# Comedians and free speech



## Tez3 (Dec 10, 2010)

How far do you think should comedians should go to make people laugh? Is there a point where free speech should be limited and what they say 'censored'?

The case that's bringing this to mind is a programme w had on the other night. A comedian called Frankie Boyle, known here for his very near to the knuckle comments many in bad taste but admittedly funny who said something that has a lot of people in uproar on both sides of the argument.

You probably won't know the people concerned so I'll give a few details, Jordan (Katie Price) is a glamour model here ( that's topless) and is known for her OTT looks and behaviour and she does seek the limelight a lot, she was married to Peter Andre an Aussie singer, while married they did a lot of reality tv programmes so both are in the public eye and they love it. Jordan has a very disabled son by a previous relationship to whom as far as we can see she is a very good mother. A while back Peter and Jordan were divorced, very much in the public eye again.

Boyle made a joke about their divorce saying they were fighting over custody of the disabled child, Harvey born in 2002, but one of them will lose and have to take care of him, then he went on to make comments about Harvey raping his mother. It's more this last comment that has people upset.

Both Jordan and Peter, agreeing for once, have made complaints saying while they are fair game, a child isn't and especially being disabled so comments about him raping his mother are really inappropriate.

The arguments on one side are that people know what Boyle's humour is like and shouldn't watch his show if they are going to be offended, others are saying he's stepped over the lineas some topics and people are out of bounds for comedy. Others are saying it's free speech and while we might not like it we can't shut him up. It's not the first time the comedian has made comments that upset people. It is his 'thing' to say shocking things.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-jokes-Cumbria-shootings-ONE-DAY-tragedy.html


comments?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 10, 2010)

There is freedom of speech, and there is good taste and judgment.

FOS says I can say whatever I want with very few exceptions. (Like shouting fire in a theater for example).
Joking about rape, child molestation, incest, and so forth is allowable.

But just because something is allowed, doesn't mean it's proper, in good taste, or should be said.

I'll defend his right to say incredibly tasteless, asinine and stupid things, while at the same time disapproving of what he says.

Freedom of speech allows for horrible things to be said, things which must be allowed to be said, lest we someday find we've removed all speech from acceptance.


----------



## crushing (Dec 10, 2010)

We had something similar in the US when a late night talk show comedian made a joke about a famous baseball player raping a famous politician's fourteen year old daughter.  Sure, it was disgusting and many people called to have the comedian fired.  I'm of the opinion that if you don't like the humor, change the channel or find something else to do.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 10, 2010)

I have to agree with my friends above.  It's a vile thing to say and I do indeed think it is offensive, insulting and distasteful.

But free speach and democracy is a bit like air.  Sometimes you breathe in something that makes you choke but start restricting your inhalation and pretty soon you suffocate.


----------



## WC_lun (Dec 10, 2010)

He'll keep saying stuff in poor taste as long as there are people who enjoy his poor taste.  If government tried to censor him, even more people would seek out his "comedy."


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 10, 2010)

In our case the government would keep out of it, it would be the television companies that would take the show/person off the air. Of course some companies would sign him up! Commercial interests would win out here, if more people watched him so that more people watched the ads he'd stay on, if people switch off he'll be sacked. That could be the best form of democracy, the people speak with their on/off button.

I think you have to be careful who you annoy with comments like this, upsetting Jordan would be a big mistake she'll probably hunt him down and eat him alive. Never underestimate a mother on the hunt for the man who said things about her son! 

Boyle is actually funny even when his stuff is in a bad taste but he seems to have gone somewhere off in the wrong direction. I find what he said in very bad taste and not in the least funny, his job is to be funny so I think I'd perhaps sack him or give him a break until he found his funny stuff again. He will probably want to hide too, I wouldn't want Jordan/Katie Price after me! she remarried now to Alex Reid an MMA fighter, he's tough but she has him under her thumb.


