Censorship is, and has always been a controversial topic. There are so many questions to consider on the subject of censorship. For example, what deserves to be censored? Where should we draw the line when it comes to censorship? Who should be allowed to censor the media? If we censor violent or naughty things, could it lead to people just censoring whatever they disagree with or don’t want to see? These questions are all discussed in The Simpsons episode “Itchy and Scratchy and Marge.”
Overview
In the episode, Homer attempts to build Marge a spice rack, while the kids watch Itchy and Scratchy. While Homer is working on the spice rack, Maggie sneaks up behind him out of the shadows, brandishing a giant mallet, clobbers him on the head, and scuttles away as quickly as she came, leaving Homer lying there, battered and alone. Why would an innocent baby do such a brutish and violent thing? Marge is wondering exactly that — until she sees an episode of Itchy and Scratchy, which is basically a more violent version of Tom & Jerry. After seeing one character attempt to stab another, Maggie picks up a pencil and tries to stab Homer with it. Marge immediately blames the show for Maggie’s recent violence spree and bans Bart and Lisa from watching it too, even though they have never done anything violent because of Itchy and Scratchy. And besides, they still manage to watch Itchy and Scratchy at their friends’ houses, despite what Marge says. It’s not like she can watch them all the time.
Maggie, mimicking what she sees in the episode, touches on a contentious issue that has been around for as long as TV and movies have been around: Can watching violent media cause children to act in violent ways? While yes, research has shown that violent TV shows can cause children to accept violence as a way to solve problems, and imitate the violence they see on television, the answer is more complicated than it seems. For example, not all kids are as equally susceptible to the influence of TV. According to “The Very Young and Television Violence,” there are certain factors that can make some kids more impressionable than others, such as kids with less self-esteem, kids who are likely to conform to group pressure, and kids with few of their own interests. Finally, more than anything else, it’s the parents’ job to instill morals and critical thinking in their children, and for them to make sure that their kids know that what they see on TV is pretend.
Marge then writes a letter to the producers to ask them to tone down the violence. She receives one back from Roger Meyers, the CEO of Itchy & Scratchy International. He replies that one person cannot make a difference and insults her. This only provokes Marge further, wanting to show “what one screwball can do.” Marge goes full Karen and forms an angry mob called Springfieldians for Nonviolence, Understanding, and Helping, (or SNUH) and even drags her family into protesting outside of the Itchy and Scratchy studios. However, Bart and Lisa have continued to sneak off and watch Itchy and Scratchy with their friends under Marge’s nose this whole time and she never suspects a thing. Marge’s protests start to gain momentum and soon more people start to protest. Marge is even asked to appear on the TV show Smartline. On Smartline, she confronts Roger Meyers and suggests that concerned parents send letters to Meyers. Because of this, Meyers gets tons of mail, one letter even saying that they won’t brake if they see Meyers crossing the street. Because of this, Meyers has no choice but to eliminate the violence in Itchy and Scratchy.
No matter how hard Marge tries to shield her kids from violence and stop them from watching violent cartoons altogether, the truth is Marge cannot force her kids to follow her morals. At the end of the day, they are their own people, and they are going to find a way to do what they want. She can’t make sure they aren’t watching TV all the time. And even more, her being laser-focused on protesting prevents her from seeing what her kids are really doing, when she started this campaign all for the benefit of her kids. To add to this, due to the amount of protests she’s attending, Marge is neglecting her own family, and they have to eat a lot of TV dinners. She’s been protesting so much she’s lost sight of what’s really important: her family.
The violence is finally removed from Itchy and Scratchy, and Maggie is no longer acting violently. In fact, she even shares lemonade with Homer after seeing Itchy and Scratchy share lemonade! The other kids, though, dislike the newly cleaned-up show now that it has lost what made it funny. They hate it so much that they all stop watching TV and actually *gasp* go outside! They proceed to spend the day playing outside, having fun together, and using their imaginations as kids should.
This scene shows some of the positive effects of censoring. For example, now that Itchy and Scratchy is no longer violent, and is actually modeling positive behaviors, like sharing, now Maggie will model positive behaviors instead of violent ones since she is seeing more examples of that. Another positive, albeit unintentional, side effect of the censoring is that because the show is so lame now that no one wants to watch it, everyone is actually going outside! They’re getting social interaction! They’re using their imagination! They’re getting exercise! All of which is a much more positive use of their time than being in front of the TV ever is. I don’t think Marge intended this when she protested Itchy and Scratchy, but it is a positive effect nonetheless.
If Marge thought everyone was going to live happily ever after, she was sorely mistaken, because while she meant well, her crusade had unintended consequences. The curators of Michaelangelo’s David send it on a tour of the US, with Springfield being one of the stops. Marge is awoken by SNUH urging her to protest David, as they think it’s “filth” and an “abomination” because it shows a… you know what I’m talking about. However, Marge sees nothing wrong with it and thinks it’s a masterpiece. Unfortunately for Marge, her cause has now taken on a life of its own. She appears on Smartline once again, and they ask her why she’s against David. Marge replies that she’s not, and she thinks everyone in Springfield should see it. This surprises the panel, with Dr. Marvin Monroe exclaiming, “How can you be for one form of freedom of expression, but not the other?” Marge replies she guesses she can’t. Dr. Marvin Monroe asks what she has to say to all the “Marge Simpson wannabees” out there. Marge replies “I guess one person can make a difference, but most of the time, they probably shouldn’t.”
Conclusion
Now, we get to the meat of the argument. If we censor what is violent or harmful, could it lead to people just censoring what they don’t agree with under the guise of it being “harmful”? We can’t just think freedom of expression is okay until we don’t agree with it. That’s hypocritical and it’s not how America is supposed to work. Everyone gets freedom of expression, not just the people expressing opinions you agree with or are comfortable with. In addition, it can be hard to tell what makes one form of freedom of expression okay and another not. For example, is it violent? Is it dangerous? Is it vulgar? Are people imitating it? And who gets to decide this stuff anyway? People have different opinions of what deserves to be censored. And just because something is vulgar or violent does not mean it should be censored. As for Marge saying she thinks people “Probably shouldn’t” make a difference, I think that you need to be ready for the consequences of trying to make a difference. People are going to twist your ideas to fit their own selfish agendas, and you need to be prepared and take responsibility for that.
In conclusion, censorship is a very complicated topic. It is not always clear what makes one thing worth censoring versus another, or if the harm of censorship outweighs the good. The answers to these questions are not always straightforward, but they are important to ask.
