Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/03/08/the-simpsons-producers-are-pul.html
…
If only there had been some way to know that he was accused of molestation, other than this media that came out 10 years after his death and 14 years after his trial, which, if you recall, was kept incredibly secret and out of the public eye.
17 Likes
Aren’t we getting a little carried away with all the censorship and blacklisting nowadays? Will Itunes shut down his music? Let’s yank Ty Cobb out of the Hall of Fame? Let’s pull any OJ Simpson gear off of Ebay… If pedo news about MJ was current that would be one thing, but how many decades have we heard circulating stories about this? It’s been pretty well documented for years.
15 Likes
Yeah… this thread ain’t gonna go well, methinks.
33 Likes
Aren’t we getting a little carried away with all the censorship and blacklisting nowadays?
I don’t think so. They own the copyright, they can do whatever they want with it. It’s up to you what you do with the stuff you own.
7 Likes
┻┳|
┳┻|
┻┳|
┳┻| _
┻┳| •.•) - nope
┳┻|⊂ﾉ
┻┳|
13 Likes
But what about our history!?! Our heritage!?! Oh, this isn’t about a confederate statue? Never mind, then.
/s
Considering that this is their “book” as James L Brooks called it, they have every right to do it. Just as with Gilette putting out an ad that asks men to do better, they are taking a risk of backlash and reduced revenue because they believe they are doing the right thing. I can’t really consider that censorship and certainly not blacklisting.
ETA the sarcasm tag that I dropped somehow.
6 Likes
I haven’t seen the documentary. May I assume that one or more people have now come forward as adults to say “yes, Michael Jackson molested me as a child?” Because the lack of such testimony was the main reason to give him the benefit of the doubt before now.
6 Likes
Yeah, that’s essentially it. I think they are saying that when they testified for Jackson, they were lying.
It’s pretty well made, although it gets kind of rambling and boring at the end.
4 Likes
Essentially, two men who up until now have defended MJ are claiming sexual abuse.
Looking into the story though, it’s a bit fishy. You find that they had their claims tossed out of official court proceedings and thus now they are appealing to the court of public opinion (and apparently winning).
I would recommend anyone who does watch the doc, do some fact checking on the two men who are now making the claims as the doc is completely one-sided and oddly enough, there are connections in the production of the doc to Harvey Weinstein and the timing of his criminal proceedings.
8 Likes
Can’t do anything to address Apu, though!
10 Likes
This is utterly insane. You can’t simply “erase history” (unless you’re in Ren and Stimpy)
This is, frankly, a freakin AWESOME episode and it’s ridiculous to remove it due to things one person involved in this one episode allegedly did.
Lisa it’s your birthday
Happy birthday Lisa
Such a touching Bart <3 Lisa moment.
10 Likes
Agreed. Very very reactionary.
4 Likes
Yes, apparently the people who admitted to being coached by Tom Sneddon all those years ago have now had enough therapy to decide that they were actually molested hundreds of times, and have decided that the best course of action, even though they admit to having fond memories of him and say that he was a loving and kind person, is to p̶r̶o̶f̶i̶t̶ make a documentary about it. Make of it what you will.
7 Likes
As a whole I’m not really sure how I feel about this. I don’t particularly like the idea of retroactively memory-holing things just because of who was involved in the original production. I think part of where one may stand on this is if they can separate the art from the artist – which can be hard to do. Some pretty awful people have been involved in some pretty beloved things – sometimes I can reconcile it, others I can’t – or at least not until after some time has passed.
8 Likes
i have decided to handle these things on a personal level on a case-by-case basis. in some cases, the information has turned me so sour on the person’s art or craft that i can’t support/view/listen to it any more (for example, Spacey). in other cases, i’m able to still enjoy the work, but it’s more with a kind of deep sadness. Jackson will be that, for me. his music is SO pervasive in pop culture it’s impossible to erase, and all that being said i still really, REALLY enjoy “off the wall” and some of his other albums. i feel that pulling this Simpson’s episode is sad, and useless, because it will still be out there. it’s just a gesture, i guess. but it also doesn’t help that it’s one of the all-time classic, really really GOOD episodes.
also, let’s not forget the historic example of Fatty Arbuckle:
3 Likes
What example, that he was railroaded, but it eventually fell apart?
1 Like
It’s not suppression, it’s “unpublishing”!
Ugh, that’s always been the hard thing for me about the Jackson case. Everyone involved seems to have a financial stake or showed clear signs of being coached into offering specific testimony. None of which means Jackson is innocent, just that the accusations are incredibly muddied.
11 Likes
I’m with you on that. Like, John Lennon was by all accounts a pretty terrible person but it doesn’t dampen my enjoyment of The Beatles. On the other hand, I simply cannot enjoy anything Spacey-related right now. Maybe in time I will be able to, maybe not. Spacey also (albeit in a completely weaselly fashion) admitted to wrong-doing.
MJ has long professed his innocence (while also at the same time sabotaging it in various ways). He’s also long dead and can no longer defend himself. (Note: I’m not trying to insinuate that the accusations against him are false or anything, nor do I believe that his legacy should be immune from any posthumous revelations.)
Fatty Arbuckle was ruined by his accusations, which were later found to be false. He was so throughly ruined that even after his acquittal he couldn’t find work and largely died in obscurity. He was reduced from a top tier actor to cautionary tale and historical footnote.
8 Likes
