What they are quite calmly and clearly saying is that Comedy Central will bow to the demands of whomever credibly threatens violence.

They attempt to make this sound quite reasonable by pleading public safety and by arguing that they've done a lot of stuff in the past that people didn't like (non-violent people, that is).

But if we refuse to defend freedom of speech in the face of threats of violence, then we're not defending it at all. It does no good to claim that you exercised your free speech when there was no danger involved. The time when it matters is when violence is threatened. And Comedy Central puts their cowardice right out there front and center: "we are afraid, so we are not going to make them mad", they say. "But we're plenty brave if there's no real danger involved, so please remember that."

One more thought. I am in my middle years now, and this emerging muslim (and Mexican) threat is the first real threat to my people's way of life that I have experienced in my life. I have to say that I thought we were made of stronger stuff. I have been flabbergasted at the cowardice of the American press in the face of this cartoon controversy. We don't even have a particularly significant muslim population in this country, and are in zero danger of military invasion from the muslim world - and yet our opinion leaders largely caved at the first whiff of actual personal danger. It's just ugly to behold, that kind of craven appeasement, that kind of fear and cowardice. What a bunch of pussies.

In other words, Comedy Central says "if the bullies are mean enough, we'll censor the show. But take a look at our record of poking fun at those who aren't bullies -- see, we're brave!".

Well, in a way I see their point. It isn't their job to enforce the rule of law around the parts of the world that might view the cartoon. But with lawlessness in those parts of the world and states basically offering to fund retribution against individuals that publish these things, they might be forgiven for taking the pragmatic approach.

This wouldn't be an issue, of course, if everyone had had the balls to host and publicise the Mohammed cartoons. Because that would have created too many targets and it would have been back to the standard tactic of non-discriminate terrorism. As it is, some people think they can avoid becoming targets by being "sensitive" on this particular issue, with the net result that everyone censors and even people like Comedy Central feel they have to tow the line. What is needed is a collective action rather than a few companies/individuals standing out and making themselves targets.

Arguments against however:

1. The cartoon "controversy" was mostly engineered by theocratic institutions and governments and so you cannot draw any causal connection between displaying the cartoons and violence. They are merely an excuse for violence and never a reason.

2. The actual danger of retribution is still quite low in a non-muslim country that enforces the rule of law. Eric has hosted all the Danish cartoons, as have I displayed a few, I assume without any organised attempt to take us out:) It is not as if there is a network of muslims out there looking for propogators of Mohammed images to kill. When there is "retribution" it seems pretty random so far. Once again suggesting the lack of real causal connection and more just the rousing of violent emotions.

"With the power of freedom of speech and expression also comes the obligation to use that power in a responsible way" This argument is patently false. By arguing for the necessity of responsibility you inherently discount and destroy the very nature of free speech. This finds the slope to no violence on TV or videogame, no pornographic content in any medium, etc. for the sake of "responsibility". Responsibility is a polite way to cowardice.

"Ten seasons and almost 150 episodes the series has addressed all types of sensitive hot-button issues, religious and political, and has done so with Comedy Central's full support...including this one" The problem here is simply that the statement is untrue. In addition to the censoring of Muhammad, there are the "Closet" Scientologist episode and the Menstruating Mary one, both of which have been pulled from the possibility of reruns due to complaints or threats from small groups. A bold faced lie, and nothing more.

There is much more...almost every sentence may be taken to task, but this seems a good start.

So Eric Rudolph (sp?) was right. How sad.

In other words, Comedy Central says "if the bullies are mean enough, we'll censor the show. But take a look at our record of poking fun at those who aren't bullies -- see, we're brave!".

Perfect.

That they haven't caved in to censorship in regard to Christianity, despite some who would threaten violence from that quarter, is indicative of their political leanings, never mind what they say to the contrary.
Cowards? No, just Quislings.
When Bagdad falls, will their writers be in the crowd marching in celebration down University Avenue in Berkeley?
You bet your ass they will!

Now is the time for the Christian right to take up arms. Rally with me to end, once and for all, media tyranny over Christian believers. We must now NOT turn the other cheek, but take up arms and bombs against media slanderers. Comedy Central is a prime offender. They will be first.

Oh my God, Comedy Central killed freedom. Those Bastards

It's a form email. I got the same one in my in box.

'me' said it perfectly: Comedy Central is nothing more than a bully impervious to all criticism—unless it believes the critic will actually do some physical violence.

Just a breif point:

Remember all those muslims protesting and rioting and burning things around the world because a picture of Muhammad was portrayed in what they considered a negative light by Danish political cartoons? How could anyone forget?

