South Park Censored

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
MartianInvader
Posts: 809
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 5:51 pm UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby MartianInvader » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:18 pm UTC

Asylumer wrote:How can you even claim the United States invading Iraq/Afghanistan has to do with Islam when the US is allied to Saudi Arabia? Please lead me through that bizarre logic. Islamic extremists blow up the twin towers, get Americans fearful and riled, America responds by attacking the Taliban who've supported the attacks, America gets led into Iraq war under false pretenses. At what point in there did America become liable for starting a religion motivated crusade instead of the cause being political? Is the American government trying to replace Islam as the state religion in those countries?

Spoiler:
Ah, I didn't realize that 9/11 was the very first incident between the Middle East and the West, and that it was an entirely unprovoked attack, and that there isn't over 50 years of bloody history between the two cultures. To answer your specific question, I would say America became liable for starting a religion motivated crusade around the time it helped create and supported a country in the middle of land where Muslims were living, where you couldn't vote unless you were Jewish.

I'm not commenting on which side in this conflict is more justified, but if you honestly don't understand why most of the Middle East hates the US, go read a fucking history book. Suffice to say, most Muslims are not so ignorant.

Sorry, that was a bit beside the point, but ignorance can really push my rant-buttons. I'm spoilering it for tangency.

This whole thing (especially the "everybody draw Mohammad day" stuff) kind of reminds me of the whole DRM battle. Just like pirates and DRM software companies, you've got two sides trying to best each other, one screaming "Don't make fun of us, or else!" and the other going "I'll say whatever I want! Neener neener neener!" Just like how with DRM the only ones who really suffer are the honest customers, the only ones who really suffer here are the millions of peaceful Muslims, who have their religion increasingly belittled by one side of the conflict and radicalized and shed in an ugly light by the other.
Let's have a fervent argument, mostly over semantics, where we all claim the burden of proof is on the other side!

Asylumer
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 6:34 pm UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Asylumer » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:29 pm UTC

MartianInvader wrote:
Asylumer wrote:How can you even claim the United States invading Iraq/Afghanistan has to do with Islam when the US is allied to Saudi Arabia? Please lead me through that bizarre logic. Islamic extremists blow up the twin towers, get Americans fearful and riled, America responds by attacking the Taliban who've supported the attacks, America gets led into Iraq war under false pretenses. At what point in there did America become liable for starting a religion motivated crusade instead of the cause being political? Is the American government trying to replace Islam as the state religion in those countries?

Spoiler:
Ah, I didn't realize that 9/11 was the very first incident between the Middle East and the West, and that it was an entirely unprovoked attack, and that there isn't over 50 years of bloody history between the two cultures. To answer your specific question, I would say America became liable for starting a religion motivated crusade around the time it helped create and supported a country in the middle of land where Muslims were living, where you couldn't vote unless you were Jewish.

I'm not commenting on which side in this conflict is more justified, but if you honestly don't understand why most of the Middle East hates the US, go read a fucking history book. Suffice to say, most Muslims are not so ignorant.

Sorry, that was a bit beside the point, but ignorance can really push my rant-buttons. I'm spoilering it for tangency.


Good job assuming I was ignorant of the CIA screwing around where they shouldn't have been or that there haven't been instances of conflict in the past, jack ass. My point was that America's invasion wasn't religiously motivated and is definitely not a reason for aggrieved Muslims to claim the west is attacking THE RELIGION when the USAs actions are better explained by political motivation.

Forgive me if I won't let a double-standard slide.

EDIT: Hmm, though perhaps I did a little double-standard myself when I referred to the Al-Qaeda involved as Islamic extremists, since their fundamentalism was hardly the issue.
Last edited by Asylumer on Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:39 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: South Park Censored

Postby aleflamedyud » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:36 pm UTC

Ah, I didn't realize that 9/11 was the very first incident between the Middle East and the West, and that it was an entirely unprovoked attack, and that there isn't over 50 years of bloody history between the two cultures. To answer your specific question, I would say America became liable for starting a religion motivated crusade around the time it helped create and supported a country in the middle of land where Muslims were living, where you couldn't vote unless you were Jewish.

