Slashdot Mirror
South Park's Episode 201 — the Expurgated Version
Yesterday we mentioned the controversy facing Matt Stone and Trey Parker after last week's South Park (episode 200) depicted Muhammad, founder of Islam, concealed in a bear suit.
Today, penguinman1337 writes "Apparently, all is not well over at Comedy Central. The heavily censored version of episode 201 that aired last night has a lot of people angry, including the show's creators." From their note: "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."
There is no knee-jerk but knee-jerk and jerks are its prophets.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
At the risk of my good karma, you're a moron. They didn't censor the part with Jesus watching porn, or Buda doing lines of coke, they censored the speaking of the word "prophet muhammed" and the "I learned something today" speech that didn't even mention muhammed. All because people are scared of offending muslims.
Ah, comedy central has made it clear that in response to death threats, they'll censor themselves. I'm sure that will be the last time religious nuts get their panties in a twist and threaten them with violence because they're angry. After all, religious fundamentalism goes hand in hand with being reasonable.
Wonder if we'll ever see Colbert gagged because some right-wing "hutatree" terrorist realized they were being made fun of...
I am more than a little tired of this crap of "Oh we have to be culturally sensitive towards the Muslims." No, we don't. We don't need to be culturally sensitive to anyone. I liked Philip Pullman's talk about this general idea when he said "No one has the right to live without being shocked, no one has the right to spend their life without being offended." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ3VcbAfd4w&feature=player_embedded).
The media needs to learn that about the Muslims as well. They aren't a special group any more than Christians or Atheists or anyone else. If they want to get whiny about people making fun of them the answer needs to be "Shut up, nobody cares," and then go back to making fun.
A very important part of free speech is the ability to make fun of things, including, maybe even especially, the things people hold sacred.
The heavily censored version of episode 201 that aired last night has a lot of people angry, including the show's creators.
The terrorists have won.
According to the statement by Matt and Trey, the final speech (which in the broadcast version was nothing but an extremely long beep) didn't even mention Muhammed, it was about intimidation and fear. Comedy Central really went way overboard on the censoring of this episode. Hopefully whenever their current contract expires they can take South Park to a network that isn't run by a bunch of gutless cowards (if such a thing even exists anymore).
Personally, I thought the whole two-part episode kind of sucked anyway, but the overzealous censoring of the second part was just ridiculous.
And this is what happens when you let terrorists censor you.
> All because people are scared of offending muslims.
The are not scared of offending Muslims, per se. They are scared of being murdered. Their fear is not unfounded and is with precedent.
Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
Muslims told everyone else how to behave and what they are allowed to say?
You don't say?
I thought it was a coincidence that many of the most theocratic, oppressive, and evil regimes justify their existence with Islam.
This was of course the point of the South Park episode. They insulted every religion in the world in that episode, and only one threatened violence and managed to get their bit censored. It's 2010 and Islam is stuck in the 1300s. It's impact on the world is violent, pushy, and fascist.
It's also interesting in the way they chose to censor it. Tom Cruise got censored when he "received Mohammed's goo", but it was done in the exact same way Mohammed in the bear suit was, implying a joke. Presumably Matt and Trey did not have Tom transform into Mohammed, since not showing Mohammed was the joke to begin with; perhaps he transformed into a bear suit too or something along those lines. Whatever was really there, CC had no need to censor the image of Cruise, since Muslims would not have had a problem with Cruise in a bear suit or whatever. Censoring him in the same way was, again, a joke.
As for the end speech being entirely bleeped, if it's true that it didn't mention Mohammed at all, then bleeping it makes no sense at all. This is the network that had no problem with 216 utterances of the word shit after all; what could Stan and Kyle possibly been saying that was so offensive? Again, it seemed like this was a joke, poking fun at the whole censorship thing.
What's disturbing here is that, if it's true CC made these censors without Matt and Trey's knowledge, then they were not only censoring, but adding or changing jokes in the episode as well. Censorship is one thing, but creatively changing an episode...I would think that from the creators eyes that would be even worse, and I can't believe CC would dare do such a thing.
Despite the statement, I'm still not convinced this isn't all some big hoax or joke. The censoring done in the episode just doesn't make any sense, unless it's part of the episode, jokes about the whole situation.
To me this smells like one giant PR stunt.
I think you overestimate the current profitability of the online audience... hell, South Park even made fun the difficulty to monetize online success in "Canada on Strike", a relatively recent episode.
Otherwise, I agree with you, those 3 shows carry comedy central. Comedy Central tries to strike out on other good shows but they usually suck, whether cartoons (Drawn Together, Ugly Americans) or shows like Tosh.0.
Hell, reruns of Futurama is their 4th biggest thing, but seeing the same 60 episodes gets old fast... hopefully the new ones will be good.
What Comedy Central did was absolutely pathetic. Parker & Stone had already self-censored the episode by not actually showing any pictures of Muhammad and the way they did it was absolutely hilarious. But apparently you can't even speak the work "Muhammad" on Comedy Central. That Comedy Central allows them to ridicule anything and everything - any and all other religions are open game - but when it comes to anything Islam-related suddenly there's a whole new set of rules. Hypocrisy and cowardice at its finest.
I hope that the uncensored version makes its way out soon.
infested with jello like fishes no melotron wishes
I think that's supposed to read
"are supposed to turn the other cheek"
The christianists in the bible belt haven't followed Jeebus for a long ass time.
This morning I heard "so who is really to blame? The creators of south park who write the offensive satire or those who are making the threats of possible violence and death? Well, obviously those making threats are wrong, but what about the creators?"
So lets see, at least in the United States of America we have the beleif of "Freedom of Speech" right? That means we can dissent when we feel especially strong about something.
So I figure, for anyone who says "the creators are wrong in their satire" just opens the door for "those hippies supporting marijuana" (Viva Marijuana was the sign I saw this morning on the way to work) to also be "censored."
Oh but that's totally different right? Lets move to 'scientology.' Why should they not be allowed to censor people? Political groups? Schools? Religions with abuse scandals? Where/when do we stop censoring?
The best and most straightforward argument I have heard regarding this is:
"South Park has made fun of Christians, Jews, people of different ethnicities and organizations. But none other than the Muslims have threatened violence before." That should tell us where the real problem lies.
From my point of view, when I first saw South Park I was offended (Jesus Christ Vs. Santa Claus). But as time passed and I gave it a chance... eventually viewing it when it came on Comedy Central I enjoyed it. As a matter of fact, I regularly recommend it to people when key issues come up. Such as their red cross/catholic scandal episode.
Finally, what happened with Issac Hayes was tragic but eye opening. He shows that "I can be part of something (great) that covers a lot of subjects - that consequently offend everyone at some point or other, as long as it doesn't offend me or my beliefs."
My abilities are only limited by my imagination
I think that's supposed to read
"are supposed to turn the other cheek"
The christianists in the bible belt haven't followed Jeebus for a long ass time.
Sure, but by that same token, I seriously doubt the Koran explicitly advocates killing people indiscriminately.
Why is this modded troll? are you kidding me? maybe the "nerds" on here get the luxury of working only with other nerds, however i have to work with two conservative, gun crazy people who sit there and every day complain about "the government is trying to disarm the american people, we need to buy more guns". One day one of them said "we need to just round up all the muslims and shoot them" holy crap, dont realize if you know this, but that's called ethnic cleansing!! Yeah, there are "gun-toting americans" that i'm more afraid to be around then any of the muslims i went to school with! sorry for the rant
I also doubt that as well. Nonetheless, many Islamic scholars who wish to justify the hatred they feel and the violence they desire against those they perceive as enemies have and continue to advocate such indiscriminate killing. I think this Youtube video adequately describes some of the problems with Islam as a whole: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyNQ1zc-q74
What's more, they've even depicted Muhammad before!! In the episode Super Best Friends. It boggles the mind that followers of a religion of love can be so hateful over something so mind-bogglingly ridiculous.
The terrorists only win when we lose the will to fight for our Freedoms.
If anything, this shows that Comedy Central has surrendered to terrorism.
But Matt and Trey are still fighting for Freedom of Speech.
If The Simpsons on Hulu can be more profitable than on network TV, why would you think South Park wouldn't be able to pull better ad revenues online than on cable?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Well thats the old part. I am hardly a theology scholar, but I think (could be wrong) a lot of the stuff in the new testament was ment to invalidate the old stuff, like stoning. So if someone is doing it for Jebus then they should be likewise against that stuff. If they just follow the old testament then they aren't really Christains, but that would be some valid form of religion I guess.
?
You might need to re-read 1984 yourself. One of the points was that the Party itself was not actually that powerful; it appeared so because most people were willing to censor their own speech and even thoughts (see: doublethink). The Party only needed to worry about the people who weren't.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Perhaps not so much afraid of Islamist terrorists as of the dreaded -1, off topic, I suspect.
and I am sure Jewish and Hindu would be ignored.