They were doing so because it is forbidden to portray a prophet in a negative light in the Koran. In fact, doing so requires you to be put to death.

But... Jesus Christ is considered a prophet by the Muslim faith, the Koran also states this.

And Comedy Central had no problem portraying HIM in an incredibly offensive, blasphemous manner. And look, no response by the Muslim world!

Now, to be fair, it took months before the mullahs and tyrants of the Arab world organized the "spontaneous" response by rioters, so in time it may come.

But Comedy Central's position is even less defensible in light of these facts.

Dear Comdhimmi Central,

So let me get this straight. What you are saying to me is:

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the "South Park" episodes entitled "Cartoon Wars." We appreciate your concerns about censorship and the destructive influence of outside groups on the media...

[...but don't share them.]

To reiterate, as satirists, we believe that it is our First Amendment right to poke fun at any and all people, groups, organizations and religions and we will continue to "defend" that right...

[...even though we refuse to exercise it, or even "defend" it through any physical, spiritual or otherwise invisible effort.]

Our goal is to make people laugh and perhaps, if we're lucky, even make them think in the process...

[...we frequently fall short of this goal. We are, after all, cable television. Besides, aren't you all laughing at us by now?]

Comedy Central's belief in the First Amendment has not wavered, despite wavering in our decision not to air an image of Muhammad. Our decision was made not to mute the voices of Trey and Matt or because we value one religion over any other, (except violent Islam. Who can't favor that?) This decision was based solely on concern for public safety in light of recent world events...

[...such as Britney Spears dropping her baby. We have it on good authority that this was directly related to Spears' accidental distraction by an image of the Prophet (PBOH). Comedy Central isn't opposed to much, but if there are small steps we can take to prevent another senseless baby dropping, we will, unashamedly take those steps!]

With the power of freedom of speech and expression also comes the obligation to use that power in a responsible way...

[...we learned this from the first Spiderman movie.]

Much as we wish it weren't the case, times have changed... [...and so has the importance of "freedom" of things, like speech and worship.] ...As witnessed by the intense and deadly reaction to the publication of the Danish cartoons, decisions cannot be made in a vacuum without considering what impact they may have on innocent individuals around the globe. [...in short, as much as we love free speech, free speech kills, so we are shutting up now. Anyone who believes otherwise is a murdering bastard.]

It was with this in mind we decided not to air the image of Muhammad [...again, though we've done it a few times in the past, even though radical Islam has been killing people pretty effectively since 1948, with or without the visual assistance of agitating hand drawings...], a decision similar to that made by virtually every single media outlet [...whose cowardice we admire, except the Western Standard and muslim newspapers] across the country earlier this year when they each determined that it was not prudent or in the interest of safety to demonstrate solidarity or courage in an effort to reproduce the controversial Danish cartoons.

Injuries occurred and lives were lost in the riots set off by the original [...okay, not the original, but the second time, once the radical imams got around to being offended] publication of these cartoons... [...because, you know, most of the deaths were the result of intense paper cuts exacted by improper handling of the cartoons.] The monolithic, singular, state-party American media [PBOH] made a decision then, as we did now, not to put the safety and well being of the public at risk, here or abroad. [...because pirated DVDs of our Osama Bin Laden as a murderous cartoonish sodomite episode that happen to make the black market in Yemen simply are not our problem.]

As a viewer of "South Park," you know that over the course of ten seasons and almost 150 episodes the series has addressed all types of safe but sensitive, hot-button issues, religious and political, and has done so with Comedy Central's full support in every instance, excluding this one [and that bit about Tom Cruise, and the other about stigmata...but our fart jokes are as uncensored as a bugle call!].

"Cartoon Wars" contained a very important message, one that Trey and Matt felt strongly about, as did we at the network [...of course, to a much, much lesser degree], which is why we gave them carte blanche in every facet but the only facet that was central to the theme of the program: we would not broadcast a portrayal of Muhammad... [...because free speech isn't free when money and/or unrelated injury is on the line.]

In that regard, did we censor the show? Yes, we did. But if you hold Comedy Central's 15-year track record up against any other network out there [...including the Food Network or that one channel with Benny Hinn on it], you'll find that we afford our talent the most creative freedom [...this side of Mary Mapes, but come on, CBS is NETWORK. It is still network, right?] and provide a nurturing atmosphere that challenges them to be bold and daring and places them in a position to constantly break barriers and push the envelope...[just not so far as it actually results in someone pushing back. In short, we'll bully the weaklings, and call it comedy, but avoid the tough guys like the plague.]