Yeah, that's just an outright lie. Not only did America not support the creation of Israel any more than the Soviet Union did (the American government explicitly told Ben Gurion not to declare independence), but non-Jewish citizens make up a full fifth of the population in that country and vote for whomever they damn well please.

Seriously, stop using fictionalized histories of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to fabricate a clash of civilizations between Western liberal democracy and Islam. Notably for students of actual history, nobody in the West or in the Middle East had a notion of such a clash of civilizations in 1948, or 1967, or in 1973 -- the years of the major Israeli-Arab wars. The clash between Western liberal democracy and Islam, as an idea, came about in the '90s after the collapse of the Soviet Union (who had sponsored secular Arab nationalism while the Americans sponsored mujahideen) left both Islamists and Americans without other major ideological enemies against whom to ally. It gained its prominence on September 11, 2001.

Accept real history instead of trying to palm off the blame for this conflict.
Last edited by aleflamedyud on Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:40 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26819
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: South Park Censored

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:38 pm UTC

Dream wrote:as long as Comedy Central is just unwilling to upset people as much as they have, and aren't capitulating to threats, there's no problem with them doing this.

What? What makes you think that's what they're doing? It's just a big fucking coincidence that the first South Park episode they censored on religious grounds came just after death threats on religious grounds? Gimme a fucking break.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
skeptical scientist
closed-minded spiritualist
Posts: 6142
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:09 am UTC
Location: San Francisco

Re: South Park Censored

Postby skeptical scientist » Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:02 pm UTC

Dream wrote:As long as Comedy Central is just unwilling to upset people as much as they have, and aren't capitulating to threats, there's no problem with them doing this.

First of all, that's a big if. Second of all, there still might be a rights issue, if they prevent South Park's creators from sharing the uncensored version on their website. I agree, they don't have a right to show whatever they want on Comedy Central's dime, but they created the uncensored version in good faith, and it is unjust for Comedy Central to prevent them from letting anyone see it. Furthermore, if Matt and Trey felt that their artistic vision was compromised without their consent by Comedy Central's executives, they have a legitimate grievance. Assuming they let Trey and Matt share the unaltered episode on their website (which I doubt), and they didn't censor it because of the threat of violence (which I highly doubt), and they had the show's creators' permission to broadcast the censored version (which they almost certainly didn't have), then I don't have a problem with their censorship of their own broadcast.
I'm looking forward to the day when the SNES emulator on my computer works by emulating the elementary particles in an actual, physical box with Nintendo stamped on the side.

"With math, all things are possible." —Rebecca Watson

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Dream » Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:18 pm UTC

The death threats are inextricably entwined with the massive media exposure, PR problems and broader upset in the Islamic world. I think it's every bit as likely that Comedy Central, a profit motivated corporation, shied away from being associated with the upset, or being cast as unfeeling and exploitative, as it is that death threats scared them. I think it's likely they took a calculating view of what the entire situation would mean for the company and did the thing they thought would be best in those terms. If there were death threats, but no media exposure whatsoever, no controversy or anger, I really don't think this would be happening. I think it would be treated exactly as any other death threats over content: crazy people who you ignore until you have to take them seriously.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: South Park Censored

Postby aleflamedyud » Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:40 pm UTC

Dream wrote:The death threats are inextricably entwined with the massive media exposure, PR problems and broader upset in the Islamic world. I think it's every bit as likely that Comedy Central, a profit motivated corporation, shied away from being associated with the upset, or being cast as unfeeling and exploitative, as it is that death threats scared them. I think it's likely they took a calculating view of what the entire situation would mean for the company and did the thing they thought would be best in those terms. If there were death threats, but no media exposure whatsoever, no controversy or anger, I really don't think this would be happening. I think it would be treated exactly as any other death threats over content: crazy people who you ignore until you have to take them seriously.

Dude, that's even worse. That means that it doesn't even take a death threat to spur censorship, just bad publicity.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Malice » Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:57 pm UTC

Dream wrote:The death threats are inextricably entwined with the massive media exposure, PR problems and broader upset in the Islamic world. I think it's every bit as likely that Comedy Central, a profit motivated corporation, shied away from being associated with the upset, or being cast as unfeeling and exploitative, as it is that death threats scared them. I think it's likely they took a calculating view of what the entire situation would mean for the company and did the thing they thought would be best in those terms. If there were death threats, but no media exposure whatsoever, no controversy or anger, I really don't think this would be happening. I think it would be treated exactly as any other death threats over content: crazy people who you ignore until you have to take them seriously.


