Charter Member of the Sub-Media

July 21, 2004

It's About Time « Media Distortions »

Doonesbury has been offering up baseless and inaccurate criticisms of Republicans and President Bush for far too long. Well, the cartoon is gone from 38 newspapers now.

Some cry "censorship", but the government had nothing to do with this. The market forces have their place, and in this case, the significant majority of newspapers felt their readership no longer wanted such slanted and biased propaganda. The comics page should be for humor, not mean-spirited partisanship.

Posted by Nathan at 04:01 PM | Comments (11)

but it's one of the funnier ones after the born loser and frank and ernest and zits and luanne, even when it took on the Clinton White House, etc., back in the 90s. Now the one that deserves to be trashed is that little Mallard Fillmore, which not only takes in vain the name of one of our little known presidents, but is mean spirited to boot. At least Doonesbury is mostly funny. More so than many of the regulars on the comic page. C'mon, get a life.

Posted by: chuck rightmire at July 21, 2004 05:03 PM

Wow. There *is* one person left in America who thinks Doonesbury is funny. :)

Sorry, Chuck, I couldn't resist.

Posted by: Deb at July 21, 2004 05:25 PM

It's okay, Deb, sometimes I have a weird sense of humor. Like whenever it's a politician that's the target.

Posted by: chuck rightmire at July 21, 2004 05:58 PM

I think they should keep Doonsbury AND run Chris Muir's Day by Day along side the numbers and at the end of 3 months, keep the one with the better numbers... bet Chris will still be standing.

Posted by: Guy S. at July 21, 2004 08:13 PM

...impossible to tell in a print newspaper. Online, tho, by clicking? Doonesbury has the edge just by name recognition, but Day by Day is far funnier.

Posted by: Nathan at July 21, 2004 09:40 PM

We run Mallard Fillmore, Doonesbury, and the Boondocks in a section unrelated to the comics page. Works well.

Frankly, I wish him success, but I don't want Day by Day in my paper, and I'd just as soon get rid of the three I mentioned above. I remember when the comics page was full of lighthearted, apolitical humor, and a six year old could read them at the breakfast table and parents wouldn't have to worry. Our local paper has been judicious and kept it wholesome and lighthearted by relegating controversial, politically motivated cartoons to another area. I am constantly shocked, however, when traveling and noting that no other paper does.

Posted by: Jo at July 22, 2004 07:20 AM

I agree, Jo. If a cartoon is mainly political, it should be on the Op/Ed page with the political cartoons.
Berke Breathed sometimes crosses the line into the political, but I have less problem with him because it's not the norm, and he's usually funny. And maybe also because when he does it, he's less about advocating one side and more about skewering puffed up politicos of both sides.

Another one I have big problems with, at least recently, is Non Sequitor. That one is also going way over the line into political advocacy.

Allowing your personal views to color your comic strip's content is one thing; using your soapbox which is supposed to be for entertainment as a pulpit from which to hammer home a political point using 3-4 frames of minimal dialogue that allow no room to treat any topic in depth...well, it's Politics By Bumper Sticker in another form. Useless, and worse than useless, at least for entertainment.

You know, I think this is just one more example of an area that used to be for kids being hijacked by adults for adult purposes. It may be the self-centeredness of the Baby Boomers, it may be people trying to erode standards to an "Anything Goes" standard, or it may just be an unavoidable decline of a wealthy society. But the trend is rampant and in nearly everything these days. We don't let kids be kids anymore.

Posted by: Nathan at July 22, 2004 07:33 AM

Wow. Republicans really are closed minded. After reading many of these articles and postings, I can see why people joke: There is no such thing as a young republican. Being so conservative really sucks the life out of you. I can see that in your hollow, empty attempts at being smart.

Posted by: Luccas at February 15, 2005 03:22 PM

Why, that's sweet, Luccas. Thank you!

Posted by: Nathan at February 15, 2005 03:34 PM

Simply put, a comic strip (political or otherwise) should to be funny. It has to at least try to evoke a laugh. The vast majority of Tinsley’s work is a purely political statement without even an attempt at humor. There is a conservative strip I like, Scott Stantis' “Prickly City”. While I rarely agree with the writer’s political views, I often laugh at the strip’s humor and appreciate the interesting artwork. “Mallard Fillmore” is bombastic, single minded, riddled with straw man arguments and just plain un-funny.

I had not seen Chris Muir’s "Day By Day" before. It seems funny enough and thoughtful. One thing I have to wonder about, Both Muir and Stantis are white. Both write strips with a black a "Republican" main character who is surrounded by white "Democrats". Is this tokenism or just wish fulfillment on their parts?

Posted by: Robrob at June 26, 2005 08:11 PM

Probably both and neither at the same time.

Posted by: Nathan at June 26, 2005 08:14 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?