|
There's that new Comedy Central show that gets off on being offensive, enabling 'race realism' by making 'jokes' about how people with certain skin colors smell a certain way. Comedy Central, like most mass media, has a perception management element. Like a recent South Park episode that ended with a nonsequitor of Jesus saying 'forget about this issue, instead FREE PUSSY RIOT' It focuses the audience on Putin and Russia's domestic issues. 60 minutes then reused the clip as a demonstration of popular support for Pussy Riot while describing their arrests as a part of 'Russia's equivalent to the Arab Spring'. Of course no Occupy arrests get 60 minutes coverage.
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 19:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:13 |
|
|
McDowell posted:Of course no Occupy arrests get 60 minutes coverage. I doubt CBS is very concerned about Pussy Riot organizing against them, Occupy on the other hand actually frightened the wealthy in the US for a hot minute.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:I doubt CBS is very concerned about Pussy Riot organizing against them, Occupy on the other hand actually frightened the wealthy in the US for a hot minute. And so led to the wealthy laughing it away as dirty smelly hippies pooping on cars worthy of no more than a smug as gently caress "Really?!?!?" from Erin Burnett.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 20:06
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:Honestly, I think South Park can be explained by saying that Matt and Trey are simply more annoyed by stereotypical hippie liberals than stereotypical redneck fundamentalist conservatives. I'm paraphrasing here, but one of them has definitely said "We hate conservatives, but we loving HATE liberals".
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
AircraftNoise posted:Except that the Daily Show oftentimes discusses salient political news. Sure, its a comedy show at its heart, but the source of the comedy is usually things that are actually happening in the political sphere that are so ridiculous that it is comedic. Also, the show often features guests that frequently discuss political topics. South Park can be described the exact same way except that the "guest stars" are usually subjects of ridicule but still exist to make a political point. Dr Christmas posted:Honestly, I think South Park can be explained by saying that Matt and Trey are simply more annoyed by stereotypical hippie liberals than stereotypical redneck fundamentalist conservatives. Trey and Matt have said this explicitly in a Rolling Stone interview. They said that they loved putting Bush in an episode for a minute or so every once in a while because they knew all the liberals watching would expect him to be portrayed as a redneck idiot and they intentionally portrayed him as a perfectly normal person with the express intent of pissing off liberals. They could've used their show's influence to condemn one of the worst presidents in history but they chose to spite liberals instead. Elephant Ambush fucked around with this message at 20:20 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
I don't think an artist needs to self censor or adjust their work just because someone stupid takes them too seriously, especially when social commentary is not the main thrust of their work. If they want to then that's their choice but I don't think it's right to blame them if they don't. They are a comedy show. You shouldn't take them that seriously. You should have a problem with people taking on personal convictions from a cartoon laugh show, not the fact that cartoon laugh shows exist and often feature a political message that wasn't well thought out or is just outright wrong. That excuse is perfectly valid when it's a comedy show dabbling in politics. They've never made a claim of authority and there's no reason to consider them one, people projected it on them. The problem is that you start playing around in a grey area, how blatant does a show need to be about social commentary before they're responsible for it? Who gets to decide what's a bad message and what isn't? It's a question of whether or not they should be held responsible for what their audience does and frankly I don't see any good argument for that here.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
I'm not saying South Park should be censored in any way. But with power comes responsibility. They're tremendously influential and they should be called out for all the stupid bullshit they pour into the heads of college Republicans and libertarians every week.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I don't think an artist needs to self censor or adjust their work just because someone stupid takes them too seriously, especially when social commentary is not the main thrust of their work. If they want to then that's their choice but I don't think it's right to blame them if they don't. Have you seen the trans episode? It's hateful, transphobic bullshit and the entire point seems to be "hey, let's laugh at those dumb crazy trans people." Or, the Chinese character whose purpose seems to be "let's laugh at how chinese americans speak cause lol they all have accents." So you'll excuse me if I don't entirely buy "They are a comedy show. You shouldn't take them that seriously." as a valid response to someone using a public forum to poo poo on minority groups.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 20:30
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:I'm not saying South Park should be censored in any way. But with power comes responsibility. They're tremendously influential and they should be called out for all the stupid bullshit they pour into the heads of college Republicans and libertarians every week. Well they are, it's not illegal to discuss South Park. I still don't think they're responsible for their influence or whatever mischief it magically forces college Republicans into. I think it's a good thing that they're aware of it and want to do something about things like people being stupid enough to think Cartman is a role model, but I wouldn't feel they'd be doing anything wrong by saying "no thanks, we're paid to make people laugh and it seems to be working out just fine". We might not like what results but holding artists personally responsible for their audience, especially when they've never made any sort of claim of authority or given out explicit