🎨 Artcow Iconoclast / Jonathan Mack Sweet - The Chris-Chan of Arkansas

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Hi, folks.

I decided to take a crack at transliterating Jon Sweet's TV Ratings post. I tried to preserve the spelling, grammar, and punctuation as best I could, though I was a little iffy with the commas sometimes. Text that was struck through actually appeared that way in the original piece. I present it here without commentary. I'd like to know what you think before I add my own thoughts. If anybody knows where we can get a transcript of the SNL sketch for comparison, I'll gladly add it here.
I know this is a funny (as in weird) thing to say as a mod, but if this has already been posted or linked to, go ahead and tell me and I'll pull it down.

For now, the text:


TV RATING SYSTEM

In the beginning it was ratings for movies. It started with the basics: G for general audiences, PG meant that parents had to accompany their kids to the theaters, R meant that anyone under sixteen was not admitted, and X, of course, meant strictly adult. No kids were allowed in the theater, and they had no choice but to either sneak in through the back door, rent the video, or catch the movie on cable.

Then came NC-17 – no children under 17 admitted. “Showgirls,” with Elizabeth Berkely, was the first big-screen NC-17 movies. This rating caused problems, however. For example, Spike Lee’s “Malcom X” became “Malcom NC-17,” and Stan Lee’s X-Men became the NC-17 men. The jury is still out, though, on “The X-Files,” Ex-Lax, and the Exxon Valdez.

But now we have these fancy new TV ratings to deal with. There’s TV-Y for children under seven, TV-Y7 for children 7 and up, TV-G for family audiences, TV-PG for more mature audiences, and TV-14, which means send the kids and all dogs under two out of the room. And then there’s TV-M, for “mature audiences” – the one they don’t even talk about.

However, I don’t think just these five ratings alone cut it – so in the age-old liberal tradition of making the simple complicated, I offer a few more useful TV ratings for families across the Fruited Plain.



(1) TV-TC/WBC. Means “Too Cerebral/Will Be Cancelled”. Shows like “Nowhere Man,” “VR-5,” “Strange Luck,” and “The Adventures of Brisco County Jr.”, which were too highbrow for intellectually-deprived audiences who prefer- [cuts off]



(2) TV-RTC/WBC. “Replaced shows that were TC/WBC. Should appear on insipid shows like “Moesha,” “Homeboys in Outer Space,” and the entire “Back-to-Back Monday’ lineup.



(3) TV-BS. Just what it sounds like. Used for programming thatis a little too liberal. Also good for televised Senate hearings when the Democrats have the floor and for President Clinton’s state of the union show.



(4) TV-B. Means the show has an all-or-mostly-black cast. Will be used for programs like “The Cosby Show,” “A Different World,” the new fall lineup on UPN, and my personal favorites, “Cops” and “America’s Most Wanted”.



(5) TV-ACBD. Stands for “Ages Can Be Deceiving.” Should be on TV shows like “Beverly Hills 90210,” “Melrose Place,” and “Saved by the Bell,” in which 50-year-old actors play high school-or college- age kids.



(6) TV-VC. Stands for “Vicious Circle”. This program features an actor who got his start in TV, and did a few one-star movies, and is now back on TV again. In six weeks, when his show is cancelled, he’ll be back to pumping gas.



(7)TV-S&L. Should be used for any programming created by Hiam Saban and Shuki Levy, i.e. “Mighty Morphin Power Rangers,” “V.R. Troopers,” “Masked Rider”, and “Big bad Beetleborgs.” Parents strongly cautioned to turn off the TV or turn on something else, as TV-SL programs can cause brain damage in younger viewers.



What puzzles me is this: Who writes these things, and how do they decide which shows are TV-Y, TV-Y7, TV-G, TV-PG, or TV 14? Is it a complicated, scientific method involving teams of researchers collecting data, cross-referencing it with data from other researchers, then using algebra, calculus and complex mathematical equations to arrive at these figures, or is it just some joker throwing darts with ratings written on them into a Nielsen ratings dartboard?

I mean, how can the Three Stooges be rated G when Moe keeps poking Larry in the eyes or running a hacksaw across Curly’s head? Or why is “The X-Files” only a PG and not a [?] when a couple of weeks ago they had cross-dressing brain-eating bisexual interracial body piercing bug-eyed pig-eared biker punk alien mutants doing the Macarena with the Cancer Man?

