people there vs. the CC edit with the laugh track and changed footage. But the older comedians (Saget, Jeff Ross, etc.) were dying at it. Because he was taking the old jokes and using them as if they were what has become traditional roast jokes which are in many ways, not good jokes, they generally aren't repeatable. (Jeff Ross' speed-roasting is garbage, his jokes in the prison special were better because he got to know the people. He's the "roast king" more, and he's said as much, because he's not afraid to get rid of a great joke that presents itself out of fear of hitting too close/too soon. Geraldo and Patrice were similar in this view.)
