This show was recommended to me recently and though I’ve not been obsessed with it, it’s been watchable. Just got to episode 3 and long story short they run an MMO company and it’s come to their attention that there are a bunch of nazis who play their game. The episode culminated in them making a private server just for the nazis. This is a widely agreed upon solution and it does not seem solely motivated by “evil money man”. I thought maybe I had missed some nuance so I looked it up and there’s an article (linked below) where the writers of the show seemingly pat themselves on the back for coming up with such a fair and balanced solution.

Am I missing something here? Have I gone too woke? The community is still filled with nazis who will likely still be engaging in online and offline activities related to the game. You as a company have seemingly no desire to distance yourself from that kind of community? The issue with nazis is not just that they’re mean to people in your video game and giving them their own private Nazi clubhouse does not seem like the solution. There’s that popular story about how a bar will slowly become a Nazi bar and I just don’t know why that’s not a concern for the writers of the show or the team in universe. This is not an always sunny type show where the people are supposed to be bad or incompetent and the whole episode rubbed me the wrong way. Has anyone seen the show? When I looked at other discussions online people were actively saying this was their favorite episode?

Article with the commentary: https://decider.com/2020/02/12/mythic-quest-dinner-party/

McElhenney joked that he thinks his server-banning plan may be able to work in real life. “You know what? That’s what we gotta do. Let’s get Zuckerberg on the phone!”

  • MountingSuspicion@reddthat.comOPEnglish
    1·
    3 days ago

    It strikes me as more of a less optimistic Parks and Rec? I think the issue is that the writers of the show did not say people came out looking worse. The writers had the following to say (also from the article):

    The goal of the episode was to ask what level of responsibility these social media companies have when it comes to policing hate speech. Though the team had a very strong opinion about what the correct answer to that is, the episode was never approached from the point of view that “Mark Zuckerberg should do this.”

    “We feel very strongly in a position, but we’re not in that position. We don’t know what the ramifications are of all of a sudden just saying, ‘Well I don’t like what you’re saying therefore you can’t say it.’ It’s just dicey,” McElhenney said. “Now all of a sudden, as the show creators, we’re creating an environment where we have to make what our decision would be in the moment, and we don’t ban them. We figure out a different way to deal with it.”

    McElhenney joked that he thinks his server-banning plan may be able to work in real life. “You know what? That’s what we gotta do. Let’s get Zuckerberg on the phone!”

    That doesn’t strike me as the kind of thing they’d say if they thought it was a bad thing to do. Maybe I just don’t understand their humor, but it really comes across as though the MMO team is well meaning but flawed, which is not what “platforms nazis” equates to in my opinion.

    I do really appreciate you taking the time to read and respond. Wasn’t sure if anyone in the community had even watched the show

      • MountingSuspicion@reddthat.comOPEnglish
        1·
        3 days ago

        That seems to be the popular take here. I didn’t think they were all awesome people, but I think it was the writers comments that made me feel like they actually think it’s a workable solution. Maybe the irony is too subtle for me, but the camera and writing seems too kind to the characters to actually be framing them as “bad”. I was definitely picking up on flawed, but clearly I’m missing something more. Might just not be for me. Appreciate the input.

        • slackassassin@piefed.socialEnglish
          2·
          2 days ago

          They were joking. The quote specifically says that they we’re joking and then they said to get zuckerberg on the phone sarcastically.

    • Ilandar@lemmy.todayEnglish
      1·
      3 days ago

      I haven’t watched it actually, so maybe your interpretation is more accurate than mine. My dad has, though, and he used to talk about it all the time with me. I never got the feeling from our conversations that this was a show to be taken seriously, it sounded very much like satirical comedy. He complained quite a lot about the third season - from what I gather it becomes a pretty bland and directionless sitcom - but he really enjoyed the first couple and I don’t think that would have been the case if this show was actually as you describe.

      I guess knowing what I do about the show, I don’t really interpret those quotes in the same way you do. To me, it seems sort of self-deprecating in a way, because he’s saying that we all think we know better but maybe if placed in that situation we’d be just as spineless. That kind of take would be very on-point for satirical comedy. Also, I just don’t see how you can come to the conclusion that the writers are actually platforming nazism (or in support of this) when this is the quote they provide:

      “From our perspective what was important was to not take a side on how it’s best to have been dealt with. I think everybody in the room and anybody with any kind of discernible heart, brain, or intellect recognizes that no one’s gonna be on the side of the white nationalists besides white nationalists,” McElhenney explained. “However, we also live in a country founded on the freedom of speech. Curtailing someone’s freedom of speech has not traditionally been as big of an issue as it is right now because now the platforms are available for people to find each other all over from these caves, from which they live, and organize. That is what’s causing so many dangerous movements to not only begin [with], but to really thrive.”

      Again, my interpretation of all these quotes put together is that he’s saying the obvious solution (outright banning them) would not be funny because it’s too obvious and too one-sided. The tension between a satirical comedy’s protagonists making bad decisions because they are cowards, or because they are not actually as good as they think is often what provides the humour.

      • MountingSuspicion@reddthat.comOPEnglish
        1·
        3 days ago

        Interesting perspective. I didn’t mean to suggest they’re pro Nazi or anything, just that the episode resolution didn’t sit right with me based on my interpretation. Your mention of the tension between self perception and outcome resonated a bit for me, though I’m not sure if that was my takeaway after watching it. If you ever do end up watching it, feel free to ping me. Would be interested to hear your post view take too.

        • Ilandar@lemmy.todayEnglish
          1·
          3 days ago

          We will see, I have to admit that the show itself doesn’t immediately grab my attention and I’m very picky with comedy. Most of the conversations I had with my dad about it were more about letting him share his interests with me than me actually wanting to talk about the show lol