And what in blazes is this V-chip I keep hearing about? Seems Ernest “Fritz” Hollings (Dem-SC) – who sounds a lot like Foghorn Leghorn – is all for it, whatever it is. From what I hear, you put it into your TV set, and it takes out all the violence you don’t want your kids to see. (Dang. There go the Three Stooges.)/ My question is, where do you put it in, and how? Does it drop in there like a coin in a vending machine, or do I have to go out and buy a couple of new TVs to get one of those fancy-butt V-chips installed? How much are V-chips they? Can I buy them in a little bag for 99¢ at the convenience store? Are they good with bean dip?

The whole TV ratings thing sound to me like another liberal plot to limit our freedom and tell us what we can and cannot watch, or do, or say. Some liberals are trying to tell us how to raise our kids; the think we’re so dang stupid we can’t decide for ourselves what our kids can or can’t watch and what is or isn’t appropriate. And if we let them get away with it, they’ll keep on robbing us of our freedoms slowly but surely. Already we spend four month’s worth of our wages on income tax and can’t walk through the streets at night for fear of the criminal element – when does the hurting stop?

[unreadable note, “See carber p”]

The following text was written at the bottom of the first page of the piece.

Now, somebody please explain this whole TV ratings and V-chip thing to me. But not right now. “Pinky and the Brain” is coming on.
 
He Sets Me On Fire said:
Hi, folks.

I decided to take a crack at transliterating Jon Sweet's TV Ratings post. I tried to preserve the spelling, grammar, and punctuation as best I could, though I was a little iffy with the commas sometimes. Text that was struck through actually appeared that way in the original piece. I present it here without commentary. I'd like to know what you think before I add my own thoughts. If anybody knows where we can get a transcript of the SNL sketch for comparison, I'll gladly add it here.
I know this is a funny (as in weird) thing to say as a mod, but if this has already been posted or linked to, go ahead and tell me and I'll pull it down.

For now, the text:


TV RATING SYSTEM

In the beginning it was ratings for movies. It started with the basics: G for general audiences, PG meant that parents had to accompany their kids to the theaters, R meant that anyone under sixteen was not admitted, and X, of course, meant strictly adult. No kids were allowed in the theater, and they had no choice but to either sneak in through the back door, rent the video, or catch the movie on cable.

Then came NC-17 – no children under 17 admitted. “Showgirls,” with Elizabeth Berkely, was the first big-screen NC-17 movies. This rating caused problems, however. For example, Spike Lee’s “Malcom X” became “Malcom NC-17,” and Stan Lee’s X-Men became the NC-17 men. The jury is still out, though, on “The X-Files,” Ex-Lax, and the Exxon Valdez.

But now we have these fancy new TV ratings to deal with. There’s TV-Y for children under seven, TV-Y7 for children 7 and up, TV-G for family audiences, TV-PG for more mature audiences, and TV-14, which means send the kids and all dogs under two out of the room. And then there’s TV-M, for “mature audiences” – the one they don’t even talk about.

However, I don’t think just these five ratings alone cut it – so in the age-old liberal tradition of making the simple complicated, I offer a few more useful TV ratings for families across the Fruited Plain.



(1) TV-TC/WBC. Means “Too Cerebral/Will Be Cancelled”. Shows like “Nowhere Man,” “VR-5,” “Strange Luck,” and “The Adventures of Brisco County Jr.”, which were too highbrow for intellectually-deprived audiences who prefer- [cuts off]



(2) TV-RTC/WBC. “Replaced shows that were TC/WBC. Should appear on insipid shows like “Moesha,” “Homeboys in Outer Space,” and the entire “Back-to-Back Monday’ lineup.



(3) TV-BS. Just what it sounds like. Used for programming thatis a little too liberal. Also good for televised Senate hearings when the Democrats have the floor and for President Clinton’s state of the union show.



(4) TV-B. Means the show has an all-or-mostly-black cast. Will be used for programs like “The Cosby Show,” “A Different World,” the new fall lineup on UPN, and my personal favorites, “Cops” and “America’s Most Wanted”.



(5) TV-ACBD. Stands for “Ages Can Be Deceiving.” Should be on TV shows like “Beverly Hills 90210,” “Melrose Place,” and “Saved by the Bell,” in which 50-year-old actors play high school-or college- age kids.



(6) TV-VC. Stands for “Vicious Circle”. This program features an actor who got his start in TV, and did a few one-star movies, and is now back on TV again. In six weeks, when his show is cancelled, he’ll be back to pumping gas.



(7)TV-S&L. Should be used for any programming created by Hiam Saban and Shuki Levy, i.e. “Mighty Morphin Power Rangers,” “V.R. Troopers,” “Masked Rider”, and “Big bad Beetleborgs.” Parents strongly cautioned to turn off the TV or turn on something else, as TV-SL programs can cause brain damage in younger viewers.



