Things That Are Killing The American Sitcom Pt. 4

Censorship

Censorship kills a lot of things: creativity, avant-garde cultural change, a young boy’s ability to masturbate to basic cable programming (well, in theory). But censorship is also sticking a knife between the ribs of the American sitcom.

Censorship in action.

This may at first seem an odd argument. Isn’t the sitcom a paragon of storytelling so traditional, inoffensive, and simplistic that it makes "Ziggy" seem edgy? Well, yes, but the best sitcoms, those considered not only historically and culturally significant but extremely popular as entertainment, are also those that were widely considered offensive for their time. Shows like All in the Family, MASH, and The Simpsons have had to struggle with censorship, and in doing so became popular for taking a stand.

Taking a stand against censorship.

The problem is all of these shows came to be before there were any real alternatives besides fighting censorship if you wanted anyone to see your show. While cable television has existed since the 1940s, it didn’t really take off until the late 1980s, just around the time we stopped seeing shows that challenged the status quo on broadcast TV. Sure legitimately good shows have come out on broadcast networks since the advent of cable, but even the most innovative of them don’t really push the envelope, so much as make the most of where it is. With the advent of the internet and premium cable channels becoming more popular, even basic cable programming has seen a brain drain.

As previously discussed.

The problem with this is that the American sitcom, like all creative endeavors, are defined by their medium. When you take the sitcom off broadcast television, and eventually off of television entirely, it fundamentally changes its very nature. If you think it’s an exaggeration to suggest censorship could eventually send all situation comedy innovators to the lawless wastes of the internet then you’re clearly unaware of the lengths writers and other artists will go to avoid being censored.

“I don’t get it.”-NBC Programming Executive

When I wrote a sex column for my college newspaper I once had an entire column rejected by my editors for being about blowjobs. Specifically, the column was about the etymology of the term “blowjob” and didn’t actually discuss the act itself at all. It was rejected because several years before my column another writer wrote an entirely different column with a step-by-step guide to giving a blowjob. That column passed through the editorial process and was published during the university’s annual Parents’ Week. Needless to say, angry letters and mass firings ensued. Because of all this the current editorial staff was wary of blowjobs….so to speak, and nixed my column immediately. The fact that my blowjob column couldn’t have had less in common with the earlier offender was considered irrelevant.

“Huh huh ‘Blowjob Column.’”

My point is that I wasn’t really all that inconvenienced by the incident. Writing the column only took about an hour, writing a new column took about the same amount of time. I didn’t get in any trouble, I just got a talking to about “boundaries” and “acceptable content.” And I got paid the same pittance either way. Even so, I was upset. I had been told that something I had created and worked hard on and truly cared about wasn’t acceptable. It was dirty and wrong and was held as an example of what I should never do again. Because of this I was tempted to outright quit writing the column. While I didn’t quit over it, I’m still so mad at that editor that below is his name and picture.

This is Chris Etling. He’s still Editor-in-Chief of the Northern Arizona University Lumberjack. He’s been pursuing a Bachelor’s degree for the past seven years. He is a cockbite.

Ahem. Where was I? Oh, right. Censorship. See, this is exactly why censorship is killing the sitcom. Simply put, censorship kills comedy, situation or otherwise. It creates the kind of anger that not only makes artists (loosely defined to include sitcom writers and college sex columnists) want to quit, but also leads to uninteresting blog rants years after the fact.

Do you see what you’ve done, Chris Etling of Flagstaff, Arizona, phone number 267-436-5063, birth date March 11, 1985, SSN 532-64-1416, with a fatal allergy to peanuts? DO YOU SEE WHAT YOU’VE DONE?

Come back next time when I’ll be putting all this behind me and starting a new topic: Observations on the Film Doomsday, because I just watched it and I’m profoundly lazy.