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 10, 2010)

It's not really a censorship issue.  Comedians know when they've gone too far.  It's called 'bombing'.  A professional comedian isn't successful because he crosses the line, he's successful because he knows the difference between where the line appears to be and _where it really is_.  Making fun of disabled children actually crosses the line for most people, and if he knows his trade he should have known that.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 10, 2010)

CoryKS said:


> It's not really a censorship issue. Comedians know when they've gone too far. It's called 'bombing'. A professional comedian isn't successful because he crosses the line, he's successful because he knows the difference between where the line appears to be and _where it really is_. Making fun of disabled children actually crosses the line for most people, and if he knows his trade he should have known that.


 
Very true.

The first thing people who complained about his show were saying is that he should be 'banned'. It' quite a common thing here, shouting 'he should be banned' whatever the problem is. I'm not sure if they had thought it through, banned from where and by who? 'Off with his head'?

 I think what will happen is that he will be quietly dropped and other shows etc won't be looking to book him. The 'life' of comedians does seem to be quite short, I've heard before one comedian saying that television uses up material in one show that would last him a year on the road, perhaps that's why Boyle resorted to the comments, he has simply dried up. I've never seen him on a proper show of his own before usually it's in comic quizes etc where he doesn't have to come up with all the material.


----------



## Archangel M (Dec 10, 2010)

"freedom of speech" in the US only means that the government cant get involved. If non-government entities want to protest, pull ad. money or call for Lettermans firing, thats not a "freedom of speech" issue.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 10, 2010)

It seems those that are phoning and complaining to the broadcasting authorities want Boyle 'banned' and those that don't say it's a matter of free speech which is odd as we don't really have any rights to free speech as Americans know it. We have no constitution to say we have rights, we probably have rights under the EU or court of Human Rights though.

the latest on it
http://news.aol.co.uk/main-news/story/comics-gag-about-price-son-probed/1456086


----------



## Steve (Dec 10, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> How far do you think should comedians should go to make people laugh? Is there a point where free speech should be limited and what they say 'censored'?
> 
> The case that's bringing this to mind is a programme w had on the other night. A comedian called Frankie Boyle, known here for his very near to the knuckle comments many in bad taste but admittedly funny who said something that has a lot of people in uproar on both sides of the argument.
> 
> ...


I think that the point of comedy is to be funny, and that's the genius of good comedians... particularly sharp witted, provocative ones.  While you'll never really know if you're approaching the line, you DEFINITELY know it when you've gone one step over it.

Personally, it's not a matter of whether they should be censored.  They're as entitled to speak their minds and tell their jokes as anyone.  Of course, it's up to everyone else to decide whether to give these guys a public venue for their routines.  If you aren't funny, or have in some way made a pariah of yourself, you aren't going to be booked for a gig.  You won't make money, and you will find that your public voice is much, much less significant than it once was.  

Banning a person or taking steps to institutionally censor him or her is unnecessary.  It's like when people post here who are annoying or immature.  If they aren't breaking rules, they shouldn't really be banned.  But there are many more subtle social pressures that can be brought to bear in order to either get them to behave or to go away on their own.   They can be ignored through the ignore feature.  They can just be ignored informally.  OR they can just get enough feedback through posts to realize that they're not behaving.  

Society at large works much the same way.

I'll also just add that "freedom of speech" and censorship are related, but not the same.  Whether or what to censor is a much more gray discussion, not as cut and dry as the constitutional amendment.


----------



## K-man (Dec 10, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> How far do you think should comedians should go to make people laugh? Is there a point where free speech should be limited and what they say 'censored'?


As has been pointed out, there is a point where material changes from clever to bad taste and finally offensive. The problem is, the boundaries are different for everyone. For example Billy Connelly is mostly outrageously funny but I personally find his language so offensive that I wouldn't go out of my way to see him. Other comedians use material that is politically incorrect like "Did you hear the one about the Englishman, the Scotsman and the Irishman?" One would be portrayed as normal, one as frugal and one as ... , well you get the drift. Then you have the 'blonde' jokes that the feminists get up in arms about or the religeous jokes that I can't even say who gets upset about. 
And, there are the ethnic jokes. We used to have many jokes about people with disabilities. They all hold a mirror up to society and sometimes society doesn't like what is sees. 
Personally, I think jokes are like cartoons. They go beyond normal life to 'out there'. The rules of censorship are different to mainstream. They can make some people uncomfortable and if you make the wrong people uncomfortable, look out. 
Tell me any joke you like. If I find if funny I'll laugh :rofl:, if I find it clever, with the little twist, I'll smile 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 and if I find it tasteless or offensive I'll move on. :shrug:


----------



## Nomad (Dec 10, 2010)

IMO, he's free to say anything he wants, no matter how hateful and disgusting.  Now, the owners and sponsors of programs are just as free to decide whether or not they want someone like this on their shows and/or representing their products.  As are the consumers in deciding whether to watch any programs he's on, or attending his concerts, and by letting the owners and sponsors know how they feel about this type of speech.

Rather than banning someone because what they said is "wrong", ignore him and let him suffer financially for his poor choice of words and lack of humor.  

Right now he's probably loving the extra publicity... after all, virtually no one here knew his name before this, but I can find reports in several papers about the incident (like this one)  Any publicity is good publicity, right?


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 10, 2010)

As with the other thread on Phred Phelps and Phamily, freedoms are defined not in the center, but at the outer edges.  When a government finally says _"No, that's going to far and we're not going to allow it,"_ they drive a stake in the ground and THAT is where freedom ends.

Many may applaud that mark in the ground and consider it just and appropriate.

However, it has been my experience that once having taken away rights, government do not give them back voluntarily under most circumstances.  In other words, that leash is not going to get longer...only shorter.

Censor a gasbag or a hate-monger today, and tomorrow it will be something YOU find innocuous or humorous or mere truthfulness that gets censored.  We always find the things WE say to be entirely reasonable; it's those OTHER people who are insane and ought to be made to shut up.

The glory of the US Constitution is that it offends everyone equally.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 10, 2010)

There is a third small group of people who are blaming Jordan for being a publicty hunter and allowing her children to be on television so much, they say it makes them a target for things like this! That's curious I think.


----------



## granfire (Dec 10, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> There is a third small group of people who are blaming Jordan for being a publicty hunter and allowing her children to be on television so much, they say it makes them a target for things like this! That's curious I think.




I mean, she is a bimbo (albeit successful) but no, the kids ought to be off limits because they didn't ask to be affiliated with her. 
Bad enough the celeb kids can't go anywhere without a camera shoved in their little faces...


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 10, 2010)

granfire said:


> I mean, she is a bimbo (albeit successful) but no, the kids ought to be off limits because they didn't ask to be affiliated with her.
> Bad enough the celeb kids can't go anywhere without a camera shoved in their little faces...



Anything that is forbidden to be said can eventually be made to apply to you.

People who are OK with that frustrate me.  They think they can have the muzzle placed on speech that 'goes too far' and never ever think that THEY might one day be the one who is considered to be 'going too far'.

We demand freedom until we get it; then we demand that it be taken away in the name of this, that, or the other.  In this case, please, government, come take our freedom away because a disabled child is being insulted by a comedian.  If something isn't done, we'll all be grossly offended!  Please put a stop to this sort of thing, by whatever means necessary!


----------



## granfire (Dec 10, 2010)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Anything that is forbidden to be said can eventually be made to apply to you.
> 
> People who are OK with that frustrate me.  They think they can have the muzzle placed on speech that 'goes too far' and never ever think that THEY might one day be the one who is considered to be 'going too far'.
> 
> We demand freedom until we get it; then we demand that it be taken away in the name of this, that, or the other.  In this case, please, government, come take our freedom away because a disabled child is being insulted by a comedian.  If something isn't done, we'll all be grossly offended!  Please put a stop to this sort of thing, by whatever means necessary!



well, the explanation proclaiming kids fair game hides behind the freedom of free speech to cover poor choices.
Standing in front of minors is more an appell to common decency vs a cry for legal restriction. because you can does not mean you should. 

Or, as child the person itself is not famous...only by affiliation. Does the same principal of fair game also apply to your and my kid?