instructions, is just plain wrong. People going out and doing mean poo poo because Sean Hannity said they should believe him and do what he says because his books sell a lot: Bad thing that Sean Hannity is at least partly responsible for. That's Sean saying outright "I'm right, trust me, this is what you should do." People going out and doing mean poo poo because there was a South Park episode where Kyle's dad got surgery to become a dolphin and it was making some point about transgendered people: Bad thing that that person is wholly responsible for. At best you can say the episode made a claim saying "this is how we think things are". The person watching it still has to find some reason in their brain why they think the writers of a dick joke cartoon show are any sort of authority on gender issues, has to think about it and agree that they're correct (even if that consists solely of watching the episodes "argument" and thinking "Yeah, that's right"), and then figure out exactly what they're supposed to do based on this information. The Daily Show is a completely different situation as far as I'm concerned because they've been explicitly politically active, but I still am not seeing any claims of authority by them. They format their show after other shows that DO make that claim in one way or another, but they are still just a bunch of joke people making a joke show. Sharkie posted:Have you seen the trans episode? It's hateful, transphobic bullshit and the entire point seems to be "hey, let's laugh at those dumb crazy trans people." Or, the Chinese character whose purpose seems to be "let's laugh at how chinese americans speak cause lol they all have accents." So you'll excuse me if I don't entirely buy "They are a comedy show. You shouldn't take them that seriously." as a valid response to someone using a public forum to poo poo on minority groups. I've seen it, I don't like the message either, but I don't take the two guys who made loving BASEketball as credible commenters on anything besides crafting funny TV shows and movies. It's not my fault other people can't do that and I'm saying I haven't heard any compelling reason that it should be their fault either. Edit: I'm not saying it's invalid or wrong to discuss and explain the WHY and the HOW of their terrible opinions and make it known in every corner of the Earth. I'm saying it's invalid to hold them responsible for their audience and what their "influence" does. Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 21:00 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
Maybe, just maybe, instead of lamenting people not liking when the guys who made BASEketball say or do things that insult serious things, the dudes who made BASEketball should shut up about issues and stick to poo poo and fart jokes?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
They didn't make that, they just starred in it.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
Didn't the "I've learned something today..." segments start out as a little dig at kids shows that would shoehorn in some trite morality right at the end of the show? Eventually they morphed into preachy "Oh I GUESS THE TRUTH IS IN THE MIDDLE" speeches.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:09
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I've seen it, I don't like the message either, but I don't take the two guys who made loving BASEketball as credible commenters on anything besides crafting funny TV shows and movies. It's not my fault other people can't do that and I'm saying I haven't heard any compelling reason that it should be their fault either. So you don't hold them up as credible commentators, good for you, but clearly other people do. Besides, Step-N-Fetchit was a character in early movies who satirized black people as lazy and ignorant. The fact this character was used in comedies doesn't absolve the authors of promoting racist beliefs and a specific political agenda. If you pump poo poo out into the world, you're responsible for it. And you agree, in some cases, as you say: Intel&Sebastian posted:People going out and doing mean poo poo because Sean Hannity said they should believe him and do what he says because his books sell a lot: Bad thing that Sean Hannity is at least partly responsible for. That's Sean saying outright "I'm right, trust me, this is what you should do." So if Sean Hannity made a bunch of dick jokes, or had a side gig as a comedian, then he would, according to you, no longer be partly responsible? Matt and Trey do set themselves up as authorities on politics and culture. Their values and beliefs are made clear on the show. The fact that you don't respect those beliefs doesn't make them any less responsible. Saying "it's not my fault other people can't do that" frankly seems like willful blindness on your part in regards to both their vocal political beliefs and their influence. Oh, and it's more than just "i don't like the message" in regards to that one episode. It's making a pretty clear statement, through satire, about their beliefs, and it's a bigoted and hateful statement which contributes to attitudes that cause real harm to people, attitudes they make an effort to support through their work. edit: tl;dr: They promote bullshit political ideology. Full stop. Just like Hannity, whom you say is responsible for the poo poo he promotes. The fact they also make poop and dick jokes in between the messaging does not absolve them of the responsibility that you assign to Hannity. And the fact that you, personally, don't take it seriously is irrelevant. Sharkie fucked around with this message at 21:22 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:16
|
|
|
Shut the gently caress up about South Park. If you can't watch a loving animated comedy TV show without your political feelings getting in the way I don't know what to tell you. Jesus Christ. Next we'll be discussing the deep political musings of Hey Arnold.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
Sword of Chomsky posted:Shut the gently caress up about South Park. If you can't watch a loving animated comedy TV show without your political feelings getting in the way I don't know what to tell you. Jesus Christ. Next we'll be discussing the deep political musings of Hey Arnold. Pretty sure Hey Arnold didn't have episodes making fun of transgender people or episodes where the EXPLICIT moral lesson was "Don't bother voting, your only two options are a douche and a turd."
