Why do terrorists keep terrorizing?

Because it works.  At least, it worked on Comedy Central.  Hot Air reports:

Aasif Mandvi, a self-described “liberal Muslim” and the “senior Islamic correspondent” for Comedy Central’s The Daily Show, said on air after the “South Park” threats that it would upset him to see the Prophet Muhammad depicted in a cartoon. But, he added: “Here’s what’s more upsetting. Someone, in the name of a faith that I believe in, threatening another person for doing it.”

But after the failed Times Square terror attack, “The Daily Show” asked Mandvi not to comment further on the matter, according to his spokesman. In fact, reps for the networks and television shows reached for comment on this article, including Comedy Central, Cartoon Network, FOX, NBC, and CBS, either failed to respond or asked to speak on background for fear of retribution.

And it isn’t just comedians on fake newscasts who are being muzzled. One writer for a scripted drama fold Fox411.com that in one of his show’s final episodes, there had been a minor plot point involving a Muslim extremist. Last week it was removed and the script was rewritten, he said.

Will this mollify them, or encourage them to make greater demands?  What do you think?


2 Responses

  1. I wonder how long it will be before we see Muslim censors vetting scripts? Of course, they will be euphemized as “diversity consultants” or some such.

  2. For a different example of this problem, I would recomend the essay “Censors Without Borders” by Emily Parker, The New York Times Book Review, p. 35, May 16, 2010.

    She looks at the self censorship prevalent among people writing about China that is driven by the fear of offending the Beijing government. Of course, this is not the fear of being kidnapped and beheaded. Rather the fear of having an academic career damaged by being denied a visa or disinvited from a conference or having the foundation one works for lose funding.

    One quote from Parker’s essay:

    “But more often, potential critics silence themselves pre-emptively. In a 2002 essay in The New York Review of Books called “China: The Anaconda in the Chandelier.” the China scholar Perry Link described Beijing’s censors as a dangerous creature coiled overhead, “Normally the great snake doesn’t move,” he wrote, “It doesn’t have to…Its constant silent message is ‘You yourself decide,’ after which, more often than not, everyone in its shadow makes his or her large and small adjustments.”

    “The Anaconda in the Chandelier” sounds like one of Edward Gorey’s darkly whimsical titles. Unfortunately, it describes something all too real.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: