Very bad taste indeed


Still, at least it wasn’t a joke about pancakes. Still, that’s Charlie Hebdo for you.

13 thoughts on “Very bad taste indeed”

  1. So cue the rent-a-mob riots and the Italian terrorist cell storming the CH offices in 3…2…1… er? Where did they all go?

  2. I’ve often wondered whether Charlie Hebdo is actually funny. Maybe it’s like Private Eye, people just remember the days when it was funny.

  3. dearieme,

    One of the problems today is that we’ve realised just how average a lot of the print media is because we’ve seen this explosion of content producers with the internet. Private Eye was about the best thing around, and that was as a result of limited competition.

    It’s why the media traditionally was stuffed full of family connections and Old Boy Networks. You could get away with hiring people

    And I can’t stand Ian Hislop. He’s the sort of person that people who are ignorant about politics and economics thinks is clever.

  4. It’s about corruption in Italy. An M6 earthquake here would cause plenty of peripheral damage, but nothing would collapse. Building standards here are to M8, and those standards are enforced. Because Japan.

    The true test is public buildings. When schools, hospitals and police stations collapse, building regulations aren’t being enforced, and someone is getting rich. Crushed Italians might not be funny, but it will be recurrent, because no-one has the will to reform the society. And no-one feels any sense of shame that a “modern” industrialised society is so backward.

  5. dearieme

    Charlie Hebdo is not funny. Some of their stuff is in bad taste – actually make that a lot of their stuff. That was why it was on the verge of collapse prior to the attacks. I applaud that we are a society that allows such things and that we should defend it, but I wouldnt buy it.

  6. BiW

    Ian Hislop – Agreed.

    And he is supposed to be the political counter (ie “right wing”) to Paul Merton on HIGNFY. That’s the BBC for you!

  7. Ian Hislop has made Private Eye very much part of the Establishment.

    I feel that a satirical publication should have no sacred cows, and should take no prisoners – but PE has its own. I cancelled my subscription after the Climategate e-mails went by without a single word’s mention. And there was much to be satirised in the contents of the mails.

    PE also subscribes to the official State religion of the NHS – OK, they attack bureaucratic wastage and corruption in it, but have never satirised it per se.

  8. I’ve never read Charlie Hebdo, but it sounds like the print equivalent of the Sickipedia website, which used to feature highly offensive user-submitted jokes. (It closed and reopened recently, but without its extensive back catalogue.) Most people are aghast at CH, but it’s a useful barometer of freedom of speech.

  9. I stopped my sub to PE when the Vodafone case was in the news. The tax reporting in PE was shit thanks, I think, to the cockeyed input of Richard Brooks – erstwhile HMRC inspector(?).

    I just pray LHTD never gets the “gig”.

  10. As I pointed out when the attacks happened, all those people ‘Je Suis Charlie’-ing clearly had never seen a copy of the filthrag. Charlie Hebdo has never been satirical, it’s just a nasty, racist, bad taste, more childish version of Viz – without the occasional satire Viz managed. (Manages? I haven’t seen a copy in years.)

    Of course free speech, no-one deserves to be shot, etc, but really, couldn’t have happened to a less undeserving bunch.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *