You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘censorship’ tag.
To piss off that guy
this blog will participate in the first annual Draw Mohammed Day as founded by Dan Savage and apparently sponsored by CACAH
As explained before, I am not a fan of Parker/ Stone, so this is not so much in solidarity with them personally, as it is with freedom of expression against religion, fanaticism, terrorism. So, I’ll be breaking my crayons, markers and watercolors too on May 20.
My contribution to art will be nothing in value compared to watering down the pool of targets.
So, in that spirit: I call on all bloggers reading this – do your part and join in!
For once the expression “If you don’t do it, the terrorists win” is not a joke.
A fantastic strip from Jesus and Mo
Let me start this by saying that I am not a fan of South Park. The libertarian creators of this show have made plenty of disgusting points throughout, not the least being a defense of Bush and his wars.
However, they are sometimes funny (see the Dog Whisperer taming Eric Cartman episode) and sometimes right on the mark in their episodes on religion and sometimes prejudice (their episode on Mel Gibson was the best comment on the whole sorry story).
was supposed to be (here. from an episode pre-censorship). It looked like this (short video at Gawker)
At the end of the episode entire minutes of the episode conclusion were nothing but a long bleep of the sound.
Interestingly, one of the objects of satire of the episode, was the over-reverence for Muhammed because of violence threats.
In the story, Tom Cruise and other Hollywood starts what to get from Muhammed “the power of not being ridiculed”
Throughout the story, references are made to the fact that Muhammed cannot be shown – and at one point he is out in a bear costume. And then there’s the life imitates art part:
South Park 201 Censored: Radical Islamic Death Warning Follows Muhammad Episode
The group, RevolutionMuslim.com, has warned the cartoon’s creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, that they could face violent retribution.
The post showed a gruesome picture of Theo Van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker who was shot and stabbed to death in an Amsterdam street in 2004 by a fanatic angered by Van Gogh’s film about Muslim women. The film was written by a Muslim woman who rejected the Prophet Muhammad as a guide for today’s morality.
The show’s producers decided to go ahead with it anyway and Comedy central aired it, but…. then, the other level of life imitates art: an episode about censorship was, well, heavily censored.
When one tries to stream the episode on line, one gets this screen
I have to agree with the way this is framed in B0botland
Breaking: Terrorism Has Won-South Park Episode DELIBERATELY Censored by Comedy Central.
.Indeed, after years of using the line for laughs, we have to accept that there’s no other explanation for Comedy central’s actions.
There are many posts in the discussion trying to defend the censorship. There’s also one that perfectl sums up the story
10. The funny thing is
the censorship helped Matt and Trey make part of their point: Why is it that Comedy Central has no problem depicting Buddha snorting coke and Jesus watching porn, but freaks out when a radical Muslim cocks an eyebrow? By censoring the episode, the network just underlined the message that no religious figure should be above discussion and criticism. In their minds, anyone who thinks otherwise is just a sheep that can hit an audio censorship button.
I know my household was rolling on the floor.
My household was confused as to what was intended and what wasn’t. And now, that we know it, angry.
And here’s a previous South Park satire on such censorship (from 2006)
And in the same vein I can’t stop thinking of Obama removing the word “islamic” from terrorism related documents.
The NY Times article contains Trey and Parker’s statement
In the 14 years we’ve been doing South Park we have never done a show that we couldn’t stand behind. We delivered our version of the show to Comedy Central and they made a determination to alter the episode. It wasn’t some meta-joke on our part. Comedy Central added the bleeps. In fact, Kyle’s customary final speech was about intimidation and fear. It didn’t mention Muhammad at all but it got bleeped too. We’ll be back next week with a whole new show about something completely different and we’ll see what happens to it.
yes, they have been good rejecting McCain editorial, but what they have done for The One lately?
Reports the New Republic:
Around midnight on July 16, New York Times chief political correspondent Adam Nagourney received a terse e-mail from Barack Obama’s press office.
The campaign was irked by the Times‘ latest poll and Nagourney and Megan Thee’s accompanying front-page piece titled “Poll Finds Obama Isn’t Closing Divide on Race,”
As they went around publishing rebuttals elsewhere, Nagourney reacted:
“I’ve never had an experience like this, with this campaign or others,” Nagourney tells me. “I thought they crossed the line. If you have a problem with a story I write, call me first. I’m a big boy. I can handle it. But they never called. They attacked me like I’m a political opponent.”
Hey, Nagourney, at least they didn’t pull your story from the paper
Considering what he did to Gore and Clark, part of me celebrates. The other part of me also celebrates – hoping for retribution.
I think TNR is jumping the gun a bit, talking about divorce and ending the affair.
having seen the W&media marriage of 8 years – I see the similarity and I dubb this one of many moments f “spousal abuse”
I predict Nagourney will praise B0 shamelessly.
Still, this story gives us another bush-like “narrative management”:
“They’re terrified of people poking around Obama’s life,” one reporter says. “The whole Obama narrative is built around this narrative that Obama and David Axelrod built, and, like all stories, it’s not entirely true. So they have to be protective of the crown jewels.”
Another reporter notes that, during the last year, Obama’s old friends and Harvard classmates were requested not to talk to the press without permission.
And the question rises: why did the media put up with this?