I think that's an unlikely scenario, given the amount of offense and mockery South Park has spewed in the direction of every other group on earth (and many individuals) without being censored. I find it more likely that radical Muslim death threats are scary.
Image

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Dream » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:20 pm UTC

Malice wrote:I think that's an unlikely scenario, given the amount of offense and mockery South Park has spewed in the direction of every other group on earth (and many individuals) without being censored. I find it more likely that radical Muslim death threats are scary.

In my analysis, posted a page or two ago, there's a qualitative difference between what they usually do, which is fictional, and what they're doing with this, which is actual. Comedy Central might not react the same way to South Park showing something offensive as they do to the network themselves actually doing the thing for real. This isn't like the other times. It's also a far bigger shit-fight than they usually stir up.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: South Park Censored

Postby aleflamedyud » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:22 pm UTC

Dream wrote:
Malice wrote:I think that's an unlikely scenario, given the amount of offense and mockery South Park has spewed in the direction of every other group on earth (and many individuals) without being censored. I find it more likely that radical Muslim death threats are scary.

In my analysis, posted a page or two ago, there's a qualitative difference between what they usually do, which is fictional, and what they're doing with this, which is actual. Comedy Central might not react the same way to South Park showing something offensive as they do to the network themselves actually doing the thing for real. This isn't like the other times. It's also a far bigger shit-fight than they usually stir up.

Funny, because they also stirred a shit-storm about Scientology, to the degree that Isaac Hayes had to leave, without being censored.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Princess Marzipan » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:34 pm UTC

Dream wrote:
Malice wrote:I think that's an unlikely scenario, given the amount of offense and mockery South Park has spewed in the direction of every other group on earth (and many individuals) without being censored. I find it more likely that radical Muslim death threats are scary.

In my analysis, posted a page or two ago, there's a qualitative difference between what they usually do, which is fictional, and what they're doing with this, which is actual. Comedy Central might not react the same way to South Park showing something offensive as they do to the network themselves actually doing the thing for real. This isn't like the other times. It's also a far bigger shit-fight than they usually stir up.
I still disagree with your claim that there's a more than semantic difference there, Dream, but haven't had the time/cognitive function to respond well yet. I will attempt to at some point.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Dream » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:37 pm UTC

aleflamedyud wrote:Funny, because they also stirred a shit-storm about Scientology, to the degree that Isaac Hayes had to leave, without being censored.

Islam. It's a bigger deal than Scientology.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Xeio » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:43 pm UTC

Dream wrote:
aleflamedyud wrote:Funny, because they also stirred a shit-storm about Scientology, to the degree that Isaac Hayes had to leave, without being censored.
Islam. It's a bigger deal than Scientology.
[myreligionisbetterthanyours/]

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Princess Marzipan » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:52 pm UTC

Dream wrote:
aleflamedyud wrote:Funny, because they also stirred a shit-storm about Scientology, to the degree that Isaac Hayes had to leave, without being censored.

Islam. It's a bigger deal than Scientology.
O_O.

WOW. So you're saying straight out that Islam gets special treatment?
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Dream » Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:02 pm UTC

The opposite. I'd expect, though of course I don't know what goes through the heads of network executives, that it's Scientology that gets special treatment. Especially dismissive treatment.

Or even, I'm not at all saying Islam gets special treatment, I'm saying, like I actually wrote, that it's a bigger deal to insult Islam than to insult scientology, what with one being orders of magnitude bigger and not a cynical cash grab. You can't compare a cult kicking up a fuss about being laughed at with a major religion objecting to a real-world case of deliberate offence. I said nothing about special treatment, just that it's obvious that the network will shit bricks over one, but not the other.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Princess Marzipan » Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:04 pm UTC

No, you're still elevating speech against one group above speech against another group. Once you start doing that, freedom of speech is dead.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Malice » Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:08 pm UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:
Dream wrote:
aleflamedyud wrote:Funny, because they also stirred a shit-storm about Scientology, to the degree that Isaac Hayes had to leave, without being censored.

