Idris Elba on pulling racist content: "Viewers should know that people made shows like this"
Aux Features Idris Elba
The conversation surrounding the entertainment industry’s attempt to scrub away its inherently racist history is split between those who support the change of heart and those who find the sudden erasure pretty disingenuous. Based on his recent interview with RadioTimes, Idris Elba appears to fall into the latter camp, suggesting that there are better ways to acknowledge racist TV shows without pulling them off of the air and ostensibly pretending that it didn’t happen.
“That’s why we have a rating system: We tell you that this particular content is rated U, PG, 15, 18,” said the Luther actor. “To mock the truth, you have to know the truth. But to censor racist themes within a show, to pull it – wait a second, I think viewers should know that people made shows like this.” Elba continued: “Out of respect for the time and the movement, commissioners and archive-holders pulling things they think are exceptionally tone-deaf at this time – fair enough and good for you. But I think, moving forward, people should know that freedom of speech is accepted, but the audience should know what they’re getting into.”
Elba’s insight comes after shows like 30 Rock, Community, The Office, and others announced the removal or late editing of episodes that so much as alluded to blackface. In certain cases, like that of 30 Rock, the removals came after years of receiving public scrutiny. As of now, there are no plans for the episodes to return to streaming platforms in the same fashion as Gone With The Wind’s recent return to HBO Max. (The film was recently pulled from the streaming platform and was re-uploaded with a warning of its racist imagery, which appears before the film.) Elba, who notes that he “believes in free speech,” feels that with proper warnings, people should be allowed to engage with content however they choose.
“To mock the truth, you have to know the truth. But to censor racist themes within a show, to pull it – wait a second, I think viewers should know that people made shows like this.”
Looking for ways to advocate for Black lives? Check out this list of resources by our sister site Lifehacker for ways to get involved.
133 Comments
I may have a man crush on this guy.
Isn’t this post missing the obligatory AVclub “he is wrong and stupid” judgement tacked on to the end? That’s weird.
He is wrong and stupid. It’s the same argument conservatives make about confederate statues ‘erasing’ history’, as if “Song of the South” doesn’t have a trail a mile long of articles, books, theses and white papers that have coalesced around it.
How is that the same? A statue honors something and people aren’t given a choice to opt-in on it. You have to seek out a tv show on a streaming service.
True. The stories told in tv and film and books are part of our collective culture and history, as are the true stories of [any historical racist jackasses you care to name]. Removing a celebratory/lionizing statue is not at all equivalent to removing access to films/shows/books we now find morally offensive. Removing the statue is not erasing the history, it’s eliminating an object that glorifies it. I’m with Idris on this — leave that stuff out and available, watch it, read about it, talk about it, and remind ourselves of how far we’ve come and how far we still have to go.
High Five
Yeah, I think things with shorter instances of racism/other terrible biases should be included with a warning. Drek like Gone with the Wind or Song of the South is too virulent for common viewing but I think there’s also some benefit from remembering how common certain stereotypes were in even recent media. I was just watching a pretty good episode of futurama (where Fry gets his head stitched onto Amy’s body) but there’s a joke about a transwoman. Scrubs has multiple jokes that were iffy (a lot of Dr. Cox’s jokes JD does X like a girl are somewhat to explicitly homophobic). It’s still good to remember that things we liked and which in other areas meant well still said things that we understand as hurtful now. It would be good if episodes had a warning beforehand so that people who might be hurt by those stereotypes could skip that episode. That or pop up video saying “This is bad, they shouldn’t have done that”
And I mean, name a piece of “classic literature” written before 1960 that DOESN’T have at least one repugnant-by-today’s-standards expression of racism or sexism or etc etc — Austen, Thackeray, Shakespeare, Dickens, it’s everywhere. If the solution is to scrap it or hide it away, well…. then where do you stop?
Yeah- I think the more isolated instances of stereotypes are important bc it lets us know what people got away with- and also makes it easier for advocates to point out examples of bad stereotypes. How is someone supposed to go “buck teeth on someone who’s Asian is a common Asian stereotype” if no one remembers Breakfast at Tiffany’s? It also helps us remember why so many people of certain generations held these prejudices bc we can feel the same “this is a good movie- what is that??” except most people not in that group didn’t know how wrong it was and just absorbed the bad messages. There should definitely be a system for letting people know what media contains bad stereotypes and/or pointing them out as they happen, but we can’t erase history (and not in the sense of Southern statues which were actually mostly built 50 years after the fact once Reconstruction was dying and Jim Crow and the KKK were becoming stronger). The media has had some terrible portrayals of minorities and women and we should be honest instead of trying to hide them.