No, they backed down for two reasons. The radical Islamic groups are known to carry out their threats. The current trend in upper American government is to treat these loons with kid gloves all based on this idiot idea if we are nice to them they will be nice to us. The fact is they totally dictate to the media what the media can say. One or more of their kind makes a real threat but others "the supposedly peaceful side" claims that its not what it seems and that the people who dared to say something bad about Islam are the real problem. It works out so well and we read about it daily.
They fear them rightfully so but their reaction is still wrong. The reason this fear and threat can persist is because far too many leaders want to act magnanimous in declaring they will turn the other cheek. This is nothing more than the good old policies of liberal lore where certain races are predisposed to violence, theft, or just need help getting an education because they don't have the ability to do good on their own. Condescending through and through
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Ah, the classic "it's not censorship if it's not the government" argument.
The problem is that if all the major sources of entertainment and news choose to censor themselves then you still end up with a situation that's just as bad as government censorship, it's just the reasons for censorship that are different (money + fear instead of ideology).
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
I'm a gun toting American! I'm also a liberal, and an atheist, and I live in New York City. What exactly does "turning one's cheek" have to do with with carrying a firearm? You do realize that part in the bible about "turning cheeks" had to do with petty insults, right? You do realize that the overwhelming majority of _law abiding_ persons who own/carry firearms do so with the knowledge that they are only to be used only the event of IMMINENT FEAR OF DEATH AND/OR GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM. Even the disciples carried swords, you dimwit. With that said...
A paradoy of your deity might be considered a petty insult. This is the instance where you turn the other cheek. You don't go around killing people for this petty shit.
And there are Muslims that I'm more afraid to be around than the 'gun-toting Americans' I went to school with.
What's your point?
(For record, I know what you were trying to say, and it's bullshit. There are crazies in every group. Just because some asshole said he wants to kill Muslims is no reason to brand all 'gun-toting Americans' as genocide-supporters.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
It's easy to bash on Comedy Central when you aren't the one in danger.
Where is it written that innocent television broadcasters need to put their lives on the line to adhere to your ideals?
When one is presented with contradictory instructions, one chooses the instruction that fits what one wants to do.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
Man, am I getting tired of muslims being offended. Hey, muslims, here's a news flash! WE'RE ALL OFFENDED! ALL THE TIME! People with half the guts of a mouse just live with it, and it's not rocket science, either. You just... live with it. It's really just that simple, and you're not beyond it. Get over yourselves, you whining, gutless, fucking pussies.
"Fuck that Pedo The Prophet Muhammed!"
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
The terrorists made threats, and in response Comedy Central gave the terrorists what they wanted. The terrorists have won.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Trey and Matt should have Mohammed in every fucking episode they air from now on. I don't just mean in the intro to the show, I mean like a new character like one of the boys.
Let those censoring assholes fucking WORK to achieve censorship...
. The current trend in upper American government is to treat these loons with kid gloves all based on this idiot idea if we are nice to them they will be nice to us.
You should go over there and bomb them into... Wait, didn't you do that already?
Deleted
I verify, I specifically went back to re-watch this episode a few days ago.
Bunch of cowards running things at Comedy Central administration. They clearly didn't learn the lesson of the Cartoon Wars episodes, every time you give in to bullies, you only embolden them to ask for more next time. So ironic to have South Parks' own network so clearly demonstrate the head-in-the-sand behavior which is being protested.
For those of you that are unaware, the concern among Muslims about depicting Muhammad is based on a few hadith that warn against doing so to prevent idolatry. The worry is that any depiction could become the focus of worship, and the depiction itself could take the place of what it represents.
Or, in other words, radical Muslims are fearful that a large faction of the faithful will splinter off and form a new denomination based on the worship of an episode of South Park. They're so anxious over this possibility, these groups have threatened to suborn the murder of Matt Stone & Trey Parker by dispatching roving death squads.
Don't click away to a calendar app—I assure you, it is 2010 and this is actually happening. (And I understand why some of you with mod points might choose "Funny" for this post, which is totally fine, but I promise everyone that this is as unbiased an accounting of the facts as I find myself able to give.)
By the way, if you happen to be a techno-savvy hard-line Muslim reading this post, I have one question for you: shouldn't your first problem, before Matt & Trey, be with the second most populous denomination of Islam, the Shi'a, who apparently have no problem with depictions of Muhammad? Is it off-base for me to ask that you sort this out amongst yourselves before requiring the non-believers to follow your religious edicts under threat of death?
but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
Bullshit. They DID sign up to let South Park offend everyone. They've made a killing giving South Park free reign. It's hypocritical as hell for them to suddenly do otherwise.
