• Introducing Image Options for ResetEra 2.0! Check the left side navigation bar to show or hide images, avatars, covers, and embedded media. More details at the link.
  • Community Spotlight sign-ups are open once again for both Gaming and EtcetEra Hangout threads! If you want to shine a spotlight on your community, please register now.

WSJ: ‘Simpsons’ Episode Featuring Michael Jackson’s Voice to Be Pulled From Circulation

Oct 25, 2017
2,011
Fiddler's Green
Everyone decides how they're going to respond to something like this on their own. In this case, they made this decision because it seems right to them. I'm fine with that. There's no set of rules, and there never will be, because all of this is driven by personal decisions about how we value art versus the creators of art, and we're never going to all agree on anything.
 
Nov 2, 2017
599
With regards to it being removed from streaming services, is that just talking about subscription services the likes of hulu or is it going to be pulled from iTunes and amazon as well? And if that is the case will that episode just disappear from peoples libraries that have actually purchased the season/episode?
 
May 11, 2018
4,765
UK
There's s a bit of a difference in context.

The movie wasn't a cartoon. Naked Gun isn't still in the public spotlight. Nordberg wasn't portrayed as doing the same kind of criminal actions that O.J. Simpson was guilty of in real life. Nordberg wasn't deified, called out by his actor's name and spent the brunt of those movies as a clown on the receiving end of physical comedy.



So it's not quite the same thing.

And, if Naked Gun's producers requested that the movies not be shown again, that would have still been fine.
Super Size me still has Jarred talking to a 14 year old girl and he was convicted.
 
Nov 8, 2017
4,275
UK
Super Size me still has Jarred talking to a 14 year old girl and he was convicted.
What bearing does this have on whether the creators of the Simpson’s feel comfortable airing work of theirs featuring MJ?

“Other media features child abusers!”
So?
 
May 11, 2018
4,765
UK
Yes, but Morgan Spurlock is a known piece of shit himself, so that type of thing probably doesn't even register on his moral radar (if he even has one).
Oh really? I missed something there

What bearing does this have on whether the creators of the Simpson’s feel comfortable airing work of theirs featuring MJ?

“Other media features child abusers!”
So?
Read the post I was replying to.
That said: OJ is not seen doing the things he was convicted of.
In super size me Jarred is shown interacting with a child of 14.
 
Nov 8, 2017
4,275
UK
Read the post I was replying to.
That said: OJ is not seen doing the things he was convicted of.
In super size me Jarred is shown interacting with a child of 14.
Yeh but you also mentioned it on your other, now-edited, post.
I don’t understand the point your making, unless you’re just shocked other media has these people in them and are still available?
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,197
With regards to it being removed from streaming services, is that just talking about subscription services the likes of hulu or is it going to be pulled from iTunes and amazon as well? And if that is the case will that episode just disappear from peoples libraries that have actually purchased the season/episode?
If you bought the episode I don’t think they will remove it from your library. It will probably just get removed from streaming services same way it happened with South Park episodes 200,201.
 
Oct 26, 2017
550
So we are all in agreement that Thriller is a Quincy Jones song, right?
It would be a bad thing to get it out of circulation
But it'd be awkward to hear it at a party right now
Life imitates The Simpsons after all
 

Adonis

Alt-Account
Member
Jan 27, 2019
42
Has to my most memorable episode. Have it recorded on VHS and I remember playing it over and over again for the birthday song.
 
May 11, 2018
4,765
UK
Yeh but you also mentioned it on your other, now-edited, post.
I don’t understand the point your making, unless you’re just shocked other media has these people in them and are still available?
Why are you getting so emotional and policing the thread??
I thought I had quoted the post I quoted above and reading again I realised I had not.
I have no shock, I just think that 2 years after stark raving dad he was in court and they did nothing and its hypocritical that NOW they take a stance.
Especially in the light of Apu they are aware of socal media and the reactions they would get if it played this afternoon.
If convicted people are not erased its just weird they do this over a doc on HBO now, when he was in court for years fo rthe same thing.
They shut if down over media, not over legal action.
Men in Black II and 13 going on 30 are banned now then also?
 
Nov 8, 2017
4,275
UK
Why are you getting so emotional and policing the thread??
I thought I had quoted the post I quoted above and reading again I realised I had not.
I asked you a pretty vanilla question on clarifying the point you were making as I didn’t get it.
How is that getting ‘so emotional’ and policing the thread..?

If convicted people are not erased its just weird they do this over a doc on HBO now, when he was in court for years fo rthe same thing.
They shut if down over media, not over legal action.
Men in Black II and 13 going on 30 are banned now then also?
Again, what are you on about lol, what does this have to do with the creators of things not feeling comfortable airing those things?
What does Men in Black II or 30 Going on 30 have to do with Matt Groening?
 
Last edited:
May 11, 2018
4,765
UK
I asked you a pretty vanilla question on clarifying the point you were making as I didn’t get it.
How is that getting ‘so emotional’ and policing the thread..?


Again, what are you on about lol, what does this have to do with the creators of things not feeling comfortable airing those things?
What does Men in Black II or 30 Going on 30 have to do with Matt Groening?
It read that way, apoligies if not.

Its Jackson in media, I am asking where it stops and what the line is.
If this is the start where does it end exactly, its a strong stance Gracy films have made here and wasn't it Brooks who made this choice not Matt?
 
Nov 8, 2017
4,275
UK
It read that way, apoligies if not.