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:22
|
|
|
Sword of Chomsky posted:Shut the gently caress up about South Park. If you can't watch a loving animated comedy TV show without your political feelings getting in the way I don't know what to tell you. Jesus Christ. Next we'll be discussing the deep political musings of Hey Arnold. The creators use the show as a soapbox for their political beliefs and musings. To say that people just unreasonably, out of nowhere, injected politics into it is disingenuous and incorrect. And again, the fact that they present these beliefs along with comedy doesn't absolve them of anything. It's like saying "Guys, A Modest Proposal is just a funny/gross story about eating babies, shut the gently caress up talking about English landowners in Ireland?"
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:30
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:Honestly, I think South Park can be explained by saying that Matt and Trey are simply more annoyed by stereotypical hippie liberals than stereotypical redneck fundamentalist conservatives. The fact that actual hippie liberals are so few in number as to be irrelevent while actual redneck conservatives control 50% of American politics hasn't dawned on them, apparently.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:37
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:So you don't hold them up as credible commentators, good for you, but clearly other people do. Besides, Step-N-Fetchit was a character in early movies who satirized black people as lazy and ignorant. The fact this character was used in comedies doesn't absolve the authors of promoting racist beliefs and a specific political agenda. If you pump poo poo out into the world, you're responsible for it. And you agree, in some cases, as you say: I've never said you can't attribute what they put out or do to them. I've said you can't attribute what their audience does with their dumb views to them. quote:So if Sean Hannity made a bunch of dick jokes, or had a side gig as a comedian, then he would, according to you, no longer be partly responsible? No. Because in that situation he's made an explicit call to action and declared himself an authority on the topic. quote:Matt and Trey do set themselves up as authorities on politics and culture. Their values and beliefs are made clear on the show. The fact that you don't respect those beliefs doesn't make them any less responsible. Saying "it's not my fault other people can't do that" frankly seems like willful blindness on your part in regards to both their vocal political beliefs and their influence. No they don't. I've never seen a South Park or a Matt/Trey interview where they've said "We know more about these topics than you do, we're experts, this is an objective analysis of (whatever issue)". I've seen some convincing sounding arguments that came to me in an episode of really really good entertainment, but in the absence of anyone telling me Matt and Trey have PhD's in psychology or gender issues, I would still have to process that argument, which should include looking at who's making it. The mere fact that a person HAS a value or belief doesn't mean it's worth listening to. The fact it's made widely available and a lot of people internalize a lovely belief for no better reason than "I saw it on a cartoon and it sounded convincing" doesn't make the artist responsible for those people. The line between art, commerce and commentary in TV is hella blurry because of the nature of the medium, but I still don't see any good reason why a show should be looked down upon because of what it's audience does. The show should be looked down upon for what's in it intrinsically. If Matt and Trey make something hateful and disgusting they should be taken to task for it. If someone in public is a poo poo to someone who's transgendered and calls them a dolphin or something from the episode that person should be taken to task for it. If an artist is THAT responsible for what their audience does then should we hold Anti-war movie makers responsible when their imagery is used to boost war rhetoric and jingoism? Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 21:43 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:The fact that actual hippie liberals are so few in number as to be irrelevent while actual redneck conservatives control 50% of American politics hasn't dawned on them, apparently. Hippie liberals also have approximately zero power in actual politics.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:The fact that actual hippie liberals are so few in number as to be irrelevent while actual redneck conservatives control 50% of American politics hasn't dawned on them, apparently. I'm sure it has; but being rich, white, straight, libertarian men they know the rednecks aren't trying to make them think about how privileged they are.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:41
|
|
|
Sword of Chomsky posted:Shut the gently caress up about South Park. If you can't watch a loving animated comedy TV show without your political feelings getting in the way I don't know what to tell you. Jesus Christ. Next we'll be discussing the deep political musings of Hey Arnold. If you have something more worthwhile to contribute to the discussion of right wing media then feel free to post it instead of whining that we're talking about something you're not interested in.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
