TV Guidance

TV Guidance

Jaime Weinman writes about all kinds of television and other kinds of popular culture. He does not write Gossip Girl episode reviews. Follow Jaime on Twitter: @weinmanj

You Say Muhammed, I Say Mohammed, South Park Says "Bleep"

by Jaime Weinman on Thursday, April 22, 2010 3:45pm - 89 Comments

You’ve probably heard about the weirdness involving part 2 of South Park‘s anniversary episode, but here’s the quick recap:

Their 200th episode, last week, was a fan-friendly tip of the hat to many celebrity parodies and storylines from earlier in the season, including season 10′s controversy over showing Mohammed. (They showed him in the episode “Super Best Friends,” which Comedy Central still shows, but the network refused to allow his depiction in new episodes.) As Kyle said, “Dude, I can’t believe we’re dealing with this Mohammed thing again,” but they did, and the episode ended with Mohammed dressed in a bear suit that covered him from head to toe, so he would never be seen. After the episode aired, the U.S.-based Islamic fundamentalist website Revolutionmuslim.com warned that Trey Parker and Matt Stone might wind up like Theo Van Gogh, something that the writer argued was a “prediction” rather than a “threat” (i.e. something you can get arrested for). Last night’s episode continued the story from part 1, and like part 1, Mohammed had a huge “censored” bar in front of him every time he appeared without the bear costume. But this time every mention of Mohammed’s name was bleeped, rendering the episode completely incomprehensible if you hadn’t seen part 1.

Because the bleeping was so unexpected and unprecedented, and especially because the entire “I learned something today” speech was also bleeped (something that seemed clearly deliberate on Parker and Stone’s part), a lot of people, including me, assumed that the bleeping was an intentional meta-joke about censorship. But then Parker and Stone announced that Comedy Central wouldn’t allow the episode to be streamed online yet, and Comedy Central said that they had in fact added extra bleeps to the episode. So exactly what the “uncensored” version of the episode was supposed to look like is still unknown.

The possibility that this is all a stunt on the part of Parker and Stone, or Comedy Central, has been brought up a few times. It certainly is getting them much more attention than the original intent — to do a follow-up episode where Mohammed’s name is mentioned but his image is censored — would have done. And I thought last week that Parker and Stone might be going back to the Mohammed thing because nothing else they’ve done this season has gotten many headlines for them. (The two-parter, while funny, is another indication that they no longer have any frame of reference outside of their own show.) But it’s also possible that Comedy Central got some serious threats and decided to try and obscure what the episode was about. We’ll have to wait to find out exactly what happened.

As to how this applies to Canada, that also remains to be seen. The Comedy Network shows new South Park episodes “uncensored” on Sundays, but since no uncensored version has been streamed online, I don’t know what version the Comedy Network has been given, if any.

Update: The linked story has been updated with a statement from Parker and Stone, clarifying that the bleeps — including the bleeping of Kyle’s speech — were all Comedy Central’s:

In the 14 years we’ve been doing South Park we have never done a show that we couldn’t stand behind. We delivered our version of the show to Comedy Central and they made a determination to alter the episode. It wasn’t some meta-joke on our part. Comedy Central added the bleeps. In fact, Kyle’s customary final speech was about intimidation and fear. It didn’t mention Muhammad at all but it got bleeped too. We’ll be back next week with a whole new show about something completely different and we’ll see what happens to it.

That’s very, very weird. I assume a statement from Comedy Central will eventually be issued, but even then, it will never explain what the hell happened if the network decided to censor an already heavily self-censored episode.

Bookmark and Share
  • Zena Putnam

    Stop focusing on the Muslims, start focusing on the all the people who would reduce your rights and freedoms, send your sons and daughters to die in other countries to retain those citizens rights and freedoms, reduce your healthcare, endanger your educational system, give other country nationals in your country more rights, freedoms, and financial support than they give their own tax paying citizens and seniors.

    This includes fundamentalist from any religion, anyone in support of a dictatorship whether they be fascists or communists, lawyers, bankers, corporation heads or politicians.

