Slashdot Mirror


The Simpsons Reviewed For Unsuitable Nuclear Jokes

Hugh Pickens writes "CNN reports that television networks in several European countries are reportedly reviewing episodes of 'The Simpsons' for any 'unsuitable' references to nuclear disaster, with an Austrian network apparently pulling two episodes: 1992's 'Marge Gets a Job' and 2005's 'On a Clear Day I Can't See My Sister,' which include jokes about radiation poisoning and nuclear meltdowns. Al Jean, executive producer of the show, says that he can appreciate the concern. 'We have 480 episodes, and if there are a few that they don't want to air for awhile in light of the terrible thing going on, I completely understand that,' says Jean, citing the example of the 1997 episode 'The City of New York vs. Homer Simpson' that was pulled after 9/11 because it included key scenes at the World Trade Center. 'We would never make light of what's happening in Japan.'"

14 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. radical news! by Odinlake · · Score: 3, Insightful

    radical news: someone behaved in a mature and sensible way!

    1. Re:radical news! by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The truth is that we did, but in the more subtile and perniciously nuanced form of political correctness.

      Gibberish. 99% of cries of "pollitical correctness" are more accurately phrased, "OMG, people expect me not to behave like an ass! That's Orwellian! Censorship!"

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  2. Re:Homer Simpson, too... by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are obviously not talking about ignoring the problem, but about not making fun of people that are actually suffering radiation exposure.

  3. Re:Homer Simpson, too... by Giometrix · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I hear what you're saying, but is it really "making fun" when the episode is filmed years before the disaster? I'm a New Yorker, the Trade Center episode not only doesn't bother me, I still find it hilarious to this day!

    --
    Download free e-books, lectures, and tutorials at bookgoldmine.com
  4. Breaking Story: by m_chan · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Humor is rooted in pain and suffering. Story at 11. and 11. and 11.

  5. great episode by phlegmofdiscontent · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I loved "The City of New York vs Homer Simpson". Great episode even after 9/11.

  6. Re:Homer Simpson, too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not like a new episode was banned, is an episode up for repeat and some one decided to play it safe and show another on of the 20 years worth of possible reruns. Lighten up it not big brother censoring the news, or someone setting up a government comity to discuss all the pros and cons, its "hey, I would if this may upset some one? Ah what the heck I'll chuck one of these in instead" as they point to a mountain of VHS cassettes.

  7. Feelings of a long-term resident of Japan by Grissnap · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I appreciate the sympathy, however misplaced it is. I get a bit angry when everyone focuses on the nuclear stuff going on. The whole nuclear thing will affect some people in Fukushima prefecture (mostly economically) and maybe some of the neighboring prefectures. Still let's look at things in perspective: 3 hospitalized (they are fine apart from some 'sunburn') from the Fukushima plant issue; over 20,000 missing or dead from the tsunami plus a multitude more homeless and hospitalized. We aren't suffering from nuclear fallout, people, we are suffering from one of the worst natural disasters to hit Japan in over 20 years. Still that is the nature of the beast, 20,000 is just too large a number for people to internalize and sympathize with. However, we can all imagine our gruesome death at the hand of deadly radiation. We all know that these episodes aren't being censored out of sympathy. I just hope they don't replace the episodes with a tsunami episode.

    1. Re:Feelings of a long-term resident of Japan by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is a very simple reason for this: People don't care about people but themselves. A tsunami washing away a few thousand Japanese? Ffft. Big deal.

      A nuclear plant cooking off? OMFG! What if the death cloud comes over here!

      Do you think anyone worries about the Japanese people suffering from radiation there? People are worried about whether the radiation comes to them, that's all. Get used to it, nobody gives a damn about anyone but themselves. That tsunami is over and doesn't threaten anyone (outside of Japan, that is) anymore. That radiation could still be a problem outside of Japan. Hence the coverage of the nuclear plants and not the tsunami.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Feelings of a long-term resident of Japan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is a very simple reason for this: People don't care about people but themselves.

      That is a massive oversimplification, completely fallacious and you know it. This may pass for a valid statement in middle school but not here bud.

      Why do people donate trillions worldwide every year to charitable causes that will have no direct benefit to them or anyone they know(Haiti disaster, HIV, Malaria, care for starving kids, etc.)? Empathy. Most of the human race have it, in varying degrees.

  8. Re:South Park wouldn't hesitate by Volante3192 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And what's up with old shows not being shown, or even being censored of shots of the world trade towers? We're supposed to remember 9/11 and the towers crashing down, but forget they stood for 30 years?

    The winners of history get to write it.

    Make your own conclusion who won...

  9. They wiping references to earthquakes & tsunam by Drakino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are they also going back and wiping any reference to earthquakes and tsunamis? So far, tens of thousands have been confirmed to have died to those events, but we don't feel the need to be sensitive about that. But a nuclear accident that hasn't killed anyone is worth rewriting history of a comedy cartoon? It's not like the jokes were made at the expense of the current situation, being that they have existed for years.

    I never did understand the removal of the twin towers from things either. Do we really want to show our respect to those that passed by trying to erase any mention or footage of the buildings?

  10. Re:Homer Simpson, too... by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's fine, but it would still have been insensitive and in bad taste to have aired that episode on 9/12. When bad things happen it's customary to be aware of the feelings of those who might have been impacted by it as a sign of respect. Stand-up comedians get away with it because they're supposed to be disrespectful and outrageous, but this is a TV station. If they're still banning the episodes next year at this time then I'd argue they're going to far.

    This isn't "censorship" (a grossly misused term on this site). It's discretion.

    --
    The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
  11. Re:Homer Simpson, too... by Schadrach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Really? Look at "The City of New York vs Homer Simpson" -- it was off the air for several years, and was only allowed to return after an editing pass to cleanse it of offensive materials.

    So, yeah....