Just want to say I agree with you. It isn’t the same at all.
don’t forget you’re also paying for it. A statue is something you have no choice with (unless you knock it over), a TV show on a streaming service is something that you pay for, and removing content from it is technically just taking value away from something you paid for.It would’ve been easier and more responsible if these companies just slapped a warning in front of the episodes in question that lets the viewer know what they’re in for
TV shows, movies and other media can also be contexted, tagged with ratings or warnings in ways that are not possible for statuary.
“Song of the South” is exactly the reason why Elba is right.The general public has no clue how racist it is. Hell if you go into movie forums, the actually take on the movie seems to be it’s not that racist, it’s just not good.Hell, look around all the talk about Splash Mountain reimagining where most people didn’t know it was associated with the movie. Erasing it just allows people to rewrite history, like how the Confederacy wasn’t about slavery even though the only real difference in the US constitution and Confederate constitution was the legalizing of slavery.That’s what happens when the narrative can be rewritten because no one can see with their own eyesPut a disclaimer and let people see how things actually were/are.To make it current, it’s like COVID-19. One of the reasons people aren’t taking it seriously is because no one is seeing the bodies and you have one political party creating a narrative. People need to see this stuff.
“The general public has no clue how racist it is”When the solution to a ‘problem’ is as easy as a five second google search, just how big of a problem is it?further, I’d wager that most Americans have no idea who Strom Thurmond is, let alone that he was probably the most racist post-war US Senator. And no one’s complaining about that.“That’s what happens when the narrative can be rewritten because no one can see with their own eyes”If Disney manages to make all the supplementary media that grows around major media properties disappear, I’ll be right there with you. But it’s not going to happen.
Yeah, but you’re singling out one high profile case. Lots of supplementary material on “Song of the South” might exist and be easily found. That’s not going to be true of every other racially problematic one off episode of a TV show. Take something like Community’s D&D episode…. it would be far more useful on educating if it existed with explanations embedded in the material itself rather than simply disappearing. We’re not talking about something from 1946… that episode aired less than a decade ago. It’s far easier to sweep racism under the rug if we say “all this old stuff” without acknowledging racism is still alive and active in today’s entertainment.
“you’re singling out one high profile case”Well yeah, I don’t have all day. Speaking of which, if that now deleted episode of Community is all that stands between us not understanding what’s wrong with blackface, you’ve got bigger problems than a deleted episode of your favourite show.
That’s such a defeatist attitude to have. Big problems take incremental steps to fix. Sure it might take more than one disclaimer on an episode of Community for someone to understand why blackface is a problem, but if they see it consistently when they are watching their favorite shows it could make a dent in their understanding. What value is there in hiding that opportunity from them?
“Big problems take incremental steps to fix.”That reminds me, even without my specific problems of Elba’s arguments, this is all laughably besides the point. As was pointed out a couple of days ago, 37 states have painted ‘Black Lives Matter’ on a street, but only of them has ended Qualified Immunity.
There-in lies the exact problem. Thank you for demonstrating it! The problem with the Community episode STARTS at the depiction of blackface. That’s a fairly shallow and kneejerk understanding of the bigger problem. There’s another problem that’s (arguably) as big an issue. Thousands of kids play a game every year that features an entire race of black people who are inherently evil. Not only does this provide an opportunity to educate people about blackface on TV, but it provides an opportunity to ask, “Hey Wizards of The Coast (owners of D&D)! What’s up with this idea of an ‘evil’ race to begin with? And why are they all non-white?” There’s a deeper problem in that episode you yourself clearly didn’t pick up upon that could have been highlighted by keeping the episode around with an explanation of ALL the levels of issue with this depiction.
“Not only does this provide an opportunity to educate people about blackface on TV”But not the only one. And certainly not even close to more…opportune opportunities, like sitting down with your kids and explaining it to them, or providing a workplace that has a properly staffed and funded HR department in order to properly educate, prevent and resolve this kind of fuckery.
You do realize this isn’t a zero sum game? One does not preclude the existence of the other.
