Kathy Griffin's Emmy Remarks to Be Censored because?
By John Amato Tuesday Sep 11, 2007 10:01am
Remember her Coulter rant?
She had the nerve not to thank Jesus and make a joke.
"Kathy Griffin's offensive remarks will not be part of the E! telecast on Saturday night," the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences said in a statement Monday. In her speech, Griffin said that "a lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus."
She went on to hold up her Emmy, make an off-color remark about Christ and proclaim, "This award is my god now!" The off-color remark was to say, "Suck it, Jesus."
I happen to like Jesus and His teachings a great deal, but this is ridiculous. This is America and we have a Constitution---or so I thought. And she has the same free speech rights that the odious and violent Bill Donohue has. I haven't seen him censored. (scroll down to see some of his antics)
Who's Kathy Griffin?
Yet another shining example of our new-fangled United Police State of America in action!
Holy Crap, Batman! They are actually calling this blasphemy! Er, isn't it the 21st century or something?...I mean, who gives a shit, really?
I hate this kind of censorship. EVERYONE knows who she is, including poster #1... if you know she'll be speaking, and you don't like her, why not turn the channel? There are a few Catholic channels, some other christian channels... lots to choose from. Some of us DO want filth, we DO want meanness... we DO want hate. And there is a market for that... Don't deprive us of what we might want to hear. I like Kathy Griffin.
I'd like to hear what baby Jesus has to say about this.
No irreverence allowed?
Bill Donahue is now in charge of what we get to see?
This is bullshit.
Bill Donahue is an asshole which people in entertainment should be ridiculing, not kowtowing to.
Even if Kathy had joined the Gingrich revolution or funded Ken Starr's professorial chair at Pepperdine, after her star turn in Shakes the Clown, I would still lay down in a gutter so she could walk across my back.
Maybe if she had held up a figereen of a dinasour and said something like.." I received
this at the Creation Museum where man and the dinasours co-existed and survived on
Noah's Ark only 6,000 years ago", her statment would not have been censored.
"What' she doing wearing a coctail dress first thing in the morning any way? Did she just get back from the party?" very funny line, but what got them angry was when she asked if they ever fact-checked anything she says. Kathy Griffin is totally cool
boozemop @ 5:
Are you talking about the newly born 8lb baby Jesus? Please be more specific!
Whenever I see someone who survived a plane crash say God spared them I have to wonder what he had against the poor bastards that died?
This is not offensive speech despite the fact that Griffin is often offensive, not funny and unnecessarily mean.
Do these people think Jesus picks TV award winners? Does he dislike the 4 out of 5 losers? This is bizarre.
Speaking of it haven't heard much from Ann Coulter for a while.
She hanging out with Bin Laden or something?
Kathy rocks. These networks need to stop trying to pander to Donohue. The daddy party's culture war never stops
lvogt @ 11:
Maybe "HE" cherry picks data...you know, like Gen. P. when giving his report to the
U.S. Congress.
Will the reich-wingers be outraged over this censorship, because we ALL know they would be if they censored "suck it, Muhammad"?
Um, holy not-a-big-deal batman. A company made a business decision as to what to broadcast on their paid-for airwaves. Are they stupid? Sure. But this does not count as a free speech violation. It's a television channel choosing what to show.
I think I'll go buy a Baby Jesus Buttplug, just to celebrate Kathy Griffin.
lvogt @ 11:
Or when athletes thank God after they win a championship....because, we all know, God only likes the winner.
Welcome to the NEW America. Where you must suck up to the Christianist right...or be censored.
Part of the right to free speech is the right of private parties to regulate speech on their private propery. E! can broadcast whatever it wants to. By forcing them to broadcast certain parts you are forcing them to use their private property to spread speech that they do not want to. Doesn't this violate their right to free speech?
I read somewhere else that she is quoted as saying, "fuck you, Jesus" Is this not true? Are all her remarks censored? Are they bleeping something out or simply not showing her acceptance?
Josh @ 16:
Yes, in this context, that IS censorship.
But the network has the right not to air what she says. That's not violating her speech rights. She can say it all she wants. Remember, the first amendment applies TO THE GOVT'S ATTEMPTS TO STOP SPEECH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It does not apply to private individual's or corporations. I can kick someone off my front lawn if they set up a podium and don;t like what they are saying.
Don't get me wrong, I think this is just plain stupid. Who cares what she says. She is a very funny, and a bit over-the-top comic. If you don't like it, don't listen. My point is that every time a non-governmental entity engages in some level of censorship that folks here don't like, people get all fired up and start ranting about free speech, the Constituion and the 1st amendment when they DO NOT APPLY TO THIS SORT OF SITUATION!!!!
Are you kidding? Why should a cable station be forced to run her commentary? They are a business -- if they do not think running part of her acceptance speech will help them increase viewers and generate ad revenue, then why should they run it? Would you call it a violation of her free speech, if they had cut somebody else's long, boring acceptance speech?
Besides -- who cares about what Griffin thinks?
Josh @ 16:
Well, this is a symptom of a much bigger problem: We've lost our rights!
There's no way around it, we are now living in a police state, where the government can and WILL break your body and take your freedom if you speak up against them.
What would Jesus do?
I'm only asking.
Josh @ 16:
The "airwaves" are intended to be used for the public benefit. The "company" is granted permission for this purpose. How does censoring her comments benefit the public?
Dr. Matt @ 22:
I didn't say it wasn't censorship. Not all censorship is a Free Speech violation.
Good for Kathy! Freedom of speech... No problem. She's censored; I don't watch the Emmys. There. If enough people refused to watch the show, perhaps those in power to censor others would understand that it's not profitable.
Check this out... http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091207M.shtml Wonderful perspective on the situation in the U.S. made easy.
Does it take Kathy Griffin to show people how fucking stupid they are? What happened to our country?
The young woman who got kicked off "Big Brother" last night thanked her god for losing.
Dr. Matt @ 22:
Actually, it is the sponsors/advertisers who make such decisions....and it is most
definitely censorship.
Peoples Front of Judea @ 27:
Shouldn't have said airwaves, as it is cable anyway. If it was broadcast, your argument would hold more water. Less so here. This IS censorship, but not a free speech violation. There are real free-speech problems in this country. This is not one.
Doggiebobo @ 32:
Who said it wasn't censorship? It's just not a free speech violation.
People watch the Emmy Awards?
Ok, technically, maybe you're right, but it's still not cool. I guess we all know to steer clear of E! then, right?
Hooray for Kathy Griffin! May we all make the religious just a little less comfortable today.
Indigowatcher @ 36:
I agree with you there.
Patthemokey @ 35:
Best post yet!
You're right and you're wrong.
She does have the right to free speech just like everyone else. And no one can take that from her. She is free to wish as she says. (Personally, I don't find her words offensive. I just don't think she's funny).
But, the broadcaster, and the show's producers also have rights. It's their PRODUCT. They are producing something for mass consumption. They have the right to decide what is good business and what is bad business. It's the same thing as paying an actress, and editing out certain scenes before releasing the final product. That's what happened here. They paid her to be part of their show (by providing an "award"), and she provided work for them. They decided that the quality of her work is not what they liked, so they have decided to leave it out of the final product. That is just plain old capitalism at work.
This is not a case of government sponsored censorship (at least, not based on the information available to me). If this was the FCC mandating that her comments be censored, I'd be in 100% agreement with you; it would be an outrage.
But this is nothing other than the producer/broadcaster having the final say as the employers.
E!'s decision to shut down Griffin isn't an affront to our Constitution; it's just corporate risk-management by a bunch of suits. They don't want to deal with all the loonies who would come out of the woodwork demanding boycotts if her joke went on the air. It's a smaller pain in the ass to deal with this than it would be to deal with the religious kooks who would call for heads on pikes. After all, E! is just a division of Comcast.
And Griffin's rights aren't being abridged; she can still say anything she wants. But freedom of speech doesn't mean the right to be broadcast.
Having said that, I thought the joke was pretty funny. I hate it when people thank God in their acceptance speeches. What...God hates the people who didn't win?
Patthemokey @ 35:
When not watching Faux Noise, O'Liely, Hannity & Colmes, HardBall, Joe Scrabrough,
Gibson, Brit Hummmm....so that is the group who watches the Emmy's.
My previous should read "she is free to say as she wishes", not "she is free to wish as she says" :-)
That's awesome. I've been waiting for someone to actually credit THEMSELVES when they win an award, not some imaginary thing that had nothing to do with it. Good for her!
This isn't a free speech issue. It is censorship, but not the kind of censorship contemplated by the 1st amendment, as there is no government action here. Television programs edit for content all the time; just because the decision might be stupid, doesn't make it a free speech issue. The Emmys are under no obligation to broadcast her remarks or anyone else's. This is a private organization making a business decision. If you don't like it, don't watch it.
