- Home
- Columnists
- J. Christian Adams
Rule of Law - Ed Driscoll
EdDriscoll.com - Richard Fernandez
Belmont Club - Stephen Green
Vodkapundit - Victor Davis Hanson
Works and Days - Roger Kimball
Roger’s Rules - Andrew Klavan
Klavan on Culture - Michael Ledeen
Faster, Please! - Andrew McCarthy
Ordered Liberty - Ion Mihai Pacepa
Say No To Socialism - Ron Radosh
Ron Radosh - Claudia Rosett
The Rosett Report - Barry Rubin
Rubin Reports - Roger L. Simon
Roger L. Simon - Dr. Helen Smith
Dr. Helen - Spengler
David P. Goldman - Janine Turner
Janine Turner - Michael Walsh
Unexamined Premises - Zombie
Zombie
- J. Christian Adams
- PJ Tatler
- PJ Lifestyle
- PJTV
- Instapundit
Home | About Us | Media | Advertising | Tips For PJM | Archive | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | FAQ | Contact Us
v1.70 PJMWeb2
Dear Comedy Central,
I applaud your concern for public safety. As others have noted, your cave in to Muslim extremists will likely result in other attempts to intimidate you. You have demonstrated you will only give in to a credible threat of force. This means those who wish to threaten you will have to engage in violence until they become credible in your eyes. Of course, violence beyond the amount required to influence you would serve no purpose. So in keeping with your commitment to public safety, could you publicize the minimum threshold of violence required to control your network?
Best,
KKK
Nation of Islam
Sean Penn
etc
I think some people are being too quick to jump on both Comedy Central and South Park. Its not Comedy Central’s job to be the defender of the first amendment. They are a media outlet devoted to entertainment. Would it be nice if they stood up and drew the line? Yes. But in the end which is more important: a picture of mohammed or the message they were putting forward. Comedy Central could have completely wussed out and blocked the episode as a whole. Instead, they ran the episode and blocked the image which only highlghted the issue. Its the issue which is important, that fear of Muslim retaliation is stifling free speech both here and abroad. At least Comedy Central was hoinest and owner up to being afraid and didn’t hide behind sensitivity concerns.
It is the job of Comedy Central to defend the first amendment.
How can you possibly say that’s it’s not? It’s everyone’s job. It’s my job. It’s Steve’s job. It’s your job.
This wasn’t a decision about decency which any entertainment outlet has the right to make, it was submission to a threat.
Yes it is.
Thanks Greg, for the erudite response. I suppose my only response to the 1,573,249th use of that particular Ben Franklin quote would be: “A facility for quotation covers the absence of original thought.” – Lord Peter Wimsey.
As for Julie’s arguement that it’s everyones obligation I agree in a perfect world. This issue of self censorship shouldn’t be a problem, in a perfect world. But this is the real world, and you are asking the wrong company to take a stand. This is a basic cable outlet, named (follow me here) Comedy Central. They’re reason for being is to broadcast (and make revenue from) comedy programs. Yes while they do bring us relatively edgy humour like South Park and the Daily Show/Colbert Report, they are also responsible for Crank Yankers, Drawn Together, Reno 911, Strip Mall, Strangers with Candy, Trigger Happy TV, That’s My Bush!, TV Funhouse, and Wanderlust. Comedy Central is affectionatly known as the house that farts built. They should not be leading the charge. What’s next, are we going to protest the Cartoon Network for their cowardly refusal to broadcast pictures of the Prophet? This is a serious matter, and it should be addressed, but I would prefer the vanguard be those who are supposed to be the guardians of free speech: CNN, Fox News, MSNBC (maybe no one would notice), CSPAN, NPR, or any one of the 3 broadcast network news.
Also, I think most people are either losing site of the real issue or never really had a clear view of what the issue was. The issue isn’t a picture of Mohammad. I could care less about that image. In fact, if you were to ask me if I wanted to see an image of that rascally little desert raider, I’d probably say no. I have no desire to offend just for offenses sake. I wouldn’t like it if someone insisted on defaming a crucifix, so I will extend the same courtesy to Muslims.
The issue is the violent response to those images. Its the effect of that violence upon western institions, especially the press. And that is what Comedy Central allowed South Park to communicate. The actual image of Mo wasn’t needed to convey the message. In fact, I think its pretty obvious that censoring the image only enhanced the message something which I believe was the intent all along. That one little black box on screen has generated 3 weeks now of commentary. 3 weeks of better and deeper discussion than I was seeing during the rioting, because the talk now isn’t about those “crazy arabs”, but about our actions and reactions to that craziness. And that’s what South Park has given us, and that’s what Comedy Central allowed them to do.
And let me address this again, just because I too many people latch onto the image. Why do we need to see a picture of Mohammed? Yes, we should have the ability to see it on TV but do we need to? What’s the purpose: expression for expression’s sake? This leads to exhibits like the “Piss Christ” in the late 80′s, who’s only purpose is to rile people up, to offend. Still legal mind you, but it serves no real purpose. Seeing a picture of a 7th century caravan raider and illiterate prophet doesn’t interest me in the least and that’s what I was barred from. Seeing smart dialogue about the importance of free speech and the media’s failure to hold true to their stated beliefs ARE what I want to hear, that’s what I saw.