You may have blown their mind
Bring up D&D and people seem to kinda tune out quick. I’ve gotten that a lot in my years of playing :).
Never said otherwise. All I’m saying is removing one piece of the puzzle does not qualify as erasure.
It does qualify as erasing one avenue – which is particularly important if the person in question clearly is ignorant of the problem. It’s like saying “I can do it with one hand tied behind my back” Sure but…. why bother?
Drow are pitch black due to their patronage by Lolth, Demon Queen of Spiders, whose abdominal carapace is glosssy jet black. Like MOST Demon Queens.
Seriously, people cancelling the Drow without knowledge of their history?
That’s as questionable as Americans over 30 with a high school diploma, with no idea who Strom Thurmond is. Please let the dribbles of American news that a Canadian got from the 15 minutes a day of CBC they heard, to be the benchmark of what information the averge American should have about the 1990s. And if they don’t, they’re “ignorant” till they read some.
They’re black because their god made them that way….? Do you seriously not see the problem with that logic?And exactly how many Demon Queens exist in fiction? I don’t know, but I’d bet real money “most” don’t have abdominal carapaces, black or otherwise.
“They’re black because their god made them that way….? Do you seriously not see the problem with that logic?”
Explain it to me slowly and clearly, please.
“And exactly how many Demon Queens exist in fiction?”
I would posit that many of them are evolutes of the Western perception of Ma Kali, the Bengali Goddess of Everything and Death. And as “Kali” means “the Black [Feminine]”, and given her depiction, i’d ask if we’re supposed to rehabilitate Ma Kali to a more contemporary shade of blue.
(representations of Kali are indeed a politically sensitive issue for this reason)But as an aside, I’m not sure it’s just Kali. I suspect that some of the demon queen iconography in European history may also descend from the Phoenicians/Carthaginians. Tanith (the mother-goddess associated with human sacrifice of children) and her Levantine equivalent Astarte/Astoreth/Ishtar were bywords for female evil and used as the names of female demons.
However, the real Kali parallel is Anath, the war goddess, who wears belts and necklaces of body-parts, and who, like Durga, is pictured riding on a lion. [Anath is more badass, though. When her brother/lover Ba’al is murdered, she not only resurrects him, but splits his murderer in two, burns the body, grinds the ashes down with millstones, sieves the powder like grain and throws the remainder to the birds to eat.] I’m only a layman, but given the lack of hyperviolent warrior goddesses in the rest of the Indo-European world, I suspect Durga/Kali is a borrowing from the middle-eastern Anath. [although I suppose there’s also the Morrigan…]
Explain it to me slowly and clearly, please.Ok, for the dense seats in back. The creators of D&D are not now nor have they ever been gods. They are mortals who lived in the US during a time we like to call The Civil Rights Movement. It was in all the papers at the time. I’m sure they were aware of its existence. They created a fictional universe made up of fictional beings and could have made any backstory they wanted, but went with “Black people are evil”. If you honestly can’t see a problem with it, then I doubt anyone can help you and you’re just going to be on the wrong side of history. Sorry. I would posit that many of them… Of who? You still haven’t given any examples of Demon Queens in fiction besides the one from D&D. You’ve only given one ‘historical’ example (quotes because obviously that god is fiction but people believed in her so, we’ll call her ‘real’ in so much as people at the time thought she was real).
Just how young are you? Strom Thurmond was *in office* until 2001 — he wasn’t some historical figure from the distant past! Is Jessie Helms another one of these historical figures you think most people don’t know about?
We don’t have to speculate. Next time you’re out and about, ask a random sampling of strangers if they recognize his name. Age won’t matter, btw.
Going to disagree.This country needs to be reminded constantly how racist it persistently is.Every time they can sweep stuff under the rug, they forget and act like it never happened or white wash As if it were a positive.
“This country needs to be reminded constantly how racist it persistently is.”If you’re counting on an uncensored box set of 30 Rock to do that job for you, I don’t know what to tell you.
For 50+ years, The Republican Party has done everything they can to make education seem like a bad thing (while making sure that top Republicans are educated).People aren’t going to self-educate.But, they’ll keep on watching their entertainment. And if you put disclaimers and force them to read exactly how and why something is racist in front of something that they want to watch. That’ll do far more good then erasure will.
“erasure”Disney choosing to no longer sell a product is not erasure. If they successfully manage to recall every copy and sue the publishers of every article and book on the subject, that will be erasure.Also, as I have to keep pointing out, the problem here is not cultural marxism. The problem here is capitalism. A multi-billion dollar company decided to do what they thought was best for their bottom line. We can debate whether that’s right or wrong, but pretending the villain is some nebulous and errant social justice movement is the villain is not the way to start this conversation.
Taking something down so that people will forget either that exists or the context of its actual is erasure.They are able to pretend that this bad part of their past no longer exits until it is treated as if it never happened.All this is doing is allowing companies to white wash their history under the guise of a social justice movement.Education is always better. From companies down to people. And I think anyone who supports erasure in any form is just foolishly waiting for history to repeat itself when the cultural memory forgets it.
“They are able to pretend that this bad part of their past no longer exits”Even assuming that’s their goal (it’s not), they’ll fail miserably.
But that’ll hurt “woke” white people’s feelings!And, as we all know, the only point of Anti-Racism is to assuage the feelings of white folks!
Idris Elba is English, not American and did not grow up with the black American experience. He’s free to talk from his British perspective, but not from a black American one. When a prominent black American steps forward and expresses this opinion, I’ll listen, but I haven’t seen that happen yet.
Not trying to be confrontational, but I’m not sure I understand. You’ll listen when a prominent black American expresses an opinion, but you won’t listen when a black British man expresses the same opinion? No, he’s not talking from a black American perspective, but why does that matter? He doesn’t claim to be – black British people aren’t just fake black Americans. Why would his opinion be any less valid, interesting or important just because he’s a non-American?[as a non-American, it seems like this “if you’re not American you don’t count” attitude is really common, but rarely stated as explicitly as here – and it seems to be a particularly problem for ethnic minorities, whose identity as black or asian gets questioned or dismissed because it doesn’t have ‘-American’ attached to it]
“further, I’d wager that most Americans have no idea who Strom Thurmond is, let alone that he was probably the most racist post-war US Senator. And no one’s complaining about that.”Is someone trying to hide all the footage, words and actions on Strom Thurmond and pretend that he never existed? If you’re going to argue in favor of censorship, at least come up with an argument that makes sense.
“Is someone trying to hide all the footage, words and actions on Strom Thurmond and pretend that he never existed?”No one’s doing that with Song Of The South either. Unless Disney has the power to issue a recall. And successfully sue hundreds of publishing companies and Universities. Oh, and end media piracy for good.
That’s strike two on making sense. Care to throw in some more false equivalencies or whataboutisms?
It’s the not the same argument at all, ya goon.
Not the same at all. Unless every instance of these parts of films and shows were made to menace minorities.
How can you possibly say these things are the same. The statue is honoring and commemorating someone. A show or movie is a piece of art. A painting of the Mona Lisa is the same as an episode of Happy Days.It’s important to point out when they have offensive content, but it makes no sense at all to pretend it didn’t exist.
I’m not comparing the art to the statues, I’m comparing Elba’s argument with the statue lovers argument. Both of them freight one single piece of the puzzle with all the worth.Song of the South might not be available for purchase, but learning about it is just as easy as it ever was. Easier in fact, thanks to the internet. So the whole “we need to learn from our mistakes” argument is moot, when all the coursework is still right there.
Sure, but how can someone write a new artcle, book, thesis, and paper on Song of the South if no one can see it?
It will make it harder for scholars and historians and students to research the content and compile a history of racist caricatures or show the progress of depictions of African Americans.
It’s removing the choice from people.
A Confederate statues is different. It’s not art. It’s not a bust in a gallery. It’s a monument TO history. It’s OF history. It’s not historical in and of itself. The purpose is to glorify the subject. And in these cases the subjects are racist dickholes who don’t deserve glory and instead earned infamy.
“if no one can see it”But you can see it. What you can’t do is purchase a new copy.Now, if Disney was trying to destroy every copy in existence, I’d agree with you. But they’re not.
Cool.
I’ve honestly never actually seen Song of the South. Where can I buy or legally acquire a copy?
It might be a good way to start a conversation about racial depictions in media and the past with my son along with cultural appropriation of Anansi stories.
I see a VHS copy on Amazon for $600. Which doesn’t do me a lot of good as I don’t have $600 to spare or a working VHS player.
Your poverty really isn’t germane to the discussion. Also, the majority of the scholarship surrounding the work is either free or really cheap. Enjoy!
