Censorship
November 2nd 2006 14:04
TV naturalist Mark Amey, 44, who worked alongside Irwin, backed the sentiments, saying, "My message to people is don't watch the show. It's distasteful s**t. Let's hope none of Steve's fans who keep poisonous animals happen to find the addresses of those behind the show and leave them a nice surprise."
For those who have been living under a rock for the last little while, this of course refers to the latest south park episode aired in the US titled “Hell on Earth 2006”. In said South Park episode Satan holds a huge Halloween party on earth. Also in said episode, the late Steve Irwin makes an appearance… with the stingray still attached to his chest.
Distasteful! Foul! Disrespectful! Or is it?
For those who have watched the (as the media have named it) “Steve Irwin” south park episode, you would know that the cartoon depiction of Steve Irwin was only on screen for a maximum of 30 seconds, and even that is stretching the time friendship. And as far as South Park goes, what was said was actually tasteful and tame.
So why all the controversy? Because the media gets attention from it. But not only that, so does the creators of South Park themselves. That’s right … by causing such controversy, Mark Stone and Trey Parker are getting there point across even clearer then before. Because people who wouldn’t have known about the episode previously have now read about the controversy everywhere before.
But where does this get us? Should we smash our television sets every time something we don’t like and don’t understand comes along (see Cartoon Wars Part 1 episode)? What does this achieve? Absolutely nothing. Freedom of speech just becomes non-existent.
In the wise words of Trey Parker and Matt Stone, “Either everything is free to write about, or nothing is”
For those who have been living under a rock for the last little while, this of course refers to the latest south park episode aired in the US titled “Hell on Earth 2006”. In said South Park episode Satan holds a huge Halloween party on earth. Also in said episode, the late Steve Irwin makes an appearance… with the stingray still attached to his chest.
Distasteful! Foul! Disrespectful! Or is it?
For those who have watched the (as the media have named it) “Steve Irwin” south park episode, you would know that the cartoon depiction of Steve Irwin was only on screen for a maximum of 30 seconds, and even that is stretching the time friendship. And as far as South Park goes, what was said was actually tasteful and tame.
So why all the controversy? Because the media gets attention from it. But not only that, so does the creators of South Park themselves. That’s right … by causing such controversy, Mark Stone and Trey Parker are getting there point across even clearer then before. Because people who wouldn’t have known about the episode previously have now read about the controversy everywhere before.
But where does this get us? Should we smash our television sets every time something we don’t like and don’t understand comes along (see Cartoon Wars Part 1 episode)? What does this achieve? Absolutely nothing. Freedom of speech just becomes non-existent.
In the wise words of Trey Parker and Matt Stone, “Either everything is free to write about, or nothing is”
| 125 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog





Comment by Kristen
Silly American
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Comment by Purge Your Mind
Purge Your Mind
As for distasteful in terms of steve irwin, the day he died - not two months later - the DAY he died, I recieved two SMS's containing rather crude jokes about steve. Distasteful (No I didn't tell anyone for a good week or so plus for fear of lynching) however quite funny and clever.