Islam. It's a bigger deal than Scientology.
O_O.

WOW. So you're saying straight out that Islam gets special treatment?


No. He's saying, Comedy Central is acting out of self-interest, wanting to avoid offending Muslims (as opposed to wanting to avoid offending the murderous fringe Muslims). And that there are a lot more Muslims out there to get offended than there are Scientologists. Dream is arguing that Islam doesn't get special treatment; it gets treatment proportional to its number of followers, like every other religion.

Edit: ninja'd, dammit.

Dream wrote:
Malice wrote:I think that's an unlikely scenario, given the amount of offense and mockery South Park has spewed in the direction of every other group on earth (and many individuals) without being censored. I find it more likely that radical Muslim death threats are scary.

In my analysis, posted a page or two ago, there's a qualitative difference between what they usually do, which is fictional, and what they're doing with this, which is actual. Comedy Central might not react the same way to South Park showing something offensive as they do to the network themselves actually doing the thing for real. This isn't like the other times. It's also a far bigger shit-fight than they usually stir up.


Is it? How does the Muslim world as a whole feel about this episode? From where I'm standing it seems like a bigger shit-fight because certain people are tossing death threats around, not because this is significantly more offensive than other things South Park has done.
Image

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Xeio » Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:25 pm UTC

Malice wrote:No. He's saying, Comedy Central is acting out of self-interest, wanting to avoid offending Muslims (as opposed to wanting to avoid offending the murderous fringe Muslims). And that there are a lot more Muslims out there to get offended than there are Scientologists. Dream is arguing that Islam doesn't get special treatment; it gets treatment proportional to its number of followers, like every other religion.
How does that make any sense? And I'm pretty sure the reason it was censored had nothing to do with comedy central not wanting to offend Muslims, otherwise they'd outright cancel South Park for offending any other groups/individuals they have up till this point, this is the 14th season after all. This incident is solely because of the death threats received.

Also, religions don't get preferential treatment at all is the point. And in no way does number of followers affect that.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Dream » Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:28 pm UTC

Malice wrote:From where I'm standing it seems like a bigger shit-fight because certain people are tossing death threats around, not because this is significantly more offensive than other things South Park has done.

Perhaps, but that doesn't stop the network from reacting to the shit-fight rather than the death threats that led to the media circus that made it a big enough deal that a shit-fight started. There is also the fact that Muslims have every reason to be offended by all this, and while they may not have cared were it just a scene in a comedy show, now its a national circus, and they may feel they have to have an opinion on it. If that opinion is negative, why shouldn't the network just not do the thing that is causing them critically bad press in Muslim communities?

While it is true that there is every chance that this is just how the death threats were really supposed to work, that can hardly be blamed on the Muslim communities or the network. One is offended regardless of the reason they heard about it, the other is on the wrong end of terrible publicity regardless of which way they jump.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Griffin
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:46 am UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Griffin » Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:41 pm UTC

why shouldn't the network just not do the thing that is causing them critically bad press in Muslim communities?

Because if ya let them get their way, the ter'rists win?
Bdthemag: "I don't always GM, but when I do I prefer to put my player's in situations that include pain and torture. Stay creative my friends."

Bayobeasts - the Pokemon: Orthoclase project.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Xeio » Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:42 pm UTC

You really think that they would have faced terrible publicity if they didn't censor it? I wouldn't doubt the only reason we're talking about this still is because it WAS censored.

What else would this topic be called? "South Park offends someone, sky a distinct shade of blue"

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Aetius » Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:00 pm UTC

The odds of Comedy Central's decision being based on anything but fear of the threat of violence is so vanishingly small as to not be worth considering.

User avatar
skeptical scientist
closed-minded spiritualist
Posts: 6142
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:09 am UTC
Location: San Francisco

Re: South Park Censored

Postby skeptical scientist » Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:14 pm UTC

Xeio wrote:You really think that they would have faced terrible publicity if they didn't censor it?

In Muslim communities? Yes. We probably wouldn't be talking about it, but they would.
I'm looking forward to the day when the SNES emulator on my computer works by emulating the elementary particles in an actual, physical box with Nintendo stamped on the side.