Sword of Chomsky posted:Shut the gently caress up about South Park. If you can't watch a loving animated comedy TV show without your political feelings getting in the way I don't know what to tell you. Jesus Christ. Next we'll be discussing the deep political musings of Hey Arnold. Ask Rush Limbaugh fans about him anytime he says something outrageous, they'll inform you he's just doing it for comedic effect and we shouldn't take him so serious.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:
So you admit that they are making arguments and trying to convince people of things? Great, we agree. Again, the fact that you, personally aren't convinced because the lack PhDs has no bearing on what millions of young republicans take from the show. Especially given the show's "it's just common sense" attitude someone mentioned earlier. The fact they have a popular tv show that entertains some people makes them authorities in some people's eyes. You may not like that this is so, but it is. Pull yourself from your own perspective and try to see them from the perspective of a "south park republican," or someone who laughs at gay or trans people because "hey, that's funny stuff, right? And that episode made some good points" because that person exists. Ted Nugent doesn't have credentials, either, but surely he sets himself up as a person to be listened to when it comes to politics. I fail to see the difference between him and Matt/Trey. Would you say that Nugent's totally absolved of any responsibility when he says things like suggesting Obama has committed treason, just because you, personally, don't see him as credible, or because he doesn't have letters after his name? Artists are responsible for what they produce. Dave Chapelle quit his show when it was being taken the wrong way.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Have you seen the trans episode? It's hateful, transphobic bullshit and the entire point seems to be "hey, let's laugh at those dumb crazy trans people." Or, the Chinese character whose purpose seems to be "let's laugh at how chinese americans speak cause lol they all have accents." So you'll excuse me if I don't entirely buy "They are a comedy show. You shouldn't take them that seriously." as a valid response to someone using a public forum to poo poo on minority groups. Sharkie posted:The creators use the show as a soapbox for their political beliefs and musings. To say that people just unreasonably, out of nowhere, injected politics into it is disingenuous and incorrect. And again, the fact that they present these beliefs along with comedy doesn't absolve them of anything. It's like saying "Guys, A Modest Proposal is just a funny/gross story about eating babies, shut the gently caress up talking about English landowners in Ireland?" South Park is a parody, under all the rear end & tit jokes there is a very intelligent rhetoric pertaining to our society you just have to have the keen sense to see under the surface. They pick on everybody because EVERYBODY can be full of poo poo regardless of their beliefs. If anything its a mirror of modern society that we can either use to self reflect or get offended by because we cant read between the lines.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:So you admit that they are making arguments and trying to convince people of things? Great, we agree. Again, the fact that you, personally aren't convinced because the lack PhDs has no bearing on what millions of young republicans take from the show. Especially given the show's "it's just common sense" attitude someone mentioned earlier. The fact they have a popular tv show that entertains some people makes them authorities in some people's eyes. You may not like that this is so, but it is. Pull yourself from your own perspective and try to see them from the perspective of a "south park republican," or someone who laughs at gay or trans people because "hey, that's funny stuff, right? And that episode made some good points" because that person exists. I'm saying gently caress those people and gently caress south park. But gently caress them in seperate folders or else you're making a bunch of unintended statements regarding art and audience. South Park is irresponsible and bad for making lovely claims and statements about transgendered people. People are irresponsible and bad for making lovely claims and statements about transgendered people AND having sources for those beliefs that are as lovely as "dick joke show on TV". Ted Nugent is completely responsible for what he says and does. It sucks that he gets to do it in front of an audience but I don't hold him personally responsible for anyone else repeating what he says.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
hotlettuce posted:South Park is a parody, under all the rear end & tit jokes there is a very intelligent rhetoric pertaining to our society you just have to have the keen sense to see under the surface. Ohhhhhhh! I get it now!  We're all just too dumb to get the incredibly subtle and artistic nuances of Richard Dawkins having sex with the transsexual teacher and the school chef's bowels emptying as he dies a horrible death. Thanks for letting us know how dumb we all are!  quote:They pick on everybody because EVERYBODY can be full of poo poo regardless of their beliefs. If anything its a mirror of modern society that we can either use to self reflect or get offended by because we cant read between the lines. You are trying way too hard to defend a terrible unfunny cartoon full of bad opinions that literally millions of people accept as gospel unthinkingly.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
