South Park and censorship
I don’t have a lot to say about Comedy Central’s decision to apparently censor the 201st episode of South Park in its entirety. It is a cowardly, stupid and unnecessary move – one of the worst responses to intimidation I’ve seen from a major media outlet in recent years. There was very little intimidation to speak of, in fact, which only goes to show how deeply ingrained the fear really is among members of the media, or at least among the frightened children who run Viacom, Comedy Central’s parent company. Sure, it’s just a show, and it’s not as though the government censored it, but the decision is still disturbing.
I imagine the show will be available now only on the bit-torrent black market. I missed it personally as I don’t have a television, and watch all my shows a day (or five) after they air. Since this was part two of a series, this only makes the whole situation more frustrating. I have to avoid spoilers while making heads or tails of the whole thing, and that’s not such an easy thing.
Really what this bit of fear-inspired censorship does is put a lie to every other piece of mockery which Matt Stone and Trey Parker ever dished out. They never flinched from sticking it to members of just about every other religion. Catholics, Buddhists, Mormons, celebrities, Scientologists, whites, blacks, Mexicans, gays, politicians, celebrities, conservatives, liberals, Tom Cruise, and on down the list – South Park has crossed as many lines as it could, as if to say that so long as every line is crossed and nothing is sacred no harm is done except to our vanity. (And there have been times I’ve been offended, or just grossed out, by South Park. Even aside from whether or not I’m offended, I find the show a little spotty, a little hit and miss at times, oscillating between brilliant episodes like Two Days Before the Day After Tomorrow and really, really dumb episodes whose titles escape me.)
In any case, the first time they tried to show the Prophet Mohammad, I thought it was a fairly brilliant and poignant piece on censorship. This time around, I am just discouraged. Kudos to the show’s creators for not backing down. Now, I just need to find some place to download the damn episode so that I can see what all this fuss is about.
1. This censorship, like all censorship, fucking sucks.
2. South Park is not funny.
2a. South Park is not funny in large part because it is so preachy and self-satisfied.Report
What is all the fuss about? Islam is the religion of peace, right?Report
I can appreciate how someone, in theory, might find issue with a comedian exercising prior restraint when it comes to offending minorities.
I just question why someone might choose to scream about that while there are regular mobs threatening the government.Report
But, seriously, we ought to have known that this would happen when we saw what happened to Rushdie.
He wrote his book… and got a Fatwa on his head for his troubles.
Instead of a discussion revolving around yet another group of religious fanatics burning books, we had discussions of how, yes, we need to respect the freedom of artists but we also have to respect other cultures and we ought not be surprised when people from other cultures get offended by our insensitivity to their traditions and mores.
I remember some of the arguments over the Taliban in Afghanistan shelling the giant statues of Buddha… statues several stories tall that predated Jesus. Instead of a discussion of right-wing religious nuts smashing art, we had discussions of how No True Buddhist would see the statues as anything but piles of rock.
We saw what happened when there were a number of political cartoons depicting Mohammed. Instead of a discussion of the importance of the freedom of the press, we had a discussion of “what did they expect to happen?” when there were riots.
And now they shut down South Park.
I wonder what the focus will be on. One hopes that this particular art is low enough that people might actually say “hey, you religious nuts need to stop telling people who aren’t your own women and/or children how to live!”
I rather expect to be disappointed. We’ll see.Report
@Jaybird, This is where we agree to such an extent that mere words cannot express.Report
@Jaybird, Isn’t this painting it a bit broadly though? I remember having conversations with plenty of people who said, “WTF, man?! This is f’ed up!” when those things happened. I suppose it wasn’t the “official response”, but you know, the sentiment is pretty widespread.Report
@Rufus, Where I’d agree with you is on Rushdie. I remember watching an interview on the BBC at the time with Cat Stevens in which he was calling for Rushdie to die- apparently, he got off the peace train a while ago- and I was saddened that the host didn’t say, “Oh, piss off!”
But, even there, U2 had Rushdie on stage with them, for whatever that’s worth. So, Bono is with you anyway.Report
@Rufus, I’m still irritated by the US response to Rushdie. This was an opportunity for H.W. to stand up for something.
Instead, we got mush.Report
@Rufus, maybe it’s my circle and the fact that I get into arguments on the web into much deeper detail than in the real world.Report
@Jaybird, People did say those things, but my memory of it rather differs. Maybe because I was living in Britain during most of those events, or maybe I was just hanging out with different people.
I mean, the official response to the Salman Rushdie business wasn’t to rush out and arrest all the nutters burning books in the street and (rather more seriously) speaking approvingly of threats to his life, which after all would have been a violation of freedom of speech in itself, but it did include round-the-clock police protection for the better part of a decade. And I really can’t remember anyone speaking approvingly or even neutrally of the Taliban’s statue-smashing.Report
@Simon K, interestingly, there is a comment on this very website that talks about the statues.
http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2010/03/aeschylus-the-persians-war-and-blasphemy/
Jim says: No one I cna remember aaw the destruction of the Bamian statues as blaspheny, least of all Buddhists. The term has no meaning in a non-theistic worldview, one, and secondly, since Buddhism says that forms and egoes and statues are transitory, it hardly makes much difference how a statue ceases to be a statue – explosives or weathering or the corrosive effects of birdshit.
That’s the sort of thing I encountered more than once.
Back in the US, there were two kinds of responses. One was the radio stations that started smashing the records of Cat Stevens saying “we ain’t gonna play no fascist music!” which, quite frankly, struck me as spectacularly missing the point. The other thing I really remember was having it explained to me, slowly and patiently (as to a dull child) that their culture was not like our culture and we had to understand that their response to blasphemy was just as valid as our culture, etc, etc. I don’t recall any fierce defenses of Rushdie that weren’t in the vein of smashing records. It’s like the liberals felt that they had to pick between standing with record smashers or being tolerant of other cultures and, of course, they chose tolerance.
But, as you said, maybe that’s because of the circle that I was hanging in.
Britain did do a good job, for what it’s worth. The knighthood thing was brilliant.Report
I’ve never been so disappointed.
This is the editorial cartoon controversy revisited. If every goddamn newspaper in the western world had reprinted the cartoons in their entirety then what would the retrograde ass-backwards faction of the Muslim whiners have done? Killed them all? No, the affair would have blown over. Now, instead since they were abandoned by the very media that so prides itself on its courage for speaking truth to power, those cartoonists live in hiding in fear for their lives.
I’m glad the Southpark due stuck to their guns but I’m so disappointed in Viacom. And now I’m not going to see the damned conclusion. I wish Matt and Trey would put Mohammed in every episode they issue just to force this issue but of course they do have economic concerns, they have a business to run after all. One can only hope that there is uproar and the suits go back on this poor decision.
Now as a moderate liberal, a democrat and a homo (and especially as a Canadian) I’ve felt the sting of Southparks satire but I have to disagree Freddie. Southpark is sometimes hysterically funny.Report
@North,
Exactly we aren’t free if homophobic morons can’t hold hateful signs. And we are free if sensible people can’t mock or insult them in return.
Freedom is being allowed to be the asshole.Report
@ThatPirateGuy, “Freedom is being allowed to be the asshole.”
…And a society where one is prohibited from being an asshole is a society devoid of freedom.Report
@Mark Thompson,
Exactly.Report
@Mark Thompson, Just so.Report
@North, This sort of brings up the question of Canada, because my understanding of it is that you can be an asshole here, but not too much of an asshole without running afoul of the human rights commission. Which leads me to believe that this country doesn’t actually have free speech. But every time I ask Canadians about it, they say, “Oh, we don’t restrict people’s speech unless they say something really, really terrible”.Report
@Rufus, Rufus, I’m practicing my breathing right now to keep from having an episode from just thinking about the subject of the Peoples Panels on Polite Speech… err I mean the Dominions Discourse Domination Buereau err rather the Extra Judicial Railroad Retards… *cough* that is to say the Canadian Human Rights Commissions.
Could the creators of Southpark have been dragged in front of one of these secret special courts were their studios located in Canada? I dare say yes. All it would take would be for one Mohammed molesting Islamophile (or an Athiest Douch or a Jesus loving Jerkwad) to have their feelings hurt and then the buzzards of political correctness would be deployed on the hapless Matt and Trey. On the Canadian taxpayers dime no less (but as defendants of course Matt and Trey would have to either represent themselves or pay for a defender themselves)!