Mike K @ 40:
Presactly what I would have said, if I wasn't lazy.
Welcome to AmerIraq or AmerAfganistan or AmerIran. However you spell it, it's religious extremism at its best.
"This is America and we have a Constitution—or so I thought."
Geesh! Do we have to go throught this yet again?!
Yes, we have a Constitution. And the Constitution says that GOVERNMENT cannot censor speech, it does not say that PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS cannot censor speech.
Personally, I think taking that line out of the show is ridiculous. But please do not try to make every act of censorship a first amendment issue.
...and the right wingnuts have the balls to wag their fingers :-) at Sharia.
oh well.
Eric Jaffa @ 6:
Donohue is an obnoxious moron who should never be put on cable TV again. Of course, the reason they put him on is that he's obnoxious and he's got a chip on his shoulder the size of Caleefornia...
"I happen to like Jesus and His teachings a great deal"
You might want to reconsider this position.
I'm Christian, and I thought it was hilarious. All this thanking god and jesus is just false humility and hilariously, they're making it worse for the people who lose the award because the implication is that the divine power was *against* them winning. If she had left out the "suck it" comment, would it have gone through. Maybe she should have stopped there.
You see son... when a cult has political power they're more equal than everyone else.
Totally unfair. Did E! even stop to think about all those who've laid down their lives defending this sitcom star's right to tell Jesus to suck on her Emmy?
Who's Jesus?
Oh, you mean that barefooted hippy in the sky who goes *poof* and things appear?
You like THOSE teachings?
Give me a break.
wait a sec here.
how can we be for msnbc not showing the freedom's watch ads, but against the entertainment network not showing this?
this surely is a free speech issue, but not about kathy griffin. the networks' also have speech rights and if they choose not to show and advertisement or comments made by an actor at an awards ceremony, that's their choice. it's them exercising their own speech rights.
i applaud kathy griffin for exercising her right to say what she feels, but e! doesn't have to show this if they don't want. free speech works both ways. if kathy griffin wants to make "off-color remarks" about anything, she can start her own podcast and do so without the fear of anyone censoring her.
E! was perfectly within their rights to censor a comment they perceived to be offensive. I'd have to hear the actual, unedited tape, but there could be a genuine concern that, 'suck it, Jesus' could be misheard as, 'f---in' Jesus'
Regardless, you gotta love Bill Donohue raving about it being 'hate speech'. He ought to know.
Btw, I do find it somewhat ironic that the host of the site complains about censorship and yet has this in the site's commenting policy:
"C&Lis a personal site. It is not the Government. It is not public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors’ point of view. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author’s ISP."
So, Mr. Amato, why do you believe that E! (and whoever E!'s parent company is) should not exercise the same power that you reserve for yourself?
I usually find her incredibly annoying but this is rich
This isn't a Constitutional issue or government censorship.
But it is a free speech issue and censorship by a business.
If their goal were to make the broadcast as interesting as possible, then they would make sure to include the most controversial remarks.
The people editing the Emmy Award Show aren't editing out her remarks because they don't meet their quality standards. They're doing it to avoid offending religous zealots.
debaser71 @ 51:
Actually, a portion of her statment was, again, censored...What she said was:
"I happen to like Jesus and his teaching us a great deal of bullshit"...
Who gives a shit what Donohue says? He can suck His, too.
I guess Donohue has never seen any of Sarah Silverman's skits. That fuck would blow his top off.
My awards acceptance speech:
And most of all I'd like to thank God and Jesus...for liking me so much more than the rest of you losers who didn't win!!!
Once again, the rights of the Atheist stomped on.
Besides, no one can take a joke.
If a person wants to promote their icons, then that is their business. It's not anyone's right to paint red all over everyone else's beliefs however.
Crooks and Liars works hard to not allow flamewars to break out and the sitemonitors usually stamp them out in short order when they do.
I don't see a huge difference in sensibilities here, quite frankly. Erect me if I'm wrong.
Swashbuckler @ 58:
my thoughts exactly. how can you find fault with e! if you exercise the same policy?
Awwww ... Did mean old Kathy hurt the feeling of the fairy-tale believers? Next thing she'll be saying is there is no Santa, no Easter bunny, no tooth fairy.
We have done exactly like osama wants, we have now become censured like the world of islam.
Kathy..get your Burka
Amerka, grab you korans.
The rest of us have to go along with the delusional or get punished by bushs' religious right gestapo.