hotlettuce posted:South Park is a parody, under all the rear end & tit jokes there is a very intelligent rhetoric pertaining to our society you just have to have the keen sense to see under the surface. They pick on everybody because EVERYBODY can be full of poo poo regardless of their beliefs. If anything its a mirror of modern society that we can either use to self reflect or get offended by because we cant read between the lines. Yeah, everybody can be full of poo poo, but not everybody has the same level of privilege or power. I stopped watching South Park because I don't find it funny, so I haven't seen this episode on the transgendered and so I won't try to make some kind of judgment call. But if they do make fun of the transgender community that's hosed up, because for whatever bits of bullshit and wrong-headedness exist in the community it's still made up of some of the most picked on and reviled members of society who are constantly under the threat of physical and emotional violence. They are not on the same level as liberal Hollywood producers who drive hybrids or whatever other groups deserve to be the targets of their scathing and nuanced wit.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
So would anyone here agree that ID and the makers of DOOM2 are partly responsible for Columbine? What we're talking about here is a first amendment issue. In YOUR art YOU are allowed to say what you want and YOU can be held responsible for saying it. If someone really loves that art and goes and pees on a christ figure in a church somewhere people are allowed to talk about how you inspired that person or gave them the idea, but ultimately it's not your responsibility, no matter how obvious it is that this person was inspired by you. That person is responsible. I could go on youtube right now and record myself making a racist joke about Chinese people all being terrible bicyclists. I just post it and leave it, never do anything else. Never really intend for it to be used for anything, I thought it was funny and recorded myself doing it. Made it publically available. 1) In one universe 5 people watch it and nothing happens. 2) In another universe it goes mega-viral and establishes a new global stereotype that Chinese people don't know how to ride bikes. Why exactly am I more guilty in universe 2 than universe 1? My opinion is that I shouldn't be. I am exactly as reprehensible in both universes, what other people did with my art and how they internalize it is not my fault. I agree that there are varying degrees, and complex issues regarding how authoritative I claim to be, what I expected and intended for my art, what I already knew about my audience. But ultimately I will never agree that I would be responsible for worldwide Chinese stereotyping beyond my personal responsibility of making a joke on youtube, which I would be exactly as responsible for in universe 1. If the People's Chairmen thought I deserved a drone strike on my house I would feel personally slighted that he didn't drone strike any other youtube jokesters. Plenty of people would disagree I'm sure. Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 22:31 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
Can't we all agree that South Park is terrible and that there are some people who use it as the basis of their arguments and others who don't? edit: Jesus loving christ, Intel. Going down the first amendment path? Doctor Butts fucked around with this message at 22:43 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:Ohhhhhhh! I get it now! Citing one specific scene from a parody isnt a valid argument as its presented in an "episode"*. *episode (ep·i·sode /ˈepiˌsōd/) An event or a group of events occurring as part of a larger sequence. Anyone who takes any kind of information as gospel whether it be a cartoon, media or persons opinion is no longer a free individual. I can accept you think its unfunny, I can even accept you think its chalk full of bad opinions, but im really not trying that hard. The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions. - Leonardo da Vinci hotlettuce fucked around with this message at 22:42 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:40
|
|
|
I like a lot of South Park episodes. Scott Tenorman Must Die is one of my favorite 20 minutes of any television ever. I dunno, I find it pretty easy to digest the stupidity and absurdity of it all without finding myself agreeing with any underlying political message. Matt and Trey are often pretty lovely, funny people.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:40
|
|
|
I think the daily show would be a lot more of an interesting topic for the discussion because of the way the show evolved and the fact that they are very obviously politically active, but I'm finding it pretty fascinating anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
I don't care, South Park can do what it wants. But I do think everyone in this country should understand perception management, and how the assurances by the government that it isn't used on their citizens is bullshit. Certain attitudes and behaviors are encouraged by mass media, others are discouraged. The internet has been a shift in this paradigm but powerful interests get better at perception management online all the time. One should note that the Daily Show is made in Manhattan and Jon Stewart's brother works on Wall Street, so the show rarely goes after finance-types. Mc Do Well fucked around with this message at 22:48 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