Fortunately the Canadian word weasels have been lying relatively low since they ran afoul of Steyn. If there’s one thing conservatives are good for at least it’s making noise and those twits nearly got their charter yanked. And that’s another reason to be pissy about the CHRC; they have me lined up on the same side as Steyn of all people against them! I hate agreeing with people who are otherwise dingdong crazy.
If I had my way we’d wall them up in some abandoned mineshaft with a couple hundred tons of rebar reinforced concrete on top of them to keep their gaseous pronouncements from escaping into the environment. Alas, I’m not the King of Canada and Her Majesty the Queen of Canada won’t return my phone calls.Report
I never watch South Park because I find it crass and offensive, but it shouldn’t be censored – and certainly not to accommodate adherents of one religion when the show is deliberately offensive to pretty much every religion on the planet (and if aliens are watching, probably to them as well).Report
Am I allowed to simultaneously defend the creators of South Park from attempts at censorship and threats of violence and also find them incredibly self-congratulatory, juvenile and irritating?Report
@Dan Summers,
Yes, why not? Last time I checked, they aren’t mutually exclusive.Report
@Scott, I find them incredibly self-congratulatory, juvenile, and irritating, and also hilarious.
Could we host the banned episode here?Report
@Jason Kuznicki, I got it off piratebay. I recommend it. The episode is quite good regardless of the *Censored* person in context. Too bad that the controversy will override the episode.
Warning: It’s pretty f’ed up in regards to what happens wrt to the revelation of Cartman’s dad.
Plus they get yet another fantastic shot in on Tom Cruise.Report
If Bush woulda listened to me Mecca and Medina would still be glowing in the dark, and Americans wouldn’t be frightened of these 7th Century desert dwellers.Report
@Bob Cheeks,
Not Helping.Report
@Bob Cheeks,
Oh Bob, the things you say.Report
If Luther had only listened to me, the vatican would still be smoldering from all the priest’s, bishop’s, cardinal’s, and pope’s bodies hanging from the old fires and American children would not have to fear being raped by those 21th century pedophiles.Report
@dexter45, Oh Dex, the things you say.Report
@dexter45, Ya, we have the public school system to do that now!Report
@dexter45, Hey Dex, I hope you ‘protestors’ are happy now…we lost ‘consensus’ with your antics..and now we have them damn commie-dems to tolerate!
Plus I believe you people tried to sack Rome plus all ’em thrity and hundred years wars settled that matter…ah, yes the good old days when when we slaughtering our own people and not a bunch of these foreigners!
NOrthie, dude, how ya doin’.
I’ve been thrown off a couple of sites and I’m just practicing!Report
@Bob Cheeks, Doing well Bob. We got a whole bunch of rain over the last week and the world has exploded into greenery. My best to the Missus.Report
Boy, Mr. Cheeks, you sure do keep some odd hours. Why would anybody want to throw you off a site. You alone are responsible for at least ten new vocabulary words since I started reading LOOG. Also, the old testament leaders killed everything in sight, but where does Jesus say it is okay to murder innocents? If possible, I am looking for a serious answer.Report
@dexter45, I find this helps with understanding Bob, and Voegelin for that matter.
http://watershade.net/ev/ev-glossary.htmlReport
@dexter45, Dexter, all things are possible. There’s but one problemo; what exactly is your query, I’m having a problem understanding (maybe I’m getting a little long in the tooth). So, if you could possibly restate the question, I’d sure try to give an answer.
I’m working on a paper for a little known southeast Asia philosophy journal on certain aspects of the gnostic movement and consequently I’ll be hovering about this infernal contraption at all hours of the night and day as the pneumatic irruptions permit!
My mission here is to bring the love of God and enlightenment to the edumacted minds that lurk about this neo-preppy site…I think of you kids as my children (gone astray) or grandchildren.
Rufus, good job and good work on the blogs!Report
@Bob Cheeks, “If Bush woulda listened to me Mecca and Medina would still be glowing in the dark, and Americans wouldn’t be frightened of these 7th Century desert dwellers.”
“My mission here is to bring the love of God and enlightenment to the edumacted minds that lurk about this neo-preppy site.”
You’re doing it wrong.Report
@Ben Carlton, Ben, dude, thanks for your input. Hey, I’m not a priest and I am deeply flawed….yet, I try, I do try!Report