The current scholarship is (often) free and cheap. But what about future scholarship?
Should anyone in the future writing a thesis or dissertation or paper on racism in 20th century media or the evolution of African Americans in Disney be denied access to primary sources?
You say that people can see it but fail to demonstrate how.
I’m poor because I’m a librarian. Which means I’ve pledged to uphold intellectual freedom. The freedom of indviduals to choose what to read. And by extension the freedom of what to watch and listen to.It is not for anyone to decide what material should be banned and made unavailable. That’s censorship. It doesn’t matter if someone is banning Harry Potter because it promoted witchcraft or because the author is a TERF. If the movie is racially inappropriate because it shows dated portrayals or because it shows mixed-race relationships. Censorship is censorship.
“be denied access to primary sources?”You’re right. No private or public research group is going to go to the trouble of acquiring one.“It is not for anyone to decide what material should be banned and made unavailable.”Capitalism! Seriously though, the wrong you want undone is several stops back. The rest is tilting at windmills.
You’re right. No private or public research group is going to go to the trouble of acquiring one.
University doctoral students are all now “private research groups”?YOU were the one claiming people can see it if they wanted. The question remains, how? Put up or shut up: show me an affordable and legal means of reviewing Song of the South for scholarly research purposes.
And you were the one claiming that wanting to preserve controversial artistic works was exactly the same as defending monuments to slavers and traitors.
“University doctoral students are all now “private research groups”?”No, that would be why I also used the word ‘public’, which you can find in the excerpt you posted at the beginning of your reply.“The question remains, how?”That question is nowhere near as interesting as you think it is.
In other words you have no idea where it could be found. And it doesn’t matter to you so long as the media you personally consider immoral is burned.
“In other words you have no idea where it could be found.”Don’t project your lack of imagination onto me.
“And it doesn’t matter to you so long as the media you personally consider immoral is burned.”Not even remotely close to my position. I’d get a refund from the wizard, if I were you. That magic potion didn’t give you psychic powers.
Who are you to call a black man stupid? That’s racist, we should pull all of your posts off The AV Club.
This is not equivalent to statues. You can’t erase art. Those statues weren’t built for art’s sake
you definitely have a misguided view on this if you think his argument is similar to anything conservatives are making about racism.
“similar to anything conservatives are making about racism.”Not racism, just the statues.
Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.Just because you have the memory, doesn’t mean your children will.Our children need to have reminders of the horrors and never think that’s ok.
How can you not denounce him as Elba seems to be getting awful close to suggesting that there is a cancel culture.
Lol, so you want to cancel him for suggesting there is a cancel culture?
There is no such thing as cancel culture so of course I don’t want him canceled. I just want the guy with wrong opinions to never work again and to give a public apology to all of those he has physically hurt with his words.
I am assuming you are being sarcastic.
You mean the thing everyone knows exists but idiots deny is a thing out of stubbornness and because they think it makes them good people?
Yeah but… look at how pretty he is.
Yeah but… look at how pretty he is.You make a good point.
Fuck off
Intelligent comment from an ugly dumb piece of shit.
I don’t think the AV Club wants to be in a position of telling a black man that he’s wrong on racial issues, unless maybe if it’s something that is obviously stupid like claiming that there is no racism now or something like that. This issue is honestly kind of a value judgement more than a rational argument, but Elba’s position is well supported and nuanced. One can certainly disagree with it, but I think that it would be hard to call him objectively wrong in good faith.Also, to several of the other commenters, this is completely different than Confederate statues. Much of these episodes were intended to lampoon racism and have artistic merit unrelated to the issue at hand (particularly the Community episode). You can say that they are insensitive and missed their mark, but none of them were created to venerate racism or with the intent to intimidate minorities like the Confederate statues and memorials were. You can still think that the episodes deserve to be removed from public circulation, but to act like there is no difference between statues that were created with racist intent and well-meaning episodes of television that were accidentally insensitive is flat out wrong. One can have very different opinions on the merits of both of these issues, and I’m sure many do, including Idris Elba, probably. (I’ve not heard his opinion on it, but I’d be surprised if he was against taking down Confederate statues.)
Huh?The AV Club LOVES to tell black people they’re wrong on racial issues, haha!Well, at least Karen Hayes and Ken Hughes do.Good thing Shannon wrote this one up.