"With math, all things are possible." —Rebecca Watson

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: South Park Censored

Postby aleflamedyud » Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:34 pm UTC

Aetius wrote:The odds of Comedy Central's decision being based on anything but fear of the threat of violence is so vanishingly small as to not be worth considering.

No shit. Do we seriously think that Comedy Central has never faced bad publicity for South Park insulting a religion before, after what they've done to Christianity as a whole, Catholicism (QUEEN SPIDER!), Judaism (Moses wants macaroni pictures!), Mormonism (dumb dumb dumb...), and Scientology (the former 3 of which are actual major religions)? Come on!
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby folkhero » Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:39 pm UTC

I'm gonna create a timeline of South Park's relationship with Muhammad, just so we're we're all clear about what was going on.

July 4, 2001: The episode "Super Best Friends" airs. It depicts Muhammad along with the leaders of other major religions as a of comic-book super-hero like team that saves the boys from a cult started by David Blaine. This was before 9/11 and well before Theo van Gogh's murder and the Danish cartoon controversy. Some Muslims may have been offended but, since South Park offends everyone, it didn't register as even a blip.

April 5-12, 2006: the episodes "Cartoon Wars" parts 1 and 2 were aired as a direct result of the the Danish cartoon controversy. In part 1, the creators made it clear that they intended to show a clip from a fictionalized, in-universe version of Family Guy that showed Muhammad. For part 2, the creators give Comedy Central an episode that does contain a clip of Family Guy with a non-insulting portrayal of Muhammad. Comedy Central censors the scene. I don't know of any specific threats, but being amidst the Danish cartoon controversy, the shroud of violence hung over the decision to censor.

April 14, 2010: The episode "200" airs. Similar to "Cartoon Wars," it deals with the issues of violence and intimidation in their relationship to censorship. Muhammad's name is mentioned several times, and is not censored. One of the characters draws a picture of what he thinks Muhammad might look like, it is shown to be a stick figure, which is not censored. At the end of the episode, we see a U-Haul truck and later a bear suit that we are told contained Muhammad (we later find out he was never in the bear suit). We also hear Muhammad's voice from inside the U-Haul, he only says one word answers to questions like "OK."

Sometime in here, Revolution Muslim makes thinly veiled death threats against the show's creators.

April 21, 2010: The episode "201" airs. It is heavily censored: the part of the screen containing Muhammad is covered by a black censored bar, any mention of the name Muhammad is bleeped out, and the entire final 'I learned something today' speech is bleeped out. Lets sort these all out: the black censored bar becomes an important plot element, I think it's a safe assumption that the show's creators intending the censor bars to be there, in the full knowledge that since "Cartoon Wars," Comedy Central wouldn't let them show Muhammad if they wanted to. The bleeping of the name Muhammad: there was no in-story reason for the name to be bleeped in this episode and not in 200, it also made the episode indecipherable to anyone who didn't see "200," so it wouldn't make much sense for Parker and Stone to have included it. The creators said of the beeps, "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." So Comedy Central censored far more than just Muhammad's image. They censored far more than they did the week before, before the death threats.

The idea that Comedy Central wasn't motivated by fear, threats and intimidation is laughable.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

RogueCynic
Posts: 409
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:23 pm UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby RogueCynic » Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:07 pm UTC

I don't know if anyone said this, but Randall should do something along these lines. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/comic-riffs/2010/04/everybody_draw_mohammed_day_ga.html
I don't understand why Comedy Central was not afraid to show Muhammad in the first Super Best Friends episode but not in later episodes.
I am Lord Titanius Englesmith, Fancyman of Cornwood.
See 1 Kings 7:23 for pi.
If you put a prune in a juicer, what would you get?

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: South Park Censored

Postby aleflamedyud » Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:24 pm UTC

I'm going to round my statements off with the following "I learned something today" Spoof Aesop speech:

I learned something today. The way to bring people into your religion and make people respect your ideals isn't to rationally or peacefully convince them that you're right or that your customs are noble. It's to murder and threaten until you can intimidate people into submitting to your will. After all, that's what Islam really means: "submission". NOW CONVERT OR DIE, GENTILE FUCKS!!!!

