Elsewhere in the capital stands a fountain that plays patriotic tunes while two bronze men urinate on a map of the Czech Republic. The Chopin comic was not quite as daring as that, but the idea was to break through some of the stereotypes and interest German teenagers in a classical composer. Krzysztof Ostrowski, the author of the scandalous comic, was trying to poke a bit of fun at the pompousness around Chopin, particularly evident on the anniversary of his death, which had been the subject of a global campaign promoting Poland and the pianist.
Poles are enormously sensitive about how they appear in German eyes. Although many Germans, including Chancellor Angela Merkel, praise Poland for its Solidarity labor union and its role in overcoming European communism, and Germany remains racked with guilt over its bloody occupation of Poland during World War II, Poland is seen very differently in German popular culture. They practice their English on Slav forums talking to other Slavs about Slavness.
Plus as linguists, we love the word play usually used in these types of jokes. Well, not here! He did bring it on himself though by turning up to official business drunk a few times….
Those of you with kids will know just how much mum brain effects you. Some mothers have started coming up with such dumb things that really make you question human intelligence which is why they even have their own special name , but in return give us a good laugh! Confirm Cancel. Cite this. You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to this content through either of these.
Showing a limited preview of this publication:. Abstract The paper discusses contemporary Polish humor which features references to Chinese language and culture. Keywords: ethnic jokes ; memes ; Poland ; China. Published Online: Published in Print: Brzozowska, D. The Chinese as targets in Polish humorous discourse.
HUMOR , 32 2 , Copy to clipboard. Log in Register. Volume 32 Issue 2. This issue. All issues. Federal Communications Commission, F. Federal Communications Commission, supra, at ; Neckritz v. Had petitioners successfully established before the Commission that the challenged segment of the broadcast constituted the presentation of views on a controversial issue of public importance, they would then be required to demonstrate that ABC's overall approach to the subject was unbalanced.
See, e. Since the Commission upheld ABC's determination that no statement on a controversial issue of public importance occurred, our inquiry is limited to whether petitioners have made the necessary threshold showing that ABC's determination that the August 10th program did not involve a discussion of a controversial issue of public importance was either unreasonable or in bad faith.
We hold they have not. In the present case, ABC decided that the Polish joke material contained in the August 10th Dick Cavett Show did not present a controversial issue of public importance. Thus in its opposition to the application for review before the full Commission, ABC formally contended that the comedy skit on the August 10th show did not represent a controversial issue of public importance.
The Commission concluded that ABC acted reasonably and in good faith in making this determination because petitioners had not shown there was any controversy in this country concerning the intelligence or other qualities of Polish Americans. Even petitioners recognize "that broadcasters have discretion in deciding whether a controversial issue of public importance exists and their latitude may be wide" Reply Br.
Neither the Commission nor we should encroach upon this determination by ABC in the absence of an abuse of its discretion. Democratic National Committee, supra, at Petitioners do not assert that ABC lacked good faith. Thus the thrust of their argument is that the network's determination that there was no discussion of a controversial issue of public importance in the August 10th Polish joke skit was unreasonable.
In order to invoke the fairness doctrine, a petitioner must first define the issue which it maintains is a controversial one of public importance. Green v. Federal Communications Commission, supra, at In the complaint and application for review before the Commission, in the briefs here, and at oral argument we searched in vain for petitioners' statement of the issue. We have found no clear statement of a question that could serve as an issue around which an important public controversy could form.
The televising of so-called 'Polack jokes' is per se a controversial issue of public importance, harmful and insulting to a considerable segment of the American population. After the Bureau's ruling that there was no discussion of a controversial issue of public importance on the August 10th show, the application for review before the full Commission was filed, containing these statements about the issue:. The issue is one of public importance as a result of mere numbers alone.
It is controversial because the unanswered 'Polack joke' does, tends to, or is likely to belittle the Polish American in our society. Reading the pleadings before the Commission leniently, two possible issues are suggested by these excerpts: 1 whether Poles or Polish Americans are inferior to other human beings in terms of intelligence, personal hygiene, etc.
Nowhere in the complaint or application for review before the Commission is there a clear statement of the issue which is alleged to be both controversial and of public importance. It would be improper to require the licensee and the Commission to ferret out the critical issue, since petitioners bear the burden of putting the issue forward in a manner that makes it possible for the exercise of discretion as to whether the fairness doctrine or personal attack rule has been properly invoked.
Nevertheless, we need not rely on petitioners' failure to state the issue clearly, because the Commission was correct in ruling that ABC did not overstep its discretion in failing to find a controversial issue of public importance, even if we regard the above two issues as properly suggested in the complaint and application for review. Petitioners allege nothing that would support a contention that there is a controversy over the issue whether Poles or Polish Americans are less intelligent, less clean, less coordinated, etc.
If some people do seriously assert the inferiority of Poles and Polish Americans, it was not unreasonable for ABC to decide that they have not generated enough support for their position to raise a controversial issue of public importance. Even if such a debate existed, we could not say that a determination by ABC that the broadcast of the skit in question did not constitute a discussion of this issue was unreasonable.
In any event, the record satisfies us that petitioners did not seek to convince the Commission that the skit presented views on such a question. Assuming that petitioners asserted the question whether broadcasting Polish jokes is desirable, they still failed to demonstrate that there is a controversy of public importance over that issue. In an attempt to show that a controversial issue of public importance was aired on August 10th, petitioners cite the news coverage afforded the filing of the complaint in this case.
0コメント