----------



## billc (Dec 10, 2010)

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/t...on-me-new-media-is-comedys-salvation-from-pc/

Talks about Sam Kinison and the new pc comedy that is around.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 10, 2010)

The comic, or anyone can say whatever they want. That's Freedom of Speech.

I don't have to listen to it, support it, or them. That's Freedom too.

I don't want any government agency telling me, or you, what you can or cannot say.

But you and I can say "sorry mate, but your comments offend me, so I refuse to listen to you. Talk all you want to yourself, I'll be over there listening to something I do like.".


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 10, 2010)

granfire said:


> Or, as child the person itself is not famous...only by affiliation. Does the same principal of fair game also apply to your and my kid?



Yes, it must.

Doesn't mean I would not go right around the bend if someone said something despicable about a disabled child of mine, and perhaps arrange for him to take his teeth home in his pocket.  However, I'd fully expect to suffer the consequences for it, and I would not expect the law to stop him running his horrible mouth.

Here in Detroit, we've got a fine young lady; she likes to say horrible things to dying children.  She's awful.  And she's legal to do so.  I want her to shut up; but I don't want the law to shut her up.  Make sense?

http://www.truecrimereport.com/2010/10/jennifer_lyn_petkov_taunts_7-y.php

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news/the_edge/dying-girl-taunted-by-neighbors-in-trenton


----------



## K-man (Dec 10, 2010)

Bill Mattocks said:


> When a government finally says _"No, that's going to far and we're not going to allow it,"_ they drive a stake in the ground and THAT is where freedom ends.
> 
> Many may applaud that mark in the ground and consider it just and appropriate.
> 
> ...


The prime example of this would be what is happening in Iran. There you now don't have any freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion or feminine rights. Under the Shar you had corruption but you did have rights. Under the Islamic Republic you have no rights and I bet there's still corruption. 

George Orwell had it right when he wrote ''Animal Farm" and "Nineteen Eighty Four".


----------



## Blade96 (Dec 10, 2010)

I wasnt fussy about our comedian, Rick Mercer's show 'Talking to Americans' I found it a bit offensive cause he would ask silly questions about Canada, and the americans wouldnt know the difference and would answer, and then laugh at their answers. I didnt think it was very funny to make fun of people's ignorance. But - its not illegal.


----------



## billc (Dec 10, 2010)

this link takes you to one of the funniest comedy bits by Sam Kinison, entitiled, "world hunger."  Mr. Kinison has a solution.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...n-have-survived-in-todays-brave-new-pc-world/


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 10, 2010)

One of Sam's best ideas. 

That and the idea that comedians should attend medical school so they could make medically accurate jokes......


----------



## MA-Caver (Dec 11, 2010)

Lenny Bruce, Dick Gregory, Red Foxx, Richard Pryor, George Carlin, Sam Kinnison, Eddie Murphy, Carlos Mencia, The Blue Collar Comedians (White, Foxworthy, et al), Kings Of Comedy, Robin Williams, Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence ... all those and hundreds more have crossed the line at one time or another with offensive material. Quite a number were censored and yet they kept on because they did find an audience. 
Carlos Mencia actually puts out a disclaimer that warns people that they MAY be offended by his jokes/monologues. He even pokes fun at the mentally retarded. He does so presumably because he feels it's okay because one of his siblings is a down syndrome kid. 

If you're going to be offended by something then don't listen. If you didn't anticipate YOUR line being crossed and it was then as it was said, switch the channel or get out of the auditorium/arena where-ever. If a movie offends you don't watch it. If a book offends you don't read it. If someone speaking (comedian or whomever) offends you, walk away and don't listen. Do not try to impede someone else's right to listen/read/watch... and especially enjoy what they are NOT offended by. 

There are comedians whose material I have not approved of (not necessarily offended by it just I thought it was in bad taste and wasn't funny IMO... repeat: *In MY Opinion*!). I walked out of 40 Year Old Virgin in the theater because I did not find it funny. The rest of the audience was laughing their collective asses off. Well I didn't try to STOP the screening... I just got up and walked out. It can be THAT simple. 
Don't think a comedy I'm watching on TV is funny? Switch the channel or hit the power button on the remote. Someone telling an off colored joke in the break room at my work... I don't like it then *I* get up and walk out of the room. I don't go running to the manager and report it because it's NOT that BIG of a deal!... For me anyway. 