Parker & Stone can be funny, but when they inevitably inject their personal politics it sucks all the fun out, especially when their targets are the usual libertarian/conservative strawmen. If they'd stick to popculture satire they'd be great, but they consider themselves to be modern day Mark Twains or whatever, and that delusion is what makes them mediocre.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
Honestly, I don't know how people who can't laugh at things they completely disagree with could get joy out of anything in this thread. Yes, South Park has dumb opinions about some things and sometimes dumb people adopt those opinions. Relative to every other media outlet talked about in this thread, though, they're pretty benign. I still like the show. Not enough to put new episodes on my calendar, but enough to catch up on old episodes every couple of seasons. And honestly I can't stand the daily show or Colbert report anymore. They don't go far enough towards pure comedy or politics and hearing about something I already know about followed by a cut to Jon Stewart making exasperated faces at the camera got old years ago.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:56
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:The reprehensible side of South Park seems to be an intentional shock-jock/parody style thing - I really doubt ode guys actually hold reprehensible views as a whole. But seeing reprehensible views being boldly presented when they usually are not can often stir thought and discussion. That was always what I assumed their intent was, anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Well, there was that time they tried to defend slavery. That was pretty hosed up. If you're talking about the NCAA episode then holy poo poo could you miss the point any harder? On a forum created for edgy immature humor it's odd how hard people try to find away to be offended and how many people are incapable of getting jokes. Good Citizen fucked around with this message at 01:25 on May 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:If you're talking about the NCAA episode then holy poo poo could you miss the point any harder? No, I'm talking about the tobacco episode. Kevin Harris: That's right. Over the next few centuries the tobacco business was so great that many slaves were brought from Africa to help work the fields. Cartman: [strokes his chin] Which means, if it weren't for tobacco, many of our black friends wouldn't be here today. And just to be clear, Cartman is unambiguously being depicted as being in the right this time.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:Honestly, I don't know how people who can't laugh at things they completely disagree with could get joy out of anything in this thread. Yes, South Park has dumb opinions about some things and sometimes dumb people adopt those opinions. Relative to every other media outlet talked about in this thread, though, they're pretty benign. I still like the show. Not enough to put new episodes on my calendar, but enough to catch up on old episodes every couple of seasons. I find Stewart to be terribly unfunny, his delivery is awful. Fortunately he has excellent writers, a great cast, and amazing source material to work with.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:13 |
|
|
Good Citizen posted:If you're talking about the NCAA episode then holy poo poo could you miss the point any harder? You mean Debate & Discussion? And are you trying to say that the people offended by South Park in this thread are offended because they don't get the jokes? It doesn't take much effort to get offended by South Park. The jokes and underlying message of the more political/topical episodes are not that complex or deep. I like the Scott Tenorman episode too, mostly because it is devoid of their terrible politics. But later episodes are pretty heavy-handed w/r/t Libertarian messaging. I think what is more interesting is how far out of their way people will go to defend the show (as evidenced here) from any sort of criticism. Also the "they make fun of everyone" argument is such a cop out (because they don't make fun of everyone, and even if they did that doesn't make it ok or any less offensive). When I thought I heard that the creators had maybe apologized or rebuked some of their horrible opinions I had a glimmer of hope. Alas, I had misunderstood someone else. As far as I'm concerned then, Trey and Matt are still hugely irresponsible & spoiled assholes. Unfortunately I know too many people that I went to college with, smart people of all political feather (liberal, conservative, libertarian), who have literally adopted some of the opinions and quotes from the show in order to establish their political ideology and general world view. So that is a thing. edit: fleshing out my thoughts on the subject edit 2: but I disagree that Southpark should be held accountable in the same way that Hannity or the Daily Show should, but it should definitely be held accountable. thathonkey fucked around with this message at 03:16 on May 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 03:03
|
|