Not a white guy and not Kanye West, so they can’t. It’s laid out in the company by-laws.
I mean nothing is ever gone in the digital age.So kinda dumb.
exactly, pulling of those shows have nothing to do with protecting minorities from the kind of harmful imagery these shows had, but protecting said shows and white people from being called out in the future. dont hide your hand, yall knew exactly what yall were doing with those episodes, just be prepared to explain yourself when questions come up. dont just pretend it didnt happen, thats dishonest.
If you can hide your dirty laundry then you can fool people into thinking you’re clean
After the 30 Rock reunion/ NBC Peacock ad, it is clear that the recent spate of scrubbing the internet was absolutely about protecting the white creators and networks. That show had an extended storyline mocking cancel culture. Jenna was ostracized by vengeful social media hordes but she earned her way back with charming obliviousness. NBC pre-emptively scrubbed the character’s blackface to head off criticism that could drown out their ad. The right thing to do is what Elba suggests. Warn people about the presence of blackface, require an opt-in rather than an opt-out and explain why you changed your mind about the appropriateness of the scene. (Or in some cases, why you did not.) Remove it from syndication so no one has to deal with it when they don’t want to. As it is, I don’t believe Fey and the 30 Rock producers had a change of heart or learned anything. They were paid/ordered by NBC to ask for the removal of those episodes. They did this because they didn’t want to have to deal with it.
Is the episode they pulled the one where Jon Hamm and Tracy Morgan had an Amos & Andy-type show? Because the whole point of that one was mocking blackface. Seems a strange thing to censor.
“yall knew exactly what yall were doing”so did everyone else, then netflix did something and everyone forgot
I felt the discussion around the Colston statue was a bit troubling for this reason (and the very small Rhodes statuette, for that matter). I don’t exactly think it was wrong to remove it – he’s not something who deserves to be honoured. But I do think it’s more complicated and less pure than people present it. The statue to Colston wasn’t a random “we love racists” statue, like the confederate ones: it was specifically a ‘look how much we owe this guy’ statue. That town was built on the backs of slaves: the slave trade made Bristol wealthy, and a lot of what made it a prosperous and pleasant city was the result of slavery, either through economic trickle-down, or in the case of men like Colston direct donation of slave-based wealth back into the community. [Colston was a slave trader who donated vast amounts of money to the city, building hospitals, schools, parks, housing, etc, and became a major regional hero – there’s even a type of bread roll named after him].On the one hand, sure, we don’t need to commemorate him, and I can understand that the statue was distressing to some, so it’s not wrong that it’s gone. And yet there’s something I think a little troubling about a largely white movement in a relatively wealthy (yet unequal) city not in any way giving up any of the advantages they gained from the slave trade, but simply removing the constant reminders of where their money came from so that they can feel more comfortable about their continued privilege. Right, that’s that problem dealt with!
Now, maybe if they replaced the statue with a statue of 17th century slaves, I’d feel less conflicted about it. But it doesn’t seem likely that they will…
Are the Lethal Weapon sequel episodes of It’s Always Sunny still online?
If they started removing offensive It’s Always Sunny episodes, there would be nothing left to watch. God I hope that doesn’t happen.
They’ve been taken off Hulu, but are still available to rent/buy.I think this is definitely a fight that the Always Sunny crew is willing to have.
As they should! The only thing I hate about bad Its Always Sunny fans are when they screenshot the blackface and say HAHA it’s so funny. Because screenshots literally just taking the whole context of the show away. They ruin their own case by saying “it makes sense in context” by… removing the context
You should get murdered you outraged little embarrassment. Every comment you make on this site is one pissy little neumale whine after another. Just kill yourself. You’re worthless.
No one cares what you think.
No shit?“The Gang Makes Lethal Weapon 6” isn’t among my favorites, but “Dee Reynolds: Shaping America’s Youth” was great.
Rob McElhenney has become a white knight in the last few years and the show has suffered tremendously from it. He’s probably all for pulling the blackface episodes, but I haven’t heard his take on it.Sunny has lost its edge and is now like Twitter where it has to throw giant spotlights on the “point” of what they’re doing. They used to respect the audience, and would do satire of ugly behavior, but now it’s bordering on virtue signaling. That gaming show he does is just as bad. I used to love Megan Ganz, but she’s awful now, and her presence on Sunny and the Apple show are part of the problem. Rob is now a full on white savior.