I know a host of off colored and potentially offensive jokes... but (again) as it was mentioned... it's common sense, common courtesy to know who would enjoy it and who wouldn't. Even if they're bad "groaners" I'll still be selective as to whom I will tell them to. 
The difference is that a professional comedian can't worry about that because it's their material, they worked long and hard to get to a spot where they can be in front of thousands of people as compared to when they started out they probably at least were in front of a dozen or so. They didn't get to Madison Square Garden by being careful not to offend anyone they got there because they had their material and knew that enough people weren't offended and paid their ticket prices to hear it. By the time they get big enough to warrant a night at the garden enough people should/would been familiar with their style and content to know what to expect and they should bear the responsibility of their decision to attend the show or not knowing full well what the comedian would be talking about.  If they're going to get worried about being offended then they shouldn't have bought the tickets.


----------



## granfire (Dec 11, 2010)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Yes, it must.
> 
> Doesn't mean I would not go right around the bend if someone said something despicable about a disabled child of mine, and perhaps arrange for him to take his teeth home in his pocket.  However, I'd fully expect to suffer the consequences for it, and I would not expect the law to stop him running his horrible mouth.
> 
> ...



caught me in a snare there, Mister! 

No, the kids should be off limits
yes, there can't be a law enforcing it.

or was it yes, no kids, and no, no laws...

and sadly, there can't be amnesty for giving them 5 across the lips either...


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 11, 2010)

Comedy is where it can get incredibly grey, really. I've been known to essentially live at our 3 week long Comedy Festival, and have gotten to know (to a degree) quite a number of comedians as a result. One explained to me at one point the essence of what comedy actually is: it's a disjoint, a conflict, awkwardness in the assumed reality. For those that go for the more "shock" comedy, that means that they have to push a little further eternally, as it becomes the assumed reality that they will say offensive things, so they have to take that to their limit (and sometime beyond).

Those that do it well will often conflict two things next to each other. The Doug Anthony Allstars, when playing at the Barcelona Olympics, began starting their shows with the following song, mainly due to it's lovely melody. Of course, the Spanish people were happily swaying, but they said every blond head in the audience was doubled over.... er, small language warning here, by the way, so I'm not embedding it.





 
That was followed by this (more conflict - same rules apply, no embedding, rather naughty boys talking):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaeF1khifSQ&feature=related

Of course, the following is just part of our television broadcasts (Paul as part of a comedy debate). Might embed this one.... actually, just looked at the title as it was embedded, and maybe not. Still, enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sj0zcCUdg-c&feature=related

The reason for that being the source of comedy is because our laughter responce is, anthropologically speaking, a fear responce. So when there's something that we're unsure of, we respond with laughter.

When it comes to the issue of free speach as mentioned here, the simple fact is that Franky has the right to say what he wants... but he needs to be prepared to accept the consequences of such words and actions. Whether that means guest invites to programmes dries up, he suddenly has trouble booking gigs, others don't want to be associated with him, or Jordan and Peter decide that he's worth suing for emotional distress on behalf of Jordan's son, then that is what he would need to accept. You can't just hide behind "Well, it's my right to say it!". Yes, you can say it, but realise that others are allowed to react to it in ways that you might not like...

So, freedom to say it, yes. Really, what he's done is just follow the rules of comedy to it's natural extension, although he may have left off the "make sure it's actually funny, not just obscene" rule (hey, just for fun, try to find the film "The Aristocrats" for more on how to make something utterly offensive, and still remain a joke... just). That rule applies to all comedy, by the way, not just the "shock" forms (that's really what a punchline is, an unexpected, or suprise ending to an established scenario). But that does not mean that his saying it shouldn't have consequences.

PS One more, just because I love this one, it fits the example of contrast of conflict providing humour, and I can feel safe embedding this one....

