What I don't understand is why Imus got fired for his sins, albeit temporarily, while Family Guy rolls merrily along. I am not saying that Family Guy should be canned, or that Imus shouldn't have been, but it's a pretty curious situation.
He's not saying there's any reason anything should have gone differently. It's just curious it didn't!
He goes on to admit never watching Family Guy, and then demonstrating same for good measure, including an assertion that the dog is homosexual -- actually, the male dog dates human women, and it's the infant around whom the connotations fly.
He offers up these reasons for the "curious" phenomenon that shouldn't be any different:
1. Imus is human and Family Guy is a cartoon.
2. Imus is non-fiction and Family Guy is fiction (although it often has non-fiction elements).
3. Imus aspires to some level of intellectual sophistication while Family Guy is brazenly juvenile.
4. Imus is live talk while Family Guy is taped entertainment.
5. There is no real difference between the two, but the kind of big public storm that resulted in Imus being fired is essentially a random event, unpredictable and nearly inexplicable, and it typically arises when political, social, and media pressures all align just right. It can't be concocted, or controlled. It happened to Imus because it happened; and it hasn't happened to Family Guy just because it hasn't.
Well, for starters, humans write Family Guy. And if anything, taping something offensive, mulling it over and choosing to release it is worse than an off-the-cuff remark.
How's this: Imus singled out specific people who were not legitimate targets (the basketball team), said derogatory things about them and did so in his own voice. Family Guy makes fun of celebrities and wide, indiscriminate groups of people (say, whites or blacks in general) and does so through characters who behave inappropriately. There's nothing curious about it.
0 comments:
Post a Comment