  • Jeremy

    The reason why Islam is so out of place in our society and so combustible is really based on it’s definition of what a human being is.
    The traditional western definition of a human being comes from the Bible. The Bible teaches that humans are created in the Image of God “…male and female create He in his image”. So an individual has an intrinsic value that is infinite. Western constitutions are based on the in alienable rights of the individual, which proceeds from this definition of what a human being is. Whether a person believes or not in the Bible, this has no effect on their intrinsic value. This is the basis of western freedom.
    Biblical Christianity forms the basis for western tolerance. Jesus never used force to convert. He also taught the separation of Church and State, "Render unto Ceaser that which is Ceasers and unto God that which is God's. “ So the individual is held captive to his own conscience and is not to be forced to adhere to a certain way of thinking. This allows freedom of speech and expression.
    On the other hand, Islam insists that humans are "not" created in the image of God. So humans don't have the intrinsic value we are used to. The value of a human being is defined by something external -the degree of their submission to Islam (Islam means submit). If you don't submit you are an infidel and basically don’t have a right to life. The Koran commands, "kill the infidel where ever you may find him". Therefore, islam is totalitarian, and has no basis for tolerance of apposing ideas.
    To the Muslim, Muhammad the profit is a sacred idea and not to be meddled with.
    But Christianity states that people are sacred ( the image of God), and are not to be meddled with – hence our western freedoms.
    If we let Islam redefine what a human being is, western freedoms will vanish.

  • zena

    Operative word "let" there. If you let anyone redefine who you are in any way, your freedom will vanish. That's up to you. Who is this we you speak of Kimo Sabi?????

    We get what we allow. If we continue to vote for people who disregard our country's rights and values, if we continue to allow the Catholic church to guard pedophiles for the sake of political correctness, if we continue to allow and let people in power in North America do as they will and say we can't do anything about it, someone will take advantage of the situation. Politicians and Extremists of every ilk count on us being sheople. So, don't let them. Step up.

  • Robb

    This is just a taste of what is coming if we don't put these Nut-bars in their place…which for me would be back in whatever hole they came from. We hung ourselves by letting so many of these people in here, and if we allow them to hold us hostage because they can't stand any slight on their belief's then we are in for some real trouble from these clowns!

  • dwc

    In a downtown toronto co op, government funded housing.. an ethiopian muslim has been allowed to make a hate speech about people with disabilities.. the only response made to complaints about this was that the Ethiopian Muslim majority on the Board of Directors made him the President.. Follow up complaints to ..The City Overseer.. the Ombudsman for Toronto and the Ontario Human Rights Commission have basically been ignored… The laws of this land are meaningless to these secular bigots. and it seems the cowards who are supposed to enforce them..

    • worldis

      u make me lough…….why in world a muslim make hate speech about handicap ?

  • Arby

    The other sad thing in all this is that part II showed that mohammed was not even in the costume after all, therefore this wasn't a depiction of mohammed AT ALL!

  • World Peace

    To all those whom speek badly of Islam based on ignorance, misinformation, and incorrect assumptions:

    I invite you to the following websites to learn the truth about Islam, and to provide you with better understanding. Our God is one God, (Allah) in Arabic, was present in the bible (Alah) (with one l) but have been removed, as shown in th following link. http://www.ahmed-deedat.co.za/frameset.asp

    Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) that you speek of without knowledge can be found in the early scriptures. The chapter number and verses are provided for you to have a look at in the following link:
    Prophet Jesus and Muhammad (Peace be upon them) in the Holy Quran and Previous Scriptures http://theradiantlight.blogspot.com/2009/12/commo…

  • Moe Hammond

    Oh those whacky terrorists!

  • Ariadne

    I would like to hear from moderate muslims here in Canada denouncing violence and terrorism, with no attached but. Are there moderates left? Serial mass killers (masked as martyrs) and violent muslims really are destroying their religion and the future of their young ones, yet they never seem to care.

  • Julie
  • John D

    Perhaps you never seem to listen. Have you ever met a Muslim in real life, or only through Mark Steyn's columns? This is about as fair as saying "I would like to hear from moderate Catholics here in Canada denouncing violence and terrorism, with no attached but. Are there any Catholics who don't touch little boys?"

From Macleans