Its Jackson in media, I am asking where it stops and what the line is.
If this is the start where does it end exactly, its a strong stance Gracy films have made here and wasn't it Brooks who made this choice not Matt?
The start of what though, and what line?

This is the creator of something deciding they don’t feel comfortable airing the work they’ve created anymore because it features a child abuser.

This isn’t some massive campaign on social media resulting in an episode being taken down, it’s the person that made it not feeling comfortable with it any more.
 
May 11, 2018
4,765
UK
The start of what though, and what line?

This is the creator of something deciding they don’t feel comfortable airing the work they’ve created anymore because it features a child abuser.

This isn’t some massive campaign on social media resulting in an episode being taken down, it’s the person that made it not feeling comfortable with it any more.
I am not saying it is.
I am saying this sets a precedence for others to follow and that social media may yet kick off the next jackson themed thing that turns up on TV.
Anyway I am walking away from this convo as you are obviously not getting that I am saying.
 
Nov 8, 2017
4,275
UK
I am not saying it is.
I am saying this sets a precedence for others to follow and that social media may yet kick off the next jackson themed thing that turns up on TV.
Anyway I am walking away from this convo as you are obviously not getting that I am saying.
Yes.. a precedent of “a creator who feels uncomfortable airing their work featuring a child abuser has the right to remove it”.

Like I said, I really don’t see that as being deserved of the hand-wringing that we’re seeing.
 
Oct 28, 2017
2,473
Groening has every right to renove the episode, just as Lucas had the right to add additional CGI to Star Wars, and Spielberg had every right to change the guns to walkie talkies in E.T.

"A movie is never finished, only abandoned." - George Lucas

Art is a living, breathing thing, and all the better for it.
 
Nov 12, 2017
731
Groening has every right to renove the episode, just as Lucas had the right to add additional CGI to Star Wars, and Spielberg had every right to change the guns to walkie talkies in E.T.

"A movie is never finished, only abandoned." - George Lucas

Art is a living, breathing thing, and all the better for it.
and just like with George Lucas, this convinces me that internet pirates provide a valuable service.
 
Sep 26, 2018
1,017
I'd rather they don't remove these kinds of things from circulation. It's kind of like removing a piece of history in the sense that a long running show like the Simpsons provides insight on how American culture has changed in the decades since it's inception.

Never air the episode again, but it should be included in future DVD/Blu-ray releases.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,801
Los Angeles
It's a great, incredibly sweet episode. My girlfriend's favorite episode as well.

But it's also, at the core, a celebration of Michael Jackson and it's kind of hard to have that tone now. Hell, it was somewhat hard even back then because he was "weird" but now with everything else just get it out there.
 
Dec 2, 2017
4,359
I was looking in the little booklet that comes with the season three box set, and it doesn’t say Jackson was the guest on this episode at all, they say it’s ‘John Jay Smith’ any reason for that?
 
Nov 2, 2017
1,867
I was looking in the little booklet that comes with the season three box set, and it doesn’t say Jackson was the guest on this episode at all, they say it’s ‘John Jay Smith’ any reason for that?
The record company wouldn't give permission for MJ to do it, so they pretended to hire an impersonator as cover, but really it was the real MJ all along, he just wasn't credited. The ruse was so good that there were still people on GAF adamant it wasn't MJ as recently as 5 years ago.
 
Dec 2, 2017
4,359
The record company wouldn't give permission for MJ to do it, so they pretended to hire an impersonator as cover, but really it was the real MJ all along, he just wasn't credited. The ruse was so good that there were still people on GAF adamant it wasn't MJ as recently as 5 years ago.
Oh that's weird, considering on the commentary they admit its Jackson and talk about him coming into the studio to record. Thanks.
 
May 15, 2018
3,788
Toulouse, France
Wow, haven't seen the documentary, but it seems that it clearly changed Era's mind about MJ.
Last time, on the thread for the documentary's announcement, most people talked about how it has been "proved" that MJ aint a pedo, that this documentary would be bullshit, that it would just be saying the same things we already know, etc etc.
And now it seems that everyone has changed his mind.

I must watch this documentary.
 
Oct 28, 2017
2,845
I haven't seen the doc, but I guess it's convincing seeing as everyone now is convinced Jackson was a pedophile, even though he was cleared in a court of law 20 years ago.
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,856
Wow, haven't seen the documentary, but it seems that it clearly changed Era's mind about MJ.
Last time, on the thread for the documentary's announcement, most people talked about how it has been "proved" that MJ aint a pedo, that this documentary would be bullshit, that it would just be saying the same things we already know, etc etc.
And now it seems that everyone has changed his mind.

I must watch this documentary.
many of these posters have been banned in the thread.
 
Nov 8, 2017
4,275
UK
You're welcome to read the thread to see the viewpoints raised and the posts people were banned for.

Either way I recommend you watch the documentary and following Oprah interview if you want insight into the current sentiment surrounding Michael Jackson.
 
Nov 7, 2017
2,067
I haven't seen the doc, but I guess it's convincing seeing as everyone now is convinced Jackson was a pedophile, even though he was cleared in a court of law 20 years ago.
Being legally "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" in a complex judicial system =/= cleared of being a pedophile.

Meanwhile, there is new damning evidence presented in this documentary, primarily that which explains why two of MJ's most thorough abuse victims were able to develop mental gymnastics in order to defend him under oath.
 
Oct 27, 2017
966
User Banned (2 Weeks): Inflammatory Commentary in a Topic on Child Sexual Abuse
Better get the dvd while you can. Oh, and if Wade Robson wasnt a scam artist, these allegations would be easier to believe.