[yt]WqX2aqXbwB0&feature[/yt]


----------



## Archangel M (Dec 11, 2010)

The jesters job was to parody the King, but Im betting that if he went to far one day his head would be decorating the battlements.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 11, 2010)

The television critics have been giving Frankie Boyles show a big thumbs down, not because of the Jordan/Harvey jokes but because they say while he's a good stand up comedian he can't do sketches etc, his strength is in pithy comments not in writing scenes. The show was deeply unfunny they said so I think even without _those_ jokes he has shot himself in the foot.

I find Billy Connelly very funny, I don't take any notice of the language because he's only speaking as many other Glaswegians do. I adore Stephen Fry's very clever humour, Dylan Moran makes me laugh too, Bill Bailey I went to see live and he's brilliant. TBH Frankie Boyle's humour I can hear any day, the squaddie humour is sick and twisted but funny. I think his worse crime was not being funny, not that it was sick, it just wasn't funny. People will forgive a lot if they laugh, there was just no mileage in a joke about a disabled son raping his mother.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Dec 11, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> The jesters job was to parody the King, but Im betting that if he went to far one day his head would be decorating the battlements.



Now you get into interesting territory.  For a variety of reasons, comedy is linked with death.  Comedians and death make mockery of plans and persons, high-born and low.  In a Tarot deck, Death is sometimes seen wearing motley; because he gets the last laugh.  It is said in ancient times that Roman Emperors employed a slave whose job it was to follow the Emperor and whisper always in his ear, _"Memento Mori,"_ or _"Remember that death awaits you."_

It is a cruel trick nature plays; that we each have self-awareness and a strong desire to survive, while knowing all along that we will not.  No matter how we struggle in our lives, whether we succeed or fail, whether we work for our money or have it given to us, whether we are good or bad people, we will all, universally, die.

To the question, _"Is nothing sacred?"_ the madcap replies, _"No, there is nothing sacred. So we may as well laugh at everything."


_


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 11, 2010)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sommers

Will Sommers probably the best known fool who was no fool.


----------



## granfire (Dec 11, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> The jesters job was to parody the King, but Im betting that if he went to far one day his head would be decorating the battlements.



Actually, the jester's job was to find a way to tell the truth without losing his head.


----------



## granfire (Dec 11, 2010)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-869183917758574879#

not offensive but ouch....


----------



## Cryozombie (Dec 11, 2010)

Bill Mattocks said:


> we will all, universally, die.



Speak for yourself, Bill.  *I* plan on living forever.


----------



## MJS (Dec 11, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> How far do you think should comedians should go to make people laugh? Is there a point where free speech should be limited and what they say 'censored'?
> 
> The case that's bringing this to mind is a programme w had on the other night. A comedian called Frankie Boyle, known here for his very near to the knuckle comments many in bad taste but admittedly funny who said something that has a lot of people in uproar on both sides of the argument.
> 
> ...


 
I'll use the late, great George Carlin as an example.  I have seen the man a few times in person, as well as having many of his shows on tape.  He would gear his routines around real life things.  An example would be making fun of the standard airplane safety lectures.  It was great, because every thing he said, was true, if ya really stopped to think about it.  

Now, he was also known for his language which included many racial comments.  Yet looking in his audience, there were people who were black, Jewish, etc., all laughing.  Were they offended?  Maybe, maybe not, but IMO, I think its important, especially when listening to someone like George, that you take it with a grain of salt.  Like I said, I'm sure some were highly offended.  I'm half Italian, half Polish, yet I'm not offended at all, when someone makes a Polish joke.  OTOH, I'm sure some would be.  

But, comedians will continue to exist and will continue to make comments that are boarderline and possibly over the top.  I say ignore it, take it with a grain of salt, or do what the ones in the crowd do..laugh with it.


----------



## Nomad (Dec 13, 2010)

I recently heard a definition of political correctness as people believing that they have the *right* to never be offended.  

I believe everyone has the right to be offended by someone else's speech or actions.  While this inevitably leads to conflict, I'm with Bill on keeping governments well away from these issues, even though they love to meddle in this sort of thing.


----------

