walksntalks
Link to this post
hey, sorry i have to disagree with you about there having been a time when this country respected it's leaders so much that they wouldn't so insult them with nasty cartoons. As long as press and newspapers have existed gossip, opinion, indecency, rumor, and drama have ruled the reported stories and events. The first newspapers were actually run by postmasters who would rummage through people's mail and write about the tastiest stories they found! Print-journalism was actually grounded on gossip. You'll also find that most newspapers and journals that existed during the formation of this country, especially when bi-partisanism really took root, most political journals were extreme in their bashing of candidates and party members of the opposite wing (left or right). Also i think that its important for some social text to always be able to mock, criticize, belittle, or even demean our leaders. If we ever lost the right or ability to do so in a mass-mediated way, one of the essential pieces of free press would be lost. Remember, even though press was a brand-new and seemingly trivial concept during the 18th century, our forefathers knew its potential would one day be realized, and took measures to protecting its free use for all citizens in the first amendment. It's true that overtly rude and indecent humor/mockery of US leaders has tended to remain on the fringes of social popularity, but some subversive sardonic forms of humor have proven to remain quite popular throughout history. Among them is satire, shows like the simpsons, family guy, magazines like MAD, and books like Gulliver's Travels are just some examples of recent satires that have mocked political leaders. At the very least such social texts remind us that the leaders are not inerrant and are just as human as the rest of us, which if ever forgot could be much more dangerous than a few hurt feelings.
Defending freedom whenever its safe
Show profile
nationcover.jpg 23.2 kBytes