What puzzles me is this: Who writes these things, and how do they decide which shows are TV-Y, TV-Y7, TV-G, TV-PG, or TV 14? Is it a complicated, scientific method involving teams of researchers collecting data, cross-referencing it with data from other researchers, then using algebra, calculus and complex mathematical equations to arrive at these figures, or is it just some joker throwing darts with ratings written on them into a Nielsen ratings dartboard?

I mean, how can the Three Stooges be rated G when Moe keeps poking Larry in the eyes or running a hacksaw across Curly’s head? Or why is “The X-Files” only a PG and not a [?] when a couple of weeks ago they had cross-dressing brain-eating bisexual interracial body piercing bug-eyed pig-eared biker punk alien mutants doing the Macarena with the Cancer Man?

And what in blazes is this V-chip I keep hearing about? Seems Ernest “Fritz” Hollings (Dem-SC) – who sounds a lot like Foghorn Leghorn – is all for it, whatever it is. From what I hear, you put it into your TV set, and it takes out all the violence you don’t want your kids to see. (Dang. There go the Three Stooges.)/ My question is, where do you put it in, and how? Does it drop in there like a coin in a vending machine, or do I have to go out and buy a couple of new TVs to get one of those fancy-butt V-chips installed? How much are V-chips they? Can I buy them in a little bag for 99¢ at the convenience store? Are they good with bean dip?

The whole TV ratings thing sound to me like another liberal plot to limit our freedom and tell us what we can and cannot watch, or do, or say. Some liberals are trying to tell us how to raise our kids; the think we’re so dang stupid we can’t decide for ourselves what our kids can or can’t watch and what is or isn’t appropriate. And if we let them get away with it, they’ll keep on robbing us of our freedoms slowly but surely. Already we spend four month’s worth of our wages on income tax and can’t walk through the streets at night for fear of the criminal element – when does the hurting stop?

[unreadable note, “See carber p”]

The following text was written at the bottom of the first page of the piece.

Now, somebody please explain this whole TV ratings and V-chip thing to me. But not right now. “Pinky and the Brain” is coming on.
Click to expand...
I got to the NC-17 part and had to tap out. It's like he's aggressively unfunny. Like he wants to make you cringe with how awful his writing is.
 
He Sets Me On Fire said:
Good finds, Absinthe. You know, Jon is that dangerous kind of stupid, the kind that seems utterly incapable of fathoming just how stupid he is. He may actually transcend stupidity and suffer from something far more limiting. To fall for one of these schemes is okay, to repeatedly fall for them - particularly when you have to front the money yourself all the time - is simply incompetent. Between this and the commemorative brick(s) he bought, it's clear Jon cannot be trusted with his own money.



Much agreed. Added to which is Jon's inconsistency when addressing the subject. His brother stole his money, and controls his money, but his mom controls the purse strings. Which is it?
Click to expand...

Didn't he once say that he had a bank account and that his brother forged his signature on one of his cheques? If that did happen, Jon could've called the cops and had his brother arrested on the spot and he'd lose an alleged leech.
 
Seven different TV ratings suggested and they are all insufferably moronic. Also, how does anyone read TV-B and not immediately think "this guy is a racist piece of shit"?
 
There really isn't any overlap in the specifics between Sweet's stupid column and the sketch, so I presume the folks at the paper just thought he had ripped off the general idea of "ridiculously over-detailed TV ratings" from it? Adding the unfunniness, racism, and political axe-grinding that is that special Sweet touch.
 
You have to remember, Sweets lies. Just because he says plagiarism, doesn't mean that's the exact reason. He may have stole the basic idea and they objected to that or it could have been the blatant racism that instigated it.

Sweets is an exceptional individual and one should never underestimate his ability to be exceptional.
 
>TV-B

Given Sweet's racism, his really devout support of conservatism (even if and when the left has a better idea), his falling for ploys (even though he calls moving on a "ploy"), and issues with technology, among certain other problems, I'm afraid that he's not doing much, if anything, to defeat some of the unfortunate stereotypes of Americans from the South.

I think it was @Meowthkip who said something along the lines of Sweet is half-past '97 - 1897, that is.

(Also, if I'm not mistaken, blackface "comedy" and certain "jokes" about people with a certain skin color were acceptable in American society in half-past 1897. By 1997, however, they were not.)
 
Last edited:
Sweet Cuppin' Cakes said:
(4) TV-B. Means the show has an all-or-mostly-black cast. Will be used for programs like “The Cosby Show,” “A Different World,” the new fall lineup on UPN, and my personal favorites, “Cops” and “America’s Most Wanted”.
Click to expand...

Fuck you, Jon.
 
Francis York Morgan said:
Also, how does anyone read TV-B and not immediately think "this guy is a racist piece of shit"?
Click to expand...
But naw dogg, he grew up in a black neighborhood. That means it' isn't racist.

No but really fuck his piece of shit and his bullshit comedy. By creating a separate classification for "black shows" he is literally bringing up segregation for a shitty, racist joke. A joke that literally says "These people are criminals and the victims of America's systematic racism and that's funny."

EDIT- And he wonders why this unfunny garbage got him fired. Bitch nobody wants to be the racist ass school paper.
 
Absinthe said:
"when does the hurting stop?" is the catchphrase of a character named Bill from a 90s cartoon
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, I remember that show. Such nostalgia. Hopefully not ruined.

DrChristianTroy said:
And he wonders why this unfunny garbage got him fired.
Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking. Like Chris causing a stink at the GAMe PLACe to the point where Snyder looked for a legit reason to get him banned, maybe the plagiarism thing was Sweet's "shouting match", if you will (Sweet admitted to stuff like interrupting people and behaving unreasonably because bright camera flash).
 
Last edited:
I just watched the "phantom sketch" that has the power to end gigs at college newspapers. If the people at the Herald had such a strict definition of plagiarism that even using the same basic concept of "introducing new humorous ratings after briefly talking about the new system" (without attribution) counts, then I can see how they'd accuse Sweet. But here's the thing - I don't think that's really plagiarism. Something else must've happened that Sweet did to aggravate the situation. Perhaps "TV-B" and how Sweet gets along with perceived "fartknockers" had something to do with it?

Of course, Sweet's explanation is that the people at the Hearald were dang dirty trolls liberals, who just wanted him out, and that was their chance.
 
Last edited:
Absinthe said:
He has a history of falling for scams and schemes. There's the "writing contests" where you pay to enter and then invariably "win" your way into an anthology which they try to sell you copies of for ~$50.
There's the movie script reading services that charge upfront fees but have no expertise or industry connections.
There's the Melaleuca pyramid selling with its big up-front outlay on dubiously-effective products.
There's the cash for envelope stuffing "opportunity" which also involves initial outlay and follows it up with miserly piece-rate returns.
Sweet has fallen for all of these. At one point he complained that his brother stealing his money (which was wrong of his brother to do) prevented him from pursuing work-at-home opportunities - the implication being that he would need up-front money to begin these schemes.
Basically Sweet has fallen for every low-level sort-of-legal con going - short of penny shares, fuel-saving magnets and Kirby vacuums.
Even the can collecting is widely considered a waste of time because the money received is disproportionately lower than the time spent.

(I have links for all the above, but I'm on my mobile. I'll put them in later if anyone's interested.)
Click to expand...

In short, Jon is, like Chris, naive.
 
ToroidalBoat said:
I just watched the "phantom sketch" that has the power to end gigs at college newspapers. If the people at the Herald had such a strict definition of plagiarism that even using the same basic concept of "introducing new humorous ratings after briefly talking about the new system" (without attribution) counts, then I can see how they'd accuse Sweet. But here's the thing - I don't think that's really plagiarism. Something else must've happened that Sweet did to aggravate the situation. Perhaps "TV-B" and how Sweet gets along with perceived "fartknockers" had something to do with it?

Of course, Sweet's explanation is that the people at the Hearald were dang dirty trolls liberals, who just wanted him out, and that was their chance.
Click to expand...

Huh, I guess they were looking for a reason to boot him like you posited then. I know I'd want to boot him from the paper for having that TV-B rating as a legit joke. With the behavior that he throws around regularly, I'd be pretty chill with taking any excuse that runs my way too. It also really doesn't help that that article, which I think was supposed to be both informative and satirical, was a total flop in both respects. The jokes were overly forced and he really tried to hammer home the jokes way too much for one. And two, it really wasn't that informative as it stands; he spent so much time trying to make it funny that I actually don't even remember the important stuff covered in it, which are the ratings tag. If this was the average level of quality for an article or paper, I really want to know how he was even allowed to touch a pen, let alone write an article. Did they literally have no one else to fill a spot or something?
 
Presumably part of it could be his "that sketch never existed" craziness, which, to someone who had seen the sketch, would have sounded like the world's lamest lie (thus reinforcing the idea of plagiarism). If an editor said to me, "That piece you turned in was a lot like an article in this week's New Yorker," my response would be "Oh, shit! I actually rarely read The New Yorker and haven't seen this week's, but that's terrible! Can I change the piece or should we just scrap it?" not "How dare you? You're just making that up!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom