Joensuu

As a newly promoted 'forum superstar ', who is part of the Liberal Elite, I'd like to side with the monarchists. IMO, the royals are a quaint sideshow, who massively bolster our economy. Their power, while enshrined in law, is in reality reliant on public opinion (one stupid poltical intervention, and the Republicans would fall upon them). Sure, there are downsides - like the bad example they present to kids of inherited rather than earnt wealth, but I feel while they remain politically impotent, they are more of a benefit than a disadvantage.

I quite like that Donald Trump chap, bit too OTT to be a truly believable though. IMO he's funnier than that former model who impersonates Tina Fey, she's just wrong.

http://paperbackrioter.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/an-a-z-of-rubbish-arguments-from-no2av/

I can't stand McIntyre. He personifies pretty much everything that is wrong with being bland and MOR. I guess that still puts him above the likes of Jim Davidson and Bernard Manning. I assume this relegates me from being part of the liberal elite in your eyes? Either that or perhaps you have mistaken McIntyre's core fanbase?

Hmmm, tough one Sergei. Obviously this hypothetical clip straddles the line of acceptability. This would tend to suggest that either it has offended traditionalists, or it has offended one minority group or other. My personal reaction would obviously depend upon the exact content, and I very much doubt I personally would either be offended or angered, unless the humour crossed one of our social lines: race, gender, sexuality etc.

Absolutely. Although, can we agree that it probably wouldn't ever be acceptable to find Michael McIntyre funny?

Is this hypothetical you tube clip funny? And if so, is it funny in a Peep Show satirical way, in a MOR Michael McIntyre way, or in a heck the BBC has lawyers so let's keep them employed Clarkson way?

Well thank goodness for that - I wouldn't want to offend you.

Well I'm enjoying it...

Lets cut to the chase. Censorship is almost always a bad thing - it makes the censor look petty, the audience take more interest, and the censored start bleating on about being oppressed. But take Rwandan radio in 1994 - should the West have used their ability to block the transmission?

Isn't a "politically correct policeman" almost an oxymoron? I'm not watching anyone, just pointing out whenever anyone says anything daft, and at other times providing people with some rope to see what they use if for.

Depending upon the context, then er, maybe. For example: a satire of members of the Imperial Family would be fine. Associating negative stereotypes with the comedy far less so. Implying anything negative about race, most certainly not.

Hmm, a 'hint' hey? I'm not sure I actually went that far, I made no accusations, gave him the benefit of the doubt, and avoided jumping to any conclusions. I think the very fact that I didn't get offended or tell him what to laugh at (or not) seems to have annoyed him even more.

Sorry Minty. Hands up, I shouldn't goad them, but it is fun.

Quite right - no need for censorship in comedy. Could you point me to an example of where I have told people what to or what not to laugh at?

How very Daily Mail of you.

And no doubt, the editors of You Tube will agree with you, why not fire them a quick email?

As you are well aware, art is entirely subjective. I personally don't go for cows in formaldehyde, and much prefer a bit a satire. Nothing to do with whether people are British or not.

Sounds fair enough to me. A bit like taking offence at Bashar al-Assad, despite not personally being affected by his actions?

You disagree with or don't understand this video?

Like this bit:

Work of art. Anyone want to open a book on how long it stays up?

Worth a go. Gives you an indication of how much more relevant your vote in your seat will become with AV. http://www.voterpower.org.uk/

I'm not sure what the connotations of feeling sorry for Turkish are.

Yeah, this I can agree with. Well said Turkish, I can't stand those offended types.