Whenever I watch the censored version of "201", I'll put this in for Kyle's censored speech.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

User avatar
Gelsamel
Lame and emo
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:49 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Gelsamel » Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:29 pm UTC

Is anyone else unable to access the 2001 Super Best Friends episode? On the South Park site, that is.
"Give up here?"
- > No
"Do you accept defeat?"
- > No
"Do you think games are silly little things?"
- > No
"Is it all pointless?"
- > No
"Do you admit there is no meaning to this world?"
- > No

RogueCynic
Posts: 409
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:23 pm UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby RogueCynic » Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:46 pm UTC

You won't get the 01 version off Comedy Central but if the season is on dvd, you may get it there.
I am Lord Titanius Englesmith, Fancyman of Cornwood.
See 1 Kings 7:23 for pi.
If you put a prune in a juicer, what would you get?

User avatar
pseudoidiot
Sexy Beard Man
Posts: 5100
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:30 pm UTC
Location: Kansas City
Contact:

Re: South Park Censored

Postby pseudoidiot » Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:58 pm UTC

Gelsamel wrote:Is anyone else unable to access the 2001 Super Best Friends episode? On the South Park site, that is.
According to wikipedia that episode's been taken down.
Derailed : Gaming Outside the Box.
SecondTalon wrote:*swoons* I love you, all powerful pseudoidiot!
ShootTheChicken wrote:I can't stop thinking about pseudoidiot's penis.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26528
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: South Park Censored

Postby SecondTalon » Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:23 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Dream wrote:as long as Comedy Central is just unwilling to upset people as much as they have, and aren't capitulating to threats, there's no problem with them doing this.

What? What makes you think that's what they're doing? It's just a big fucking coincidence that the first South Park episode they censored on religious grounds came just after death threats on religious grounds? Gimme a fucking break.
Second. Or not. Depends on who you talk to and what conclusion they reach.

Or maybe that one was censored not due to religious grounds but due to Tom Cruise pushing Mission Impossible. Or censorship had nothing to do with it, and it was because Issac Hayes just quit the show.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby folkhero » Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:50 pm UTC

Dream wrote:In my analysis, posted a page or two ago, there's a qualitative difference between what they usually do, which is fictional, and what they're doing with this, which is actual. Comedy Central might not react the same way to South Park showing something offensive as they do to the network themselves actually doing the thing for real. This isn't like the other times. It's also a far bigger shit-fight than they usually stir up.

As I responded to that analysis, South Park's characters use God's name in vain all the time. This is actual real disobeying of the commandment in Exodus. In "Trapped in the Closet," they actually, not fictionally, reveal the Xenu mythology to the public. In Scientology, it is forbidden to reveal this to people under a certain level.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Vaniver » Mon Apr 26, 2010 9:18 pm UTC

Something I realized last night, that makes this situation even more ludicrous:

Muhammad is generally depicted not at all, by text, or by a flame. But it is often permissible to depict him if he's veiled. Which is what South Park did, though their choice of a veil is definitely modern.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
rigwarl
Posts: 759
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:36 pm UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby rigwarl » Mon Apr 26, 2010 9:24 pm UTC

For those of you appalled at Comedy Central, ask yourself this: If someone threatened to kill you and your innocent co-workers if you continued doing X, would you stop doing X?

In this case, X is the depiction of Muhammad, but I don't care if X was wearing the color green, playing baseball, or saying the word "potato", I sure as fuck would stop doing it even if my favorite shirt was green and my favorite sport was baseball. Maybe I'm not as brave as the rest of you, but I doubt that's the case.

If you find that hard to understand, imagine if I knew where you worked and said I was going to murder you if you made another post in this thread. Yes, it's illogical and abhorrent censorship, but for you, I doubt you would post because it doesn't make sense to risk your life just to make a statement. (obviously I'm not going to do that, nor do I know where you work)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26819
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: South Park Censored

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Apr 26, 2010 9:25 pm UTC

folkhero wrote:In fact, Kyle’s customary final speech was about intimidation and fear. It didn’t mention Muhammad at all but it got bleeped too." So Comedy Central censored far more than just Muhammad's image. They censored far more than they did the week before, before the death threats.

