Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 248 posts

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#101

Post by trhway »

fooker wrote: post #95
viscanti wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're also a big proponent of bothsideism. For some topics that makes sense (because there are two legitimate or legitimately absurd sides). For other topics it just pollutes discourse by elevating an illegitimate side.

An illegitimate side according you, might not be illegitimate in general. I'm not saying there are no universally illegitimate sides, but even those have their supporters and some reasonable arguments. The focus should be on deconstructing these arguments instead of marking the side as illegitimate.

>I'm not saying there are no universally illegitimate sides, but even those have their supporters and some reasonable arguments.

Like that National Association of Marlon Brando Look Alikes.

>The focus should be on deconstructing this arguments

I wonder what arguments you may see here and what the possible deconstruction may look like.

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#102

Post by nkozyra »

scarmig wrote: post #38
nbabitskiy wrote: post #30

Please explain like I'm five. What's the social status of SP in the USA? E.g. what do Chomsky, Obama, Trump, Chelsea Clinton, Fox news think about it? How come there are no rage firings because of it?

Everyone realizes it's counterproductive to overreact to any particular SP parody. Most people recognize SP as libertarian in general orientation, with a slight liberal bias. Neither Obama nor Trump has spent a second in office thinking about its portrayal of them.

> Most people recognize SP as libertarian in general orientation

While I believe Matt & Trey are generally libertarian-leaning I've never detected the slightest bleed-through of libertarian/neoliberal idealism in the show itself.

I've not really watched the show regularly in years, maybe that's changed. I do know that they initially discussed the libertarianism at a time when it was the hip above-it-all precursor to modern both-sides-do-itism that was regularly adopted without much deep reverence to actual libertarianism.

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#103

Post by anonymousab »

turk73 wrote: post #93
toomanyrichies wrote: post #81

Comedy Central is owned by Viacom, which also owns Paramount Pictures. China is a huge market for Paramount's films. Paramount has previously explored a 49% sale to China's Wanda Group, and they currently have extensive financial backing from the Shanghai Film Group Corp.[2] If they wanted to, it's well within the purview of the CCP to apply pressure to Paramount's ability to finance its films or distribute those fil…

Self-censorship is still censorship. If these companies crater to the least common denominator, then free speech in the West is also doomed. We can't allow that to happen. Putting profits ahead of everything else is a sure way to go broke because it sacrifices quality and every other good for the sake of short-term profit. We saw Disney do this with Star Wars, trying to pander to Asian audiences and failing miserably…

If it is more profitable for free speech to be doomed, then it will be doomed.

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#104

Post by fooker »

trhway wrote: post #101
fooker wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An illegitimate side according you, might not be illegitimate in general. I'm not saying there are no universally illegitimate sides, but even those have their supporters and some reasonable arguments. The focus should be on deconstructing these arguments instead of marking the side as illegitimate.

>I'm not saying there are no universally illegitimate sides, but even those have their supporters and some reasonable arguments. Like that National Association of Marlon Brando Look Alikes. >The focus should be on deconstructing this arguments I wonder what arguments you may see here and what the possible deconstruction may look like.

>I wonder what arguments you may see here and what the possible deconstruction may look like.

Consider a debate about the existence of God. A theist person might say 'everything must have a creator'. One deconstruction could be that the proposed God does not seem to have a creator.

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#105

Post by runeblaze »

jaimex2 wrote: post #20
artur_makly wrote: post #11

i wonder if China has copied SP and if so how they would portray the USA. Has anything been made like this? And is it just as funny?

Is satire a thing over there? I think it would be too risky as crossing a line could mean prison. All the Trump episodes on SP would definitely have ended with Trey and Matt locked up in China.

Yes it is a thing (albeit more subtle, which makes satire better or worse depending on your taste). I was able to read Chinese satire on U.S. gun shootings and PC issues quite frequently.

I guess my issue with things like this SP episode and these kind of satire in general, is that they only seem to focus on one important but partial aspect of one nation. To joke on American PC issues seems fun to many in China, but there are more important things to know about the U.S. than these things. In a similar vein I wish people interested in China do not just stop at knowing the terrible human rights situation and its increasingly authoritarian regime, but actually learn more about the shift of its regime since 1949, the more subtle parts of the ideology of the party (the ostensible resemblance to 1984 style "doublethink"), etc., which imo would provide much better insight into China than what is on HN.

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#106

Post by Florin_Andrei »

SmirkingRevenge wrote: post #86
toomanyrichies wrote: post #81

Comedy Central is owned by Viacom, which also owns Paramount Pictures. China is a huge market for Paramount's films. Paramount has previously explored a 49% sale to China's Wanda Group, and they currently have extensive financial backing from the Shanghai Film Group Corp.[2] If they wanted to, it's well within the purview of the CCP to apply pressure to Paramount's ability to finance its films or distribute those fil…

Interesting corporate taxonomy there. On the other hand, if China is willing to cancel something as big as the NBA at the drop of a hat (or tweet, as it were), it really highlights the risks of doing business with China in a very stark way. Nothing is to big to fail if you offend the party. You operate at their whims. Transgress, and its lights out. Too many of these kinds of reactions could backfire (one would hope)…

I thought all that was common knowledge.

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#107

Post by zenexer »

nbabitskiy wrote: post #73
anm89 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

South Park was pretty nice to Obama overall and he had a decent ability to take a joke so I'm guessing he liked it. I assure you Trump does not like South Park. But at the end of the day it doesn't matter what they think. There would be huge outrage if a President tried to silence a satirical show. They wouldn't be able to get away with it.

I understand that any American president is not like Putin. However, you (as a nation) have a history of character murdering, firing for politically incorrect statements etc.

You might end up fired or losing a contract, but you’re not going to end up in jail. In South Park’s case, there’s a very slim chance that the creators will lose their contracts—they’ve been doing this for a long time.

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#108

Post by kennywinker »

bfm1982 wrote: post #28
viscanti wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're also a big proponent of bothsideism. For some topics that makes sense (because there are two legitimate or legitimately absurd sides). For other topics it just pollutes discourse by elevating an illegitimate side.

"I like the style when it fits my beliefs, but this comedy show is polluting discourse when I disagree with it"

"when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail"

some topics they tackle are nails, others... screws.

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#109

Post by zenexer »

nbabitskiy wrote: post #36
c3534l wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are used to it and don't care about it anymore.

But what do they feel? What Trump and Obama feel about SP? For example, in Russia everybody would (hypothetically) laugh their asses out, but the creators would be promptly sued, because reasons, and won't proceed.

There’s nothing they could reasonably be sued for here. Parody, satire, and political commentary are largely protected. Our TV programming regularly criticizes and ridicules our own country’s politicians.

Re: South Park Responds to Being Banned in China for “Band in China”

#110

Post by avocado4 »

toomanyrichies wrote: post #81

Comedy Central is owned by Viacom, which also owns Paramount Pictures. China is a huge market for Paramount's films. Paramount has previously explored a 49% sale to China's Wanda Group, and they currently have extensive financial backing from the Shanghai Film Group Corp.[2] If they wanted to, it's well within the purview of the CCP to apply pressure to Paramount's ability to finance its films or distribute those fil…

Why does South Park need Comedy Central anymore? Just distribute it online.
Post reply on HN