5 ms·

Imagine the 'indirect effect' that these kinds of things have on discussions throughout the industry. Reddit just had a discussion about the video 'Fat' (i.e.

Imagine the 'indirect effect' that these kinds of things have on discussions throughout the industry. Reddit just had a discussion about the video 'Fat' (i.e. 'Bad') by Weird Al Mocking Michael Jackson. It 'couldn't be made today' first because it wouldn't even be pitched in the first place - too much risk. They'll try another idea. Maybe it's 'not nice' in 2022 to use the term 'fat' - or, maybe it's not so bad, and we're just too concerned about everything - the point is - the concept won't ever really be 'thought of' because everyone is aware of the 'new rules'. It's a form of systematic oppression. It's all over the place. I suggest we should probably err on the side of expression as long as people aren't directly doing something obviously hateful. Especially in non-populist channels like academia. Fox News will always find 'something' to harp on, let's not worry about what they have to say, unless we're in some kind of emergency i.e. war, insurrection, pandemic. Let's publish, create, then talk about it.

r3ctilinear 4y ago
Weird Al's "Fat" did not mock Michael Jackson. The "Fat" song was a parody which continued on the theme established with "Eat It". Mockery is quite different to parody.
- MauranKilom 4y ago
  Fun fact: Michael Jackson let them use the original "Beat It" set for "Eat It".
rhinoceraptor 4y ago
> It's a form of systematic oppression. Against who? Parody artists? Weird Al has a parody along the same lines on his 2014 album and I'm not aware of any outrage. If your biggest concern in life is being "cancelled" (a dramatic term for being criticized on the internet), I think that says more about you and your intolerance for free speech, than anyone else.
- jollybean 4y ago
  Being 'cancelled' in academia and entertainment is a very real thing that happens to artists, but more notably, as I mentioned, suppresses tons of content across the board that won't even get pitched otherwise. While some people do overstate it, it's definitely real. Those who diminish it are the fascists of our generation. Sean Penn (far left activist) and Conan O'Brien (staunch centre left advocate, public supporter of Hillary Clinton etc.) publicly decried the problem as 'Stalinist' - strong words. In their experience, in private conversation in Hollywood people are freaked out about the oppression, while a few virtue signal here and there publicly while towing the party line, everyone is thinks it's nuts. Stephen Pinker (staunch centre-left, respected academic) has spoken out about this, and faced a 'cancellation' of his own for merely suggesting publicly that the issue with policing in America is more a general problem as opposed to specifically a racial problem. The 'mob' came for him and tried to have his participation on various boards 'cancelled'. A long list of thinkers, including the likes of Chomsky himself, had to come out and publicly admonish the 'cancellers' (mostly on the far left) for the systematic problem. It's without modern precedent. There's a 'civil war' between generations at the NYT (Editorial) about what constitutes 'fair'. The 'outrage mob' has a measurable effect on academia and especially creative culture. Producers just don't want to risk a project being annulled, and so they go out of their way to 'sanitize' efforts left and right. The Wachowski sisters (then brothers) were 'condemned' for 'Cloud Atlas' where they dared to have people of different classes, genders and races, play various characters - frankly in attempt to display the common humanity within all of us (not some arbitrary bit of ugly humour) - though the outrage wasn't enough to hurt them, it's become a 'no go zone' for content in 2022. Actors playing characters of different source origin i.e. someone 'non Japanese' playing a character from Anime, actors playing historical figures, actors playing arbitrary fictional characters of questionable origin etc. etc. - it's all a minefield, scaring producers away from anything. 30 Rock, made by your typically socially progressive groups, had several episodes pulled. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Go ahead and re-watch 'Superbad' - it could not be made today, it wouldn't even get pitched. Every scene is 'off message' - arbitrary bits about crude porn, jokes involving trans people, 'period' gags. It was always a bit 'outrageous' but that kind of humour will risk too much ire and so it's out. Even the actors just wouldn't want to risk being on the wrong side - look at Seth Rogen's most recent work, it's like a 180 degree shift. Institutional entities that have been around for some time, notably 'make money' and notably have their own production ability - South Park and Family Guy, basically get a free pass. But most people in entertainment and academia do not have power like 'Dave Chapelle' or institutional protection like 'South Park' or respect of 'Stephen Pinker' - so they 'stay on message' and 'away from controversy' or else the script does not get approved. And FYI even the people turning it away aren't ideological about it 'it's just business' and an accommodation of the outrage mob, fickle advertisers etc.. The 'outraged' a fairly small group, with a sizeable group of allies particularly among Gen Z, which can be noted in the continuous public furor over ostensibly 'terrible person', JK Rowling. The way they go on about here is medieval. While I don't think our campuses are overtly hostile, the issue does linger.
sbuttgereit 4y ago
I tend to be sympathetic to your arguments, and I realize what I'm raising is not directly related to your point. But as others pointed out, Yankovic was far from mocking Michael Jackson... and in fact it's well known that Jackson was in on the joke: “Michael Jackson wasn’t just cool about my parody of ‘Beat It,’” Yankovic told People in 2016. “But he also loved my version of ‘Bad,’ which was ‘Fat.’ He even let me use the actual ‘Bad’ subway set for the ‘Fat’ video. He was very supportive, which was huge with opening the doors with other artists. Because if Michael Jackson signed on, you couldn’t really say no.” (https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/michael-jackson-accidentally-saved-weird-al-yankovics-career-in-the-early-1990s.html/ https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/michael-jackson-acc...)

r3ctilinear 4y ago

Weird Al's "Fat" did not mock Michael Jackson. The "Fat" song was a parody which continued on the theme established with "Eat It". Mockery is quite different to parody.

MauranKilom 4y ago
Fun fact: Michael Jackson let them use the original "Beat It" set for "Eat It".

rhinoceraptor 4y ago

> It's a form of systematic oppression. Against who? Parody artists? Weird Al has a parody along the same lines on his 2014 album and I'm not aware of any outrage. If your biggest concern in life is being "cancelled" (a dramatic term for being criticized on the internet), I think that says more about you and your intolerance for free speech, than anyone else.

jollybean 4y ago
Being 'cancelled' in academia and entertainment is a very real thing that happens to artists, but more notably, as I mentioned, suppresses tons of content across the board that won't even get pitched otherwise. While some people do overstate it, it's definitely real. Those who diminish it are the fascists of our generation. Sean Penn (far left activist) and Conan O'Brien (staunch centre left advocate, public supporter of Hillary Clinton etc.) publicly decried the problem as 'Stalinist' - strong words. In their experience, in private conversation in Hollywood people are freaked out about the oppression, while a few virtue signal here and there publicly while towing the party line, everyone is thinks it's nuts. Stephen Pinker (staunch centre-left, respected academic) has spoken out about this, and faced a 'cancellation' of his own for merely suggesting publicly that the issue with policing in America is more a general problem as opposed to specifically a racial problem. The 'mob' came for him and tried to have his participation on various boards 'cancelled'. A long list of thinkers, including the likes of Chomsky himself, had to come out and publicly admonish the 'cancellers' (mostly on the far left) for the systematic problem. It's without modern precedent. There's a 'civil war' between generations at the NYT (Editorial) about what constitutes 'fair'. The 'outrage mob' has a measurable effect on academia and especially creative culture. Producers just don't want to risk a project being annulled, and so they go out of their way to 'sanitize' efforts left and right. The Wachowski sisters (then brothers) were 'condemned' for 'Cloud Atlas' where they dared to have people of different classes, genders and races, play various characters - frankly in attempt to display the common humanity within all of us (not some arbitrary bit of ugly humour) - though the outrage wasn't enough to hurt them, it's become a 'no go zone' for content in 2022. Actors playing characters of different source origin i.e. someone 'non Japanese' playing a character from Anime, actors playing historical figures, actors playing arbitrary fictional characters of questionable origin etc. etc. - it's all a minefield, scaring producers away from anything. 30 Rock, made by your typically socially progressive groups, had several episodes pulled. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Go ahead and re-watch 'Superbad' - it could not be made today, it wouldn't even get pitched. Every scene is 'off message' - arbitrary bits about crude porn, jokes involving trans people, 'period' gags. It was always a bit 'outrageous' but that kind of humour will risk too much ire and so it's out. Even the actors just wouldn't want to risk being on the wrong side - look at Seth Rogen's most recent work, it's like a 180 degree shift. Institutional entities that have been around for some time, notably 'make money' and notably have their own production ability - South Park and Family Guy, basically get a free pass. But most people in entertainment and academia do not have power like 'Dave Chapelle' or institutional protection like 'South Park' or respect of 'Stephen Pinker' - so they 'stay on message' and 'away from controversy' or else the script does not get approved. And FYI even the people turning it away aren't ideological about it 'it's just business' and an accommodation of the outrage mob, fickle advertisers etc.. The 'outraged' a fairly small group, with a sizeable group of allies particularly among Gen Z, which can be noted in the continuous public furor over ostensibly 'terrible person', JK Rowling. The way they go on about here is medieval. While I don't think our campuses are overtly hostile, the issue does linger.

sbuttgereit 4y ago

I tend to be sympathetic to your arguments, and I realize what I'm raising is not directly related to your point. But as others pointed out, Yankovic was far from mocking Michael Jackson... and in fact it's well known that Jackson was in on the joke: “Michael Jackson wasn’t just cool about my parody of ‘Beat It,’” Yankovic told People in 2016. “But he also loved my version of ‘Bad,’ which was ‘Fat.’ He even let me use the actual ‘Bad’ subway set for the ‘Fat’ video. He was very supportive, which was huge with opening the doors with other artists. Because if Michael Jackson signed on, you couldn’t really say no.” (https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/michael-jackson-accidentally-saved-weird-al-yankovics-career-in-the-early-1990s.html/ https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/michael-jackson-acc...)