J Lee
03-02-2002, 09:49 AM
This piece is from Friday's Wall Street Journal's editorial page, by assistant editorial page edtior Daniel Henninger. Entitled Wascally Wabbit Made Us Laugh When It Was Legal: Bugs Bunny would never survive in the ear of political correctness (http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=105001712)the column is ostensably a tribute to Chuck Jones (though he does make the usual mistakes seen in the past week about what Jones did and didn't create at Warner Bros.). But the main point he wants to get at is at the end of the column, beginning with the paragraph:
Anyone between the ages of 20 and 100 knows what happened to a lot of the laughter in America. It went down a wabbit hole addressed Political Correctness.
The reason why I bring this up is for those of us on the board angry about AOL Time Warner's increased editing and removal of WB cartoons from television, this is the best chance ever to get a mention of the problem into the spotlight because:
A.) Mr. Henninger brought up the problem, and it's easier to get someone influential interested in a specific subject when they're already interested in the topic;
B.) The Wall Street Journal's editorial and news pages are both pretty important place in the world of journalism and politics;
C.) The Journal's editorial page editors hate political correctness;
D.) The Journal's editorial page editors hate Ted Turner. Really, really hate Ted Turner.
Judging the tone of the article Henninger doesn't know that -- at least in terms of Speedy Gonzales and all the cartoons featuring any Indian characters -- his PC complaints are three years behind the curve, and that (according to the e-mail Jon and Matthew received) Turner ordered those cartoons yanked from Cartoon Network back in 1999. The fact that Turner would do that, when AFAIK, no Mexican American group complained about Speedy and he continued to insult PC Native Americans by doing the Tommahawk chop with fans at the Atlanta Braves games makes this situation ripe for the Journal to stick it to Ted as a hypocrite, if they could be certain he was the one involved in taking those cartoons off the air.
It's wouldn't be a major issue to them -- just something to tweak a person whose beliefs they dislike -- but if it could get a mention in the paper, it would bring the problem into the spotlight in a way it hasn't so far. And if they did run it, it would finally force the AOL Time Warner people to address the issue head-on, since the cartoons were yanked in 1999 without explanation, and without notice in the media. If the Wall Street Journal called up and asked "Why are these cartoons banned from television?" it would have far more weight than any of us sending them an e-mail.
There's a link at the bottom of the web page where the article is to leave comments about the story. I've already written back mentioning the PC-connected removal of those cartoons and Turner's reported influence, and I would urge others to leave a few lines there too mentioning the same thing before Monday, when the paper's next edition comes out. It may not produce any results, but it can't hurt (and Matthew or Jon, if you still have copies of the original e-mail from CN, I urge you to send that along, to show there's actual evidence of the problem and the Turner connection).
Anyone between the ages of 20 and 100 knows what happened to a lot of the laughter in America. It went down a wabbit hole addressed Political Correctness.
The reason why I bring this up is for those of us on the board angry about AOL Time Warner's increased editing and removal of WB cartoons from television, this is the best chance ever to get a mention of the problem into the spotlight because:
A.) Mr. Henninger brought up the problem, and it's easier to get someone influential interested in a specific subject when they're already interested in the topic;
B.) The Wall Street Journal's editorial and news pages are both pretty important place in the world of journalism and politics;
C.) The Journal's editorial page editors hate political correctness;
D.) The Journal's editorial page editors hate Ted Turner. Really, really hate Ted Turner.
Judging the tone of the article Henninger doesn't know that -- at least in terms of Speedy Gonzales and all the cartoons featuring any Indian characters -- his PC complaints are three years behind the curve, and that (according to the e-mail Jon and Matthew received) Turner ordered those cartoons yanked from Cartoon Network back in 1999. The fact that Turner would do that, when AFAIK, no Mexican American group complained about Speedy and he continued to insult PC Native Americans by doing the Tommahawk chop with fans at the Atlanta Braves games makes this situation ripe for the Journal to stick it to Ted as a hypocrite, if they could be certain he was the one involved in taking those cartoons off the air.
It's wouldn't be a major issue to them -- just something to tweak a person whose beliefs they dislike -- but if it could get a mention in the paper, it would bring the problem into the spotlight in a way it hasn't so far. And if they did run it, it would finally force the AOL Time Warner people to address the issue head-on, since the cartoons were yanked in 1999 without explanation, and without notice in the media. If the Wall Street Journal called up and asked "Why are these cartoons banned from television?" it would have far more weight than any of us sending them an e-mail.
There's a link at the bottom of the web page where the article is to leave comments about the story. I've already written back mentioning the PC-connected removal of those cartoons and Turner's reported influence, and I would urge others to leave a few lines there too mentioning the same thing before Monday, when the paper's next edition comes out. It may not produce any results, but it can't hurt (and Matthew or Jon, if you still have copies of the original e-mail from CN, I urge you to send that along, to show there's actual evidence of the problem and the Turner connection).