If it isn't OK, then it isn't OK - even if you will make a lot of money. That's my issue with this. If CC is going to make a decision that says "we don't want to offend" then apply that principle equally. But don't puss out because someone made a threat. Stand up for the principles you've stood by to this point; "We don't give a shit about sensibilities because it make us boatloads of money"
"Give a woman two glasses of wine and some pad thai, and they'll agree to just about anything." the Sports Guy
Any time force is threatened, the threatening party has lost moral authority. If you seek to affect moral change in somebody, then your own representation of your ideals should be enough to convince them.
Bunch of cowards running things at Comedy Central administration. They clearly didn't learn the lesson of the Cartoon Wars episodes, every time you give in to bullies, you only embolden them to ask for more next time.
Sounds like what's needed is for someone to threaten them unless they take the beeps out.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
I agree with your post, but what does a mainstream Muslim have in common with these people?
Didja ya miss the part where he directed the question at any "techno-savvy hard-line Muslim reading this post?"
It isn't like all sunni are hard-line or even close to it.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
You could play it earlier today. I rewatched it this morning. By this afternoon, it was gone.
Scary times, and even scarier when people like those at Comedy Central are determined to prove their cowardice to the world.
--Matthew
"If the lights of Broadway blind me, I won't mind..."
The problem with the situation in Iraq is that the US's goal was to occupy the country and bring about a peaceful democracy. That is a tough goal when the people don't want it and the army isn't designed for it. The US has never had an army of conquest, it is not an army with massive manpower needed to occupy a country. It is an army designed to kill effectively, something it does extremely well. You'll note that the Iraqi army was smashed in days, with next to no loss on the US side.
I'm not talking about going in and occupying countries, I'm talking about killing people. If radical country X attacks the US because their crazys don't like South Park, the US attacks them and wipes out the crazies. They don't stick around. The idea is deterrence and prevention, not nation building.
As a practical matter, that isn't likely to be necessary. If there are attacks it is probably just lone crazies. For that we have a competent criminal justice system. Ideally they are stopped before hand, with deadly force if necessary, and if you they are tried and imprisoned or executed.
Oh and have you had a look at the world economy? This down turn is not a US thing and is not related to military spending, but rather to the collapse of a bubble caused by rampant speculation, poor regulation, and odd financial products.
I've met religious zealots before -- none Muslim, and what I learned from being open-minded to their beliefs and killing them with kindness so to speak, is that I often am regarded as one of the "good ones", an exception to an otherwise horrible lot of people that ought to be either put on an island somewhere or converted. To me, religious extremists are unreasonable, and you can only gain so much with them. You can never be one of them in their eyes. At best, you're a pet. Still, it's admirable to try, and it doesn't help to go provoking overly sensitive people.
On the other hand, perhaps OP is a dick, but going through life having to make special exceptions for Muslims is absolutely unreasonable. We are not bound by Muslim law in this part of the world, and we resist attempts to have our freedom of expression taken from us in order to please them. There is nothing special about the Muslim sensitivity that it deserves this treatment. I would say the same of other religious extremists too however, including various Christian groups.
Censoring yourselves due to fear of violence is a quick way to the bottom. If any nutjobs can threaten you and you'll back down, you might as well just show Teletubbies all day (until someone complains of gay overtones, then you have to stick to static). Your network wants to think it's edgy by airing movies without bleeping a couple swears, but you can't even say one person's name. Just a name. That's it. All because there's some possibility that already unbalanced people (who probably already hate you anyway) will go off the deep end and commit violence? There's always the possibility that someone will commit violence against you, but you can't live in fear because of that. You can't hide your thoughts and hope that crazy people won't act crazy. You can't censor an idea just because someone might not like it. Because if you do, you'll just be giant fucking pussies waiting for the next person trying to fuck you.
Yes, but they're brave enough to take on the Bush administration!
Dark Reflection
Yes, yes, yes, Christians have bad people too. We get it. But that's not what this is about. It's about knee-jerk reactions to the very limited depiction of a holy figure in a cartoon. A holy figure that most people have no idea what he looks like anyway, so we basically have to put his name with an arrow pointing at the figure to tell who it might be.
If you want this to slip into a "well, Christians have bad people too" thing, South Park makes Jesus Christ a recurring character all the time. The number of protests against those episodes have been relatively limited. No attempts by Christian assassins have been reported on the lives of either Matt Stone nor Trey Parker. The Scientologists pretty much had the biggest tiff against South Park, and even that was more of a huff than a "march in the streets burning things in effigy" thing.
