iconicon
This image is now is learn a little bit. (Hope)


00h15 UTC; SATURDAY, 4 JANUARY 2014: If you think Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network's selections of cartoons can get to be "too instructive" to the point of "promoting bad ideas in children" (especially such tending to violence and criminality)--let alone grew up in times when the Saturday-morning animations from Hanna-Barbera and Filmation Associates (with some especially awful specimens of Japanese anime at one point dominating Saturday mornings) were criticised heavily for overdoing it on violence--consider this recent case out of China (via the BBC):
The makers of a Chinese cartoon series have been held partly responsible for injuries incurred by two children who were imitating a scene from the show.

The brothers were badly burned in April [2013] when another boy tied them to a tree and set them on fire, according to China's state-run Xinhua news agency.

The 10-year-old said he was copying a scene from
Xi Yangyang and Hui Tailang ("Pleasant Goat and Big Big Wolf").

A court said the show's producers and the boy's guardians were both to blame.

It ordered the guardians to pay 60% of the injured brothers' medical bills and Creative Power Entertaining, a Chinese animation company based in Guangzhou, to pay 15%.

The court in eastern Jiangsu province said there was "a cause-and-effect relationship between the case and the violent scenarios in the cartoon" and that the show should carry warnings in future,
The Hollywood Reporter said.

The verdict has been widely criticised in China, with some questioning why the country's state broadcaster escaped censure despite showing the cartoon in the first place.

The show, popular with both children and adults, features a wolf whose relentless pursuit of a group of goats sees both parties suffer degrees of physical punishment.

According to Xinhua, the civil case was brought by the family of the brothers, the elder of whom is reported to have suffered 80% burns to his body.
In any event, some 1,000 episodes of Xi Yangyang and Hui Tailang have been produced since 2005, as well as spawning five animated features and a plethora of licenced merchandise in an otherwise piracy-heavy nation as China, which certain specimens of conservative Zealotry and True Belief insist AmeriKKKa needs to emulate "to hasten socioeconomic recovery" all the more (subject, of course, to Christelike ekonomesie vryheid met Amerikaanse eienskappe "having due and proper place" relative to Our National Character and Identity as a Sovereign Peculiar Among the Nations by Divine Will and Endowment).

(Of note, too, is that in 2009, The Disney Channel acquired the rights to 100 episodes of the series for broadcast in 47 countries and regions; I'm not sure if the United States was among them, but readers who know otherwise should get back to moi.)

In any case, back to the court case at hand: The court, in issuing its judgment against Creative Power Entertaining in particular, commented thus in terms reminescent of attacks on film and television violence from a psychiatric standpoint (via The Hollywood Reporter's take on the story): "
Cartoon producers should rigorously review the scenes and plots that are inappropriate for minors in their products and give warnings like ‘don't imitate'. There is a cause-and-effect relationship between the case and the violent scenarios in the cartoon."

"Apart from violence, I'm afraid the practice of Big, Big Wolf's wife, who is beating her husband all the time, may harm children's understanding of marriage," was the take from Shanghai mother Huang Hao (who has a 5-year-old son rather fond of Xi Yangyang and Hui Tailang himself) about the judgment, via the official China Daily. (For the record, the wolf has been beaten up some 10,000 times over the series' run, while the goats in question are nearly cooked some 800 times before managing to flee.)

Meanwhile, we "morally superior(?!)" North Americans do have the V-chip and ratings systems to (in theory) help parents protect children from "harmful content," which may be no good when the parents aren't around to supervise viewing (as is widely suggested as a backstop); for children's shows, the ratings in the US are TV-Y (suitable for children generally) and TV-Y7 (suitable for children 7 years and upwards; where required, an "FV" [as in "fantasy violence"] advisory may be added here) ... and in Canada, the equivalents for English-language shows are C and C8+ (as in "suitable for audiences 8 years and up"); for French-language shows, which borrow from the ratings system of the Regie du cinema de Quebec, equivalents are G/Visa general and 8 ans+.

Or is it that we've been conditioned by conservative prolefeeders to look the other way at film and television violence (especially where children come into the equation) and instead regard such as Essential and Integral to AmeriKKKan Cultural Heritage and Identity Relative to AmeriKKKan National Exceptionalism Otherwise in Clear and Present Danger of Betrayal and Usurpation?

"Another small house is finished in the next block"
(to Engrishfy the closing remarks on every episode of
Vic and Sade through the years)

Share

N.B. Leave a comment sign Slambook and/or Guestbook hypothesis. And to bloggers anticipating and followers increased traffic and webmaster, to leverage better, and for the presence of social media, in this respect, have been invited to check out the tools and resources of these valuable masu:


 free web site traffic and promotion SocialClerks Social Exchange

Looking for high-value Webmaster site and his bloggers, said such money blogging resources:

 LinkShare  Referral  Program