Monday, October 02, 2006

Mashed Veggie(Tale)s

NBC has a problem with Bob the Tomato. Well, not so much with the li'l red guy himself, but with Bob and (his buddy) Larry's penchant for talking about God and the Bible. Seems that network execs placed an unusual requirement on the show in order to be broadcast: Edit out God. Well, to be fair, I should point out that the show's producers don't have to edit out every reference to God ... just the non-historical ones. Now, keep in mind that NBC is the same network that was behind the (cancelled) series, The Book of Daniel. So, one might feel obliged to forgive these execs for being a tad God-phobic as it were. But while the aforementioned TBOD featured a pill-popping priest who had full on conversations with a rather laid back Jesus (and a rather varied supporting cast), Bob and Larry of BigIdeas' VeggieTales series don't do anything more controversial than offer watered down versions of Bible stories and morality plays for kids. And the conservative Parents Television Council is not happy with the decision. The CNN.com article quotes L. Brent Bozell, president of the PTC:
"What struck me and continues to strike me is the inanity of ripping the heart and soul out of a successful product and not thinking that there will be consequences to it. The series is successful because of its biblical world view, not in spite of it. That's the signature to `VeggieTales."'
Now, I'm not exactly a fan of VeggieTales (though I suppose it is slightly less grating than Barney, and significantly less cheesy than BibleMan), but I find NBC's move to edit religious references out of a religious program to be counter-intuitive at best. I mean, wouldn't that be akin to purchasing the rights to air episodes of The Crocodile Hunter, but then mandating that all footage of Steve Irwin (rest in peace, mate) wrestling with crocodiles be edited out. Crikey! What's next?
  • Preventing the cast of The Biggest Loser from using the words "exercise" and "diet"?
  • Cutting doctor-to-doctor conflicts from ER?
  • Putting a gag order on all courtroom activity in Law & Order?
  • Forbidding cameos of Stan Lee in a movie based on Marvel Comics' characters? (OK, so that might actually be a good idea).
I'm just wondering out loud here. But if the point behind this move is to not have any station-sanctioned prosyletizing, then maybe the network will have to cut all public service announcements, political ads, and spots for Sunday Night Football. You see, I'm not getting down on NBC simply because they are cutting Christian messages. I couldn't care one whit about that. I'm not gonna watch the show anyway. But I am going to call them on the fact that they are cutting out the essence of a show they paid for. So, I say to them, if you are uncomfortable with a show's message, don't buy the show. If you're too lazy to develop your own show for that Saturday morning slot, just air some more infomercials, 'kay?

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Pet peeve, but figured I'd point it out. You say:

"I could care less about that."

I believe the correct phrase should be:

"I couldn't care less about that."

Saying you "could care less" means that you must care a little bit - maybe quite a bit, about the item. So, it's more appropriate to say "couldn't care less", which means you care the least you possibly could for anything.

brainwise said...

Oh, you're right! I thought I caught all the major typos, but I was wrong.

I have updated the passage accordingly, but have used "couldn't care one whit" because ... well, I just like it.

Thanks for stopping by and keeping me honest (or at least grammatically clean).

KJV said...

The Bible is under attack from all sides. Satan knows it tells the truth about him, the victory that Jesus had at the cross, and what will happen in the future. As such, Satan has and still is making every attempt to destroy the Word of God. What better way to do this, than to change the meaning of the Bible over time with different bible versions; each version as it comes along claiming it is the truth and the most accurate of all the versions up until that point.
The line must be drawn where we say, "If the King James Bible was good enough for 400 years, then it is still good enough for me." For by it men and women have been saved and the knowledge of God imparted unto them. When new bible versions come along, they always take something away that is never replaced, only to be lost forever. If you believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, then stand up for it. Take a stand and speak out against these new bible versions. An objection often raised against the "King James Only Crowd" is that people learn something from the other (modern) versions, too, and that some even get saved: but I dare say that this occurs in spite of these errant versions, not because of them!
The Authorized Version of 1611, or, in other words, the King James Bible, stands alone in its uniqueness, integrity, and fidelity to the truthfulness of God’s Word. Among reasons why this writer holds this conviction is because of the great harm done not only to the Word of God, but the detriment wrought in the local church in its public worship, and, of course, because of the confusion created in countless group and individual Bible studies. After all, it could be said: How do you think your professor would think or feel if all of his students used different textbooks in his class?! In our case, God is our Great Professor! He alone is the one true God, who has walked among us upon this earth and left us the living and enduring legacy of His Word and His Spirit. Until He comes, Amen.

brainwise said...

KJV:

Thanks for stopping by and dropping your comments. I can't say I agree with you -- particularly on the topic of something called "Satan." But if you want to believe in such a being, you are welcome to him.

May your gods bless you.