Rob hasn’t said anything, which means he’s almost certainly throwing a shitfit behind the scenes (“using his soft power at FX,” if you want to phrase it like that).
I’m also really bummed at the turn Megan Ganz took.
The important thing is to get the right kind of shoe polish.And to make the lips funny.
Mack only does TASTEFUL blackface!
No.. Hulu pulled those 2, plus 3 others because of Dee’s Martina Martinez character. Fuckin lame
If they’re going to pull episodes every time Dee says or does something racist, that’s not going to leave a lot of show left.
Yeah it sucks, I had just watched the Lethal Weapon 6 episode right before it got pulled and knew they had pulled both Lethal Weapon eps, but didn’t realize they also came for the Martina Martinez episodes. I think it’s really dumb to remove episodes where the caricature itself isn’t the joke, but the joke is on the characters themselves not realizing how offensive they are being. The show is EXTREMELY clear that the characters doing the black/brown face are in the wrong, and they’ve always been shown to all be terrible people. They very obviously are not glorifying anything.
Let’s be really fuckin honest… black/brown/yellow/red/white face characters can/are/will always be funny depending on intent (ie hate/racism).
Solid dude. Solid take.I get the good intentions of removing such material – even if it’s likely guided by the almighty dollar – but there’s a difference between pretending it never existed and acknowledging it existed and being more conscious moving forward together.
I just hope he’s aware of the effect he has on women.Okay, cool.
I broadly hate praising the Disney machine, but I thought their approach with Disney+ was the right one – put disclaimers in front of potentially offensive stuff that let people know what they’re getting into.
Disney has censored “Splash”, “White Wilderness” is not available on Disney Plus.
Exactly. Don’t insult audiences and underestimate their intelligence to analyze
It does seem odd that people are trusted to deal with depictions of violence, sex, drug use, misogyny, and all manner of abusive speech – we assume that contextual understanding combined where appropriate with age restrictions and content warnings are more than enough to let people consume this material safely – but racially insensitive material, even in parody or being directly criticised in the show itself, is the one thing that people just cannot be trusted to view.
FU KINJA
TV is actin’ like they got an inelastic product when they don’t.
One aspect that gets glossed over in this discussion is who profits from racist media? Sure slap a disclaimer on there so people are warned about blackface, and can’t claim ignorance when GWTW glorifies the confederacy, but where do the dollars they make peddling racism go? Is the money they make off of black people’s pain and exploitation going back to the community in any way shape or form?
The basis behind the push to remove old objectionable content is the notion that Americans are ignorant children lacking critical thinking skills. Which, now that I put it into words, actually sounds pretty accurate. Its taking a dangerous toy away from a reckless child. In the early ‘20s comedians and TV series played around with ‘ironic bigotry’ meant to satirize the bigots (Sarah Silverman, Family Guy, etc). But all it did was confirm the bigots’ worldview for them. Because bigots don’t get satire.
Yeah, but if the standard is that we have to make the word safe for bigots and idiots too stupid to understand irony, then the battle is already lost. I’m not the biggest fan of her comedy, but I doubt there are very many bigots whose worldview was actually “confirmed” by Sarah Silverman. Heck, people too stupid to understand irony aren’t likely to sit through five minutes her schtick—they’d be bored, confused, or both. Those guys get their dose of racist reinforcement humor from the Larry the Cable Guys and Jeff Dunhams of the world, not Sarah Silverman or David Cross. Can’t speak so much to Family Guy, since despite the fact that he’s a hero for bringing Cosmos back to the airwaves, Seth MacFarlane’s “satire” has always seemed to me to be of the Mark Millar variety.
I remember Chris Rock saying he regretted his routine about the difference between black people and n***ers. Some white people took that as an excuse to start throwing around racial slurs. Which is not the point of that routine, but if you go in looking for something that confirms your prejudices…
Yeah, that’s an interesting case, particularly since Rock wasn’t going for ironic humor with that bit, so the bigots I’ve heard quote that one weren’t technically misunderstanding the routine—they were quoting it as wisdom, albeit with bad intent.But the n-word is a decent example of what’s so weird about this current enthusiasm for censorship. The word, in most of its uses, is vile and hurtful, but we generally don’t turn to full-blown censorship to deal with that vileness. We use explicit language warnings so that consumers know what they’re getting in a movie or album that uses it, but we don’t disappear those works from streaming services. When libraries ban Huck Finn (and they do, year after year), we generally agree that that’s a bad idea.