The idea that Comedy Central wasn't motivated by fear, threats and intimidation is laughable.

Yeah, pretty much this. If they had *only* censored the image of Muhammad, Dream and others would have a leg to stand on with regard to their analysis. But South Park had already done that, as part of the plot. Then Comedy Central went way the hell overboard and censored a bunch of other stuff because they had received death threats. They went and censored things which were *not* real direct violations of a rule Islam has for Muslims, so the analysis that "This was real and other religions were fictional" doesn't hold any water.

folkhero wrote:South Park's characters use God's name in vain all the time. This is actual real disobeying of the commandment in Exodus. In "Trapped in the Closet," they actually, not fictionally, reveal the Xenu mythology to the public. In Scientology, it is forbidden to reveal this to people under a certain level.
And of course there's also this, which further refutes Dream's silly "analysis".
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Dream » Mon Apr 26, 2010 9:31 pm UTC

folkhero wrote:South Park's characters use God's name in vain all the time.

That chicken flew the coop a long time ago. I'd liken it to featuring an unveiled Muslim woman, which is something routinely done by TV stations the world over, and doesn't lead to death threats outside stations in fundamentalist nations. It's just not universally offensive enough to be similar to depicting the Prophet in an image.

Vaniver wrote:Muhammad is generally depicted not at all, by text, or by a flame. But it is often permissible to depict him if he's veiled. Which is what South Park did, though their choice of a veil is definitely modern.

Your take on this is now that Muslims shouldn't be offended by something that offends them, because you've interpreted Islamic scripture once and for all? Really?

gmalivuk wrote:But South Park had already done that, as part of the plot.

They were very clearly taking the piss, breaking the spirit of the edict if not their own version of the letter. Your interpretation of Muslim scripture is just not important here.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Vaniver » Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:13 pm UTC

rigwarl wrote:If you find that hard to understand, imagine if I knew where you worked and said I was going to murder you if you made another post in this thread. Yes, it's illogical and abhorrent censorship, but for you, I doubt you would post because it doesn't make sense to risk your life just to make a statement. (obviously I'm not going to do that, nor do I know where you work)
Alternatively, we own guns, and would tell you to bring it on.

Dream wrote:Your take on this is now that Muslims shouldn't be offended by something that offends them, because you've interpreted Islamic scripture once and for all? Really?
No. There are multiple, possibly coexisting, reasons why someone can get offended by something. One is because it flaunts a religious teaching; another is because they have a chip on their shoulder. Someone who respectfully requests that a well-intentioned depiction of an iconoclast be altered to not be an icon itself seems motivated mostly by religious reasons. Someone who thinks death is justice for mocking seems mostly motivated by their immaturity and self-righteousness.

Since the depiction of Muhammad was not done in a way counter to the religious teaching, it seems odd to take the religious offense explanation at face value. The hadith disapproves of all representational art, and Muhammad's admonition was solely against icons. So, either you think that Muslim death threats have a religious justification against all representational art anywhere, or you think Muslim death threats don't have a religious justification in this case.

And if we drop the talk of religious justifications, it becomes even clearer that we're talking about violent bullying in response to mockery.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

Prefanity
Posts: 280
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 10:28 am UTC
Location: Reno, NV

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Prefanity » Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:29 pm UTC

This might be a tad silly (and it may have already been covered), but why is it allowable to write Muhammad's name?

Asylumer
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 6:34 pm UTC

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Asylumer » Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:34 pm UTC

Prefanity wrote:This might be a tad silly (and it may have already been covered), but why is it allowable to write Muhammad's name?


It may have something to do with the fact it's one of the most common names in the world. Even in the time of the prophet himself the name wasn't his alone.

User avatar
Kulantan
Posts: 999
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 9:24 pm UTC
Location: Somewhere witty

Re: South Park Censored

Postby Kulantan » Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:40 pm UTC

A, perhaps, more useful Wikipedia page...
TEAM SHIVAHN
Pretty much the best team ever

phlip wrote:(Scholars believe it is lost to time exactly which search engine Columbus preferred... though they are reasonably sure that he was an avid user of Apple Maps.)

Blog.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests