Even Woke Comics Aren’t Safe

Tom Slater in Spiked Online about how PC is bad for comedy of all political persuasions. 

Russell Howard claims the BBC asked him to tweak a routine in case it offended ISIS. Seriously. In the latest episode of his Sky One show, The Russell Howard Hour, the Bristol comic did a routine about freedom of speech, in which he told this remarkable story from his time working for the Beeb.

In the wake of the Paris attacks, he wrote a bit for his then BBC show, Russell Howard’s Good News, lambasting the ISIS killers as ‘warmongering pricks’ and insisting that they aren’t Muslims, but terrorists. This apparently set off alarm bells with the executives, who made him change it to say that the jihadists aren’t ‘devout Muslims’ ...

… Those concerned about our society’s stifling culture of self-censorship – and particularly about its impact on comedy, that most free-thinking of popular artforms – are often dismissed as hysterical right-wingers. But the cases of Howard and Patel remind us that if we live in a culture where words and jokes are taken so seriously, even thoroughly right-on comics will get bitten.

Continue Reading @ Spiked Online 

19 comments:

  1. I agree with the BBC. Having no shared culture or shared public spaces such that “nobody” can ever potentially be offended is a small price to pay relative to the greater benefit of diversity. Dismantling every aspect of our cultural legacy is necessary condition if we are to be a truly tolerant society.

    ReplyDelete
  2. DaithiD - what about things like the In God We Trust signs on courthouses in the US or say prayer in school? Even the Confederate statues?

    ReplyDelete
  3. AM, well spotted, that it should probably read “Allah” instead of God? That way atheists who might be offended at the word God would obviously defer their feelings to prioritise Muslim, specifically Muslim male, sensitivities like they do in every other aspect of “diversity”.

    ReplyDelete
  4. DaithiD - neither God nor Allah would be the secular expectation. How we separate the cultural from the religious or even find the point at which they blend is the task I think. How we manage that in a logical rather than a bigoted way is something we might give more thought to. If we are alright having these things in public spaces when they mention god but all of a sudden get touchy when they mention Allah - is that logical? Neither God nor Allah are based on reason

    ReplyDelete
  5. “...If we are alright having these things in public spaces when they mention god but all of a sudden get touchy when they mention Allah - is that logical?...”

    How would one go about answering that? Maybe research a bit of both to establish any differences? It’s seems most chose the lazy option of claiming both are essentially the same, thus research into one branch should suffice for the other. If they are exactly the same, then let the Islamophobia shield protect devout Catholic’s too.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It is not lazy - where are the differences? One is as lacking in substance as the other. We retain one but not the other on cultural grounds not because they are true although those insisting on retention for some and exclusion for others tend to claim theirs is is the true one. If we were to ban face covering in public (which I think we should do in any society that calls itself transparent) Muslims would suffer more but we would not be doing it simply to target Muslims.

    ReplyDelete
  7. AM, in terms of better accessing some divine power to better bestow justice, having Allah or God on the courthouse do not differ. The traditions established by both faiths are distinct though, and the societies formed that would ultimately distinguish between the two as candidates for inscription over such an institution would represent this distinction, that includes in terms of what is defined as justice.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Seeing as ISIS is sponsored by British/western Intel agencies then it's self explanatory why the BBC would deem it offensive.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wolftone, the most damning evidence to your proposal was the leaked Clinton/DIA memo acknowledging the possibility of a salafist principality due to Western destabilisation. But it’s not even close to proving sponsorship.
      Now compare the major population centres IS was driven from in Syria by the West, to that by the SAA/RusAF. I think only Deir Al Zour / Palmyra for the latter, and those at a time IS had been decimated everywhere else.

      Delete
    2. DaithiOD I take it logic isn't you strongest subject? Any reports coming from the western forces concerning Syria should be taken with a pinch of salt. At the very least their claims that they wiped out ISIS are laughable.
      Let's rewind to just before Russia entered the Syrian conundrum. Reports propagated by western news media was that ISIS was rampant in Syria and the west was trying its best via air strikes to halt their progress allthewhile western politicians were expressing their 'concern' for Syria and its people and were not concerned with removing Assad. Suddenly Russia enters the fray and the west goes buck mad so much so that the traditionally anti imperialist Labour Party had to let its mask slip and demand boots on the ground.
      Btw, where have all these jihadists been moved to from Syria? Western countries by all accounts.

      Delete
    3. > “I take it logic isn't you strongest subject?”

      > goes on hyperbolic rant

      Damn I should stop watching only mainstream news, it’s left me badly informed, I have been bettered by a pen name on the Quill. The shame.

      Delete
    4. "Damn I should stop watching only mainstream news, it’s left me badly informed,"

      I take it all back; you have some logic.

      Delete
  9. DaithiD - that would be correct in terms of different traditions. Given the historical cruelty of both traditions would it not be better to have neither; that the only place for religion in the court is in the dock?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AM, I’m sure you will make a few of your comrades frown by acknowledging both traditions incorporate cruelty into their practice. Remember a more convenient distinction between the faiths is : anything that appears negative pertaining Islamic theology is either a) a translation error going from Classical Arabic to English, or b) an aberration done by a “misunderstanderer” of the theological norms.
      Anything negative pertaining to the Christian practice is of such fundamental importance the entire scripture could be reduced to just that without introducing error.
      In terms of having neither, it would be desirable if people had the ability (or courage) to interrogate subjects for the underlying truths. I don’t see much evidence of this tendency in people these days, as such removing any such references must present some risk.

      Delete
    2. DaithiD - have you interrogated the underlying truths of Christian history? Both Islam and Christianity are replete with serious abuses. Society would be better of without either. Islam is without doubt wrong but hardly any more wrong than Christianity.

      Delete
    3. AM, my knowledge of Christian stuff is small in comparison to Islam, well at one stage it was when I wanted to investigate Islamic texts statically like Dr Bill Warner did, I just don’t keep up with either faith these days, damning verse numbers or their details are going. The ‘hardly any more wrong’ comparison in your most recent comment leads us back to the starting contention about requiring some knowledge of both to be more accurate than a guess.

      Delete
  10. DaithiD = both are based on false assumptions and are therefore equally wrong. Yahweh is no more real than Allah. Both have brutal histories. I am sure a point by point comparison would lead to one being marginally worse than the other but what would be the point? I want to be dictated to by neither.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Frankie Boyle joke about IRA killing Tories causes outcry...

    On Frankie Boyle's New World Order on BBC Two last week, the comic said: "Theresa May has offered to resign if she can get her deal through... it's probably a relief for her.

    "I mean, she spent the weekend at Chequers with her worst enemies - like Boris Johnson, Jacob Reese Mogg, Michael Gove, Iain Duncan Smith, all in one place.

    "Where the f*** are the IRA when you need them? All these groups that keep getting back together. What about the guys that would really help us?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Frankie,

      Nothing should be off limits to comedians and as jokes go, this was pretty tame by his standards!

      Delete