Or they're banning an episode because people got offended by it 25 years after the fact. The only reason they didn't ban the Mel Gibson episode is because no one would care, but if you ban a beloved episode, one of the best of the entire franchise, it gets the show media attention.
What episode(s) are/were banned? I only remember them not showing the car parked illegally in NYC because of the Twin Towers for a while, but admittedly I haven't really been paying attention. I stopped really watching after 12. 1 - 12 were it for me.
what does that mean? It doesn't matter to me since I have the dvd. If it were up to me, I probably wouldn't send it out to air on tv syndication, but if people want to watch it streaming on demand, I wouldn't stop them.
Well the episode is banned from syndication, Disney+, and rumors were going around that they stopped production on all Season 3 DVDs, but the episode recently reappeared on the Simpsons World App and is supposed to be included in the 20 seasons box set being put out this year.
It’s honestly for a really stupid reason. HBO released a documentary last year where they interviewed Michael Jackson’s accusers who have now grown up. The documentary presented zero new evidence, and only presented claims that were already disproven in the court of law and logistics based on Michael Jackson not even being in the same place at the time those events would have occurred due to his highly publicized music tours. These accusations aren’t even new for crying out loud, and no one complained when his concert movie was released in theaters. Basically, it’s because people were reminded that Michael Jackson was accused of doing some bad things in the past before he died, and I think people let the emotions of the documentary override logic and reason. I can certainly understand that. I’m not even a Michael Jackson fan, and I used to think he was guilty because of how much of a weirdo he was. Now, I don’t think he did anything after actually looking into the cases. He still might have, but the important thing is that there is nothing to prove that he did.
Doesn’t help that places like rangerboard are still convinced Micheal Jackson was guilty and then presenting evidence that was disproven many times before.... I’m sorry, but when you’re “victim” is a grown ass man that goes back on defending Micheal Jackson to “he touched me and I didn’t know, now please give me money,” sooner or later your ass is gonna get caught from lying.
OK, I'm admittedly not the most dedicated Simpsons fan, but I've seen enough of it during the years... ...isn't just about everything in it a stereotype of something or someone? Homer's a dumb dad, Marge is the loving but oblivious mom, Lisa is the brain, Bart's the brat, Gramps is a senile old fart, Crusty is a creepy clown, Burns is the greedy rich guy, the Flanderseses are the annoyingly happy neighbors, etc. I guess the Chappelle Effect went right over Azaria's head...
To answer the original title question? Forever. It is about current day politics and society and cultural stuff. It will never run out of things to parody. I frankly still watch and enjoy it. There has been a period, post-movie when they were pretty boring, but the show got a lot better since then, the occasional stinker aside. Besides, you could ask the same question about South Park or Family guy. They might be younger shows, but they show no signs of ever stopping, either. See this is why I am glad I always kept downloading and burning episodes of shows I watched to DVD and later BR... Also, what a dumb reason. There is still no concrete evidence apart from "he tell me".
My issue is that if they were serious about banning the episode, they would have done so way back when these allegations for came to fruition. The only reason they banned it last year is because The Simpsons was getting no media attention at all and they needed something to get people thinking about the show again.
Kay, well, since this silly sidetrack is apparently being allowed to stay here... The ONLY thing you got right in that section is that HBO released the documentary last year. Everything else, however, is completely wrong. The two people interviewed for that documentary were not previous accusers, let alone grew up and did it again. This documentary was in fact the first time they went on record with their accusations. Up until that point, they and their families had actually defended him in court to say they weren't abused... which is why there was such a controversy around them coming forward now. Regardless, where those two are concerned, the doc actually DID present new evidence of various things (that I won't detail here) and none of what these two said was ever disproven anywhere previously, and certainly not based on the reasons you outlined. You're combining other stories into this one. And I say that all objectively and indifferently because I do also understand the skepticism. But if you want to defend the guy, which is fine, at least get the facts straight when trying to do so if it's about this particular documentary and/or set of subjects. Or just actually watch it so you know what you're trying to so flippantly dismiss and have some firsthand knowledge of it rather than this... what I can only assume is some mis-remembered Wikipedia summary or something given how incorrect it all is. Because based on those opening comments, it's crystal clear you haven't seen it. And that is the one thing you said that is correct. Love the guy... hate the guy... believe or don't believe what he did; the ONLY inarguable fact in any of this is that he was never actually convicted on anything. Oh yeah? THAT is what's ruffling your feathers - that people on places like a Power Rangers' forum are convinced of Jacko's guilt? THAT is what "doesn't help"? Jesus christ, kid. I'm astonished this post is even still here given how it sounds like the usual intentionally antagonistic shit you'd find in a random "news" article comment section - not in sub-forum of a Transformers board about The Simpsons' of all things.
You can turn anything into a controversy if you try hard enough. It's just the fact that this particular one got particularly loud and public for a time, to start a movement of sorts.
True enough, but the only way to deal with such things is to never apologize to the mob. The moment you cave is the moment they are enabled. That in turn enables others to follow suit, and then here we are in 2020, battling against the cancel culture.
It's not like the show itself is a stranger to controversy. In its early days it was subject to all sorts of attacks from moral guardians and the like. That sort of stuff, you just sort of steamroll over because you can't please everybody, and trying to appease the fringe groups like that is an exercise in madness. The Apu thing stuck, though, because despite the character's fandom and many positive traits, he was still the brunt of jokes that played an entire culture for cheap laughs which was becoming increasingly frowned upon.
Again, that's sooo much of every Simpsons character. We live in the era of people wanting to be offended, and searching for offenses when they can't find any. Bored souls in an affluent society.