Yeah- “I Need a Jew” and all the rape jokes on Family Guy really make me question how well meaning McFarland ever was
Is there any reason to believe he’s prejudiced in real life?
I remember Dave Chappelle mentioning this as one of the reasons he walked away from his show. While he thought his show was offering clever commentary on race it seemed to actually be making some of the people on set laugh for the wrong reasons. I think he realized that there might be a lot of people out there watching his show and taking away the wrong messages from it, and that scared him.
I think you’re getting into “video games cause violence” territory.
nah
This is something I’ve felt since the beginning of the protests; removing this content from public consumption is a PR move. Networks don’t want to deal with potential backlash rather than make sincere attempts to address institutional prejudice or inequality, so they make it seem like they’re addressing the problem when really they were contributing to the problem in the first place. It’s a distraction.
Its mostly whites who want to remove racist themes from movies and TV because it makes them feel better about themselves. They want to cement their legacy as being woke and in step with the modern times for their whole career. Black people don’t give a shit about this.
A lot of the consternation going on here requires the privilege of our modern era and being folks who can benefit from it, because it assumes that any and all art can and should be immortal, despite the fact that 99% of all physical media has been obliterated by time and circumstance. Only people with internet connections and instant access to things they want to see should expect this to be otherwise.
In other words: people aren’t mad because they’ve lost important political messages or irreplaceable works of art, they’re mad merely because they’ve lost access to something they had access to. It’s a tantrum based in convenience and misplaced idea of audience ownership.
I’m truly sorry that art you like can be made ephemeral in ways that seem to be beyond your control, for capricious reasons, or because of the unfairness inherent in the decay of the universe. But as someone who works in tech in live performance and currently can’t do any work in his chosen form of media, I can only say this:
You get used to it.
No thanks. Censorship is not a form of progress. You and Captain Splendid are very much alone in thinking that it is.
please, elaborate on the ”misplaced idea” that is wanting to enjoy the things you pay for
Quick question, should we pull Mel Brooks and Quentin Tarantino films? Because Blazing Saddles has like a bunch of white guys say the N word and in Pulp Fiction Quentin Tarantino talks about DNS. So like, does this mean that they’re also racist?Also the original Uncle Tom’s Cabin was anti-slavery but black people call people they don’t like Uncle Tom’s meaning that they’re anti anti-slavery so should we cancel them as well?Also Canada’s Prime Minister wore Blackface so should we cancel Canada as well?This is what you sound like. (I think there’s a difference between Someone Using Blackface To Prove How Evil Or Pathetic Someone Is and Minstrel Shows y’know? You need to look at the intent.)
There’s a huge difference between Mel Brooks’ skewering of racists and Tarantino’s movies where he just likes saying the n-word. Stop acting like you don’t get it. And no, dimwit, no one is cancelling Canada or the PM, but we can ask that he look at his past actions and do better.
No you dimwit I was making a joke about them getting rid of IASIP skewering racists with their episodes with Blazing Saddles doing likewise. Stop acting like you don’t get it, pal. Also I agree with you tenfold that QT is problematic and I don’t get WHY people aren’t making more of a ruckus y’know?
Stop making jokes. You’re bad at it.QT has been called out so many times. He’s said a lot of fucked up things but for some reason he keeps getting a pass.
It’s because he’s white and rich dude. Also I’m agreeing with you one hundred percent.
The other problem is that most of the pulled content was not making fun of black people but making fun of racist people. Removing everything, with no consideration of what was racist and what wasn’t, is tarnishing the legacy of some very good shows.
Idris Elba: smart guy.Here’s an idea: make everything available. Every fucking thing, or at least everything that folks think there is a demand for. Put a rating on it? Fine. Put a warning on it? Fine. Add a “this was produced when people thought blackface was ok” warning? Fine. But let’s assume people are adults and can make choices, OK?
Finally someone said this. Thanks ‘Dris
The other problem is that most of the pulled content was not making fun
of black people but making fun of racist people. Removing everything, with no consideration of what was racist and what wasn’t, is tarnishing the legacy of some very good shows.
he actually called them “racist themes”, not racist content, but i am glad someone is pointing out how absurd this all is.