Swashbuckler @ 58:
Fair point.
Eric Jaffa @ 60:
Censorship by a business and free speech issues are mutually exclusive. Free Speech is a right that can not be abridged by the Government. Business can do whatever they want.
hello -
The purpose of an awards show is the acceptance speeches.
Flame wars between commenters isn't the purpose of most blogs.
George Carlin, Your next! How dare you make jokes about Jesus!
It always bothers me when people thank Jesus or God because they won an award or even survived a disaster. That implies that either Jesus or God are making choices in those situations. If one person survives a mining disaster where ten others died, are the families of those to died to believe that God allowed their loved ones to die. Every time someone thanks Jesus for their good fortune it's like their saying "look everybody, God chose me." It's really a slap in the face to the less fortunate.
I agree with those who say this is not censorship. It's not the news, it's entertainment... It's just editing. Perfectly within their rights but it points out the strangeness of religious sensitivity in this case.
Dr. Matt @ 18:
Yeah...I want to see a losing team thank God for all he has given them.
I mean losing will build character and create compassion in the heart.
Thank you God for all of the hard lessons I have had to learn.
hello @ 65:
well, as for as the constitution goes, sure it's everyone's right to "paint red all over everyone else's beliefs" (which isn't what griffin did, unless you think everyone else in america is christian). that's what free speech is. but e! isn't a government entity, it's a for-profit television network. they have every right to decide her comments aren't appropriate for their network. just as mr. amato (or more likely the site monitor) has the right to decide comments here aren't appropriate for this website.
Kathy Griffin wins an Emmy ..... yaaaawwwn .
Kathy Griffin tells Jesus to suck it ....... megapublicity .
You do the math .
I reject making public cracks about Jesus until Gentiles can make public cracks about Jewish religious leaders.
I thank Jesus for Kathy Griffin....Really I honestly do.
You're right about the free speech.
Her comments should have been alowed.
This is America
and free speech is what help make this country great !
I'm no longer angry or upset
about what folks say on TV
about Jesus or God or religion that is negative.
Just bored. Yawn !
I'd rather be the only Christian living with atheist
then living with Christians who would eliminate free speech...or atheist or Jews or Muslims etc. who would do the same.
Swashbuckler @ 58:
Exactly. She can find places to say suck it Jesus, and some media outlets won't let anything go.
I think the hipocracy bells should be ringing at C and L right now
Josh -
Free speech is a big issue. When a company decides not to broadcast something to avoid giving offense, that is part of it. Their decision may be right or wrong, but the speaker who isn't heard still has less free speech.
Free speech isn't only a legal issue.
Eric Jaffa @ 81:
OF COURSE free speech is a big issue. As many of us have said, this has NOTHING, NADA, ZILCH, ZERO to do with free speech.
Granted, this is a business and not a government supported agency, but is it realistic for a business to be able to supercede the Constitution of the United States?
Where is it written that a business can act as a hostile sovereign nation within the boundaries of the USA? Where is the Constitutional Amendment that states that government shall not pass a law infringing upon an organization's right to do business?
That being said, God makes pedophiles in his own image.
Magical thinking FUCKING SUCKS. No matter how you try to slice it. (Mixed metaphor alert!)
lonesomerobot @ 75:
That's what I actually meant. Thanks for clarifying ;-)
Carl @ 78:
Good comment, I would be more succinct and say:
"I'd rather be the only christian living amongst atheist,
than the only atheist living amongst christians"
Here's Jesus's reaction to her comment:
http://uberkuul.files.wordpress.com/2006/06/buddy%20christ%20from%20dogm...
He's tired of thuggish gangsta rappers, impact addled athletes, and airheaded hoochies thanking him for every award anywho.
Zenrage @ 83:
The business isn't superseding the Constitution. Read the first amendment. Right Here:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Constitution says exactly what the Congress can not do. It doesn't say anything about private citizens. Nothing about business. Seriously, understand the Constitution before you go spouting on what it does, or does not, say
Josh -
In the 1950s, the writers of "I Love Lucy" weren't allowed by the network censors to refer to her character as "pregnant." Instead, they had to call her "expecting."
Does that have anything to do with free speech?
Josh @ 81:
First the FCC wants to censor nipples and loudmouthed announcers (liberals but not conservatives?), than it was to censor speech and religious views too.
Pr?s?d?nt-B?sh @ 85:
meaning that the christians would be crueler to an atheist than verse visa