The result has been some of the most provocative television ever produced... [...considering that we are, after all, still only cable tv, and, come on...the standards were never that high in the first place.]

In other words...given that in our long history, we've really only had one realistic chance to, in front of one of the largest audiences in our history, take a modest but firm stand for the principles of liberty, to simply allow Trey and Matt to speak freely on a truly dangerous subject in the name of freedom, to risk something a little more dear than the dismay of otherwise peaceful people, to stick a finger in the eye of cowardice, we instead opted for fear, abdication and servitude to Muhammed (PBOH.)

We would like nothing more than to be able to look back at this in a few years and think that perhaps we overreacted...[...because nothing says "edgy comedy" like feelings of regret.] Unfortunately, to have made a different decision and to look back and see that we completely underestimated the damage that resulted was a risk we were not willing to take. [...never worry, we'll be taking on radical Catholicism in a future episode.]

Our pledge to you, our loyal viewers, is that Comedy Central will continue to produce and provide the best comedy available... [...in a structure where fear is the dominant paradigm, mind you.] and we will continue to push it right to the edge, using and defending the First Amendment in the most responsible way we know how. [...by not every excercising it the one time it matters.]

Sincerely,
Comedy Central Viewer Services

[...and we don't really mean "Sincerely."]

+++

Am I hearing what you are saying?

Well played Dan, well played indeed. Spot on!

With all due respect to soapboxing about first amendment freedoms of speech, censorship and fear, etc. we must also consider that Comedy Central is an American company operating in the United States, and therefore subject to a host of legal actions (legitimate or otherwise) should somebody somewhere get hurt and decide to blame the show for thier pain and suffering. I couldn't have written a better letter myself if I was an attorney with a host of insurance actuaries checking the document word for word.

For better os worse, we live in a country where you can incur huge costs (legal fees, settlements, etc.) defending yourself even if you've done nothing wrong. Just imagine if that Danish newspaper was US-owned and some of the deaths were of American citizens, and you get the picture.... "C'est la vie" just doesn't win many jury trials in this day and age.

I'm kind of wondering when Comedy Central is going to find out that Matt and Trae slipped an image of Mohammed into every title card of every South Park episode in season ten.

He who laughs last, most definitely, laughs loudest.

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.

Mike: I agree, in general. That's why I would like to have seen a concerted "spread the risk" cartoon display when the initial rioting broke out, on the part of all our brave media "free speech" defenders.

It is, moreover, particularly egregious when boisterously in-your-face transgressive publishers--like Borders and Comedy Central--exercise restraint.

The legal costs may add up, but all the nine (with the exception of Alito, he hasn't ruled on such a case yet) are free speech junkies - liberal and conservative both. Thus in time a civil suit against a network for aggressive action under 1st amendment protection would be thrown out as being non justiceable.

I realize that the argument that Comedy Central - or whomever else - is a media outlet, corporate in nature, is ubiquitous, but that does not excuse them from the call of cowardice due to the 'restraint' that they used.

We went to Iraq - according to the explanation of the moment - to spread western values. Free expression is the foremost of these values, and as such is required to be aggressively protected here at home before we may ever expect it to take root abroad.

I disagree strongly with the few people who have said that it's not Comedy Centrals *job* to defend the first amendment.

It is their job. And my job. And your job.

This is called personal responsibility and we each have it, to defend our fellow citizens and ourselves instead of outsourcing that to other agencies. Either free speech is something we believe in, or it's not. There is no "we believe in it" but "it's not our job to defend."

I got the same letter, and the fisking it got here pretty much says it all. All I can add here is the possibility that Comedy Central is caving in, not out of any real fear, but to generate truckloads of free publicity and media attention (which, in fact, the "South Park" episode would not have got otherwise). Don't be surprised if they generate more by changing their minds, re-running the show uncensored, and pretending it's proof they're really really brave after all. Hey, it's not like privately-owned broadcasters ever cared a lot about politics or their own image.

PS: "me" was spot-on here. Can I quote that bit?

Dan - can we all reply to Comedy Central with your letter?! That's awesome!

I can't stand South Park - waaay too crude and gross for my taste. But if we have to have crude and tasteless then let them be equal opportunity tasteless.

So what's wrong being a target for violence? You gotta die some day and better to go out fighting back with a butter knife some Joe Jahadi with an AK-47 than to die of prostate cancer or an excess of bacon grease in your heart.

When the existing "organs of articulation" we have for our culture wuss-out, we'll just have to find new ones, like "Classical Values."

You feel the same way Beck?