We all know there are bad people in all religions. But the point of this is about humorous depiction, and all religions in the world have had their figures depicted humorously at times. But only one religion seems to put out a death sentence on anyone who does it to their major figure, even though almost no one even knows exactly what he looked like and generally has to be drawn as a crude stereotype with his name pointed at him for anyone to know. Which is also really sad, and I don't mean that in a mocking way, in a lot of ways.
In order to do that someone will have to start a new religion based on South Park.
What about a religion based on freedom of speech?
Ho! Haha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust!
Before the current conflict in Iraq...brainwashed by Western media...
This is the part where you are supposed to provide informative links to support your contention, and set us all free of this indoctrinated delusion perpetrated by Western media that the shia/sunni conflict started prior to 2003.
Proceed.
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
NOW they are. Try that attitude out against any time in the majority of the last 2000 years and see how far it would have gotten you.
Christianity is no more or less violent than any other religion. It's just the core of the faith has been supported by societies that have moved toward more progressive values in recent years. I suspect this is largely by chance, and nothing to do with Christianity itself.
It's much easier to find evidence to support whatever you want to believe in any religion than it is to find one definitive meaning in any of them.
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
I haven't seen any reports of attempts on their lives by Islamic assassins either, for whatever that's worth...
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
So, in a church it's called "the word of God Almighty"; in a court of law it's called "hearsay".
"I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
> The statements by RevolutionMuslim are mostly for intimidation purposes and will most likely have no bearings in reality.
There were some dead people who would probably have liked to still be able to disagree with you.
Don't forget the quote of Christian Crusaders ... "Kill them and all and let God sort them out"...
Christians do kill, they do bomb clinics, they do blow up buildings in Oklahoma -- just that most of them are not so included, but they organized well from all states in the US to overwhelm the electorate in the last California election to remove the rights of same sex people to marry.
Monotheism is inherently antithetical to human life, as human life needs freedom and monotheism says there's only one way -- and ultimate it's followers enforce their beliefs on others. Until people realize that one-wayism is a threat to everyone, it will remain an insidious problem.
Absolutely. Even the "nice" christians somehow find it in their heart to hate homosexuals, and their public stance against their civil rights is no less ugly because it's done with a smug smile.
If you're a religious believer, you've already established yourself as partially insane
It's interesting to me how you manage to both decry tolerance and display an utter lack of it so concisely in one post. Bravo biggot.
But we don't live in 1200 AD, we live in the present. At the moment Christianity is much less violent than Islam: it's that simple.
Yes, Christianity did terrible things in the past but currently similar things are being done by Muslims. IMHO it is our ethical duty to stop religious insanity in the present, regardless of the past.
This sig is intentionally left blank
This rings false to me. It seems you're implying that the violence level of "any other religion" is well-defined, as in, every other religion is more or less as violent as each other. I've never seen, for example, militant Buddhists. Well, perhaps a Buddhist (or someone claiming to be one) who is militant about something else, but no-one who spreads Buddhism by force.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Christians do have the advantage in the "whose religion is inherently violent" mudslinging match that nobody was killed in Jesus name while Jesus was alive, or while any of his students were alive, or their students, or their students, or their students, or their students. It took several HUNDRED YEARS for people to start killing in Jesus name. Why? Because Jesus made it very clear you were not supposed to kill in his name, even to the point of literally turning your other cheek to somebody who was slapping you in the face. It was not until Christianity became the dominant regional religion and rulers began looking for justifications for political wars and capital punishment that killings began, and then continued in force for ~1300 years, largely until the enlightenment pulled out a lot of dusty verses.
Muhammad, on the other hand, personally led the Muslim armies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad#Beginning_of_armed_conflict
I suspect Christianity's new found 'peaceful' resolution came about when governments told them to mind their own business. When they lost the power to sway law in the US and Europe, they in turn had to comply with a slew of new restrictions to what they could and couldn't do. Agree with the parent. Christianity was an extreme force for violence, and could be again. Imagine if religion was allowed to blend with Law in the U.S. Now imagine the more radical folks who tend to push those agenda and the 'ideals' they strive for. I could definitely see that evoking violence, either through resistance or compliance.
In the middle east, Religion and Law or intermixed freely. Look at the violence created by such a mix.
If there is one thing that I think absolutely made things better in the US was a Separation of Church and State.
I fail to see the intolerance there.
Sure, there's an insult, but he's not calling for them to be banned/beheaded/banished or anything.
No true Scotsman eh?
"The black ink is just the backstory, the message and teaching is in red."
LOL.
So someone has sat down and decided this? They got to decide what are the real teachings and rules and what aren't?
Face it, like most religious people, you're picking and choosing which bits you think apply to you based on your own values. You don't follow the religion, you fit it around yourself.