Holy Smurf, continued

[jaunthie]

Okay, maybe I was too groggy yesterday, or maybe the BT didn't contain this quote about why UNICEF chose the Smurfs in the first place. But the Washington Times did:

"Philippe Henon, a spokesman for UNICEF Belgium, said his agency had set out to shock, after concluding that traditional images of suffering in Third World war zones had lost their power to move television viewers."

Just think about that a minute, folks. And in case you don't know what kind of images have "lost the power", we're talking about pictures of kids - real live human beings here, actual people - missing limbs. Missing eyes. Dying of starvation. You know, that kind of apparently passé stuff.

But images of bombed Smurfs...that captures our attention. That's newsworthy. That's clipworthy in at least a dozen languages (for example, this French version here). That's worthy of prominent media warnings beforehand advising that this content isn't suitable for "sensitive viewers and young children".

Damn.

The truly tragic thing, of course, is that he's absolutely right. After all, I haven't exactly blogged about bomb-maimed children here before, and I don't remember the last time the Washington Times (or any other paper) covered this issue, either.

Damn and double damn.

Nor do I recall seeing any warnings before the pictures of real, live, mutilated children on newscasts or charity sites or even Unicef's own Web site.

Ugh.

And I still find the idea of Smurfs being bombed funny, on some level.

Talk about shame...this is just all kinds of wrong.

Comments

[hiker-chick.livejournal.com]

Wait a minute: isn't "cartoon violence" supposed to be not as big a deal as live-action variety? Hmmmph.

[tangerinpenguin.livejournal.com]

Consider how many people were intellectually aware that there are a bunch of GIs coming home missing limbs for every one of the almost 2000 that have been killed, but didn't really register it emotionally until B.D. lost a leg in Doonesbury...

[jaunthie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I know. Not to mention the incredible explosion in popularity of comic books in general (says this old comic book geek who well remembers the day when you had to go to specialty shops to find graphic novels, and really obscure shops to find manga). While I'm perfectly well aware that the human brain is hard-wired to accept the impact of images much more than typeface, it also has me thinking dark thoughts about the likely regressing state of literacy, intellectual honesty, and critical thinking in our country...

Hmmph, indeed! Or maybe I just need coffee.

[hiker-chick.livejournal.com]

Then too, it might be important to consider the difference between seeing the effects of violence "after the fact" vs. live, as it's happening. We have seen many children without an eye or limb(s). But I'm pretty sure it would still turn my stomach to see a child as the eye/limb is in the process of being lost (as happens in the Smurf clip).

So why don't they precede Wily Coyote clips with warnings? Because he usually bounces right back, I suspect.