The most recent South Park episode, featuring a naked Donald Trump, may have violated the law.
You must log in or register to comment.
While this article is technically correct on some things, it’s somewhat missing the entire point of what Matt and Trey did very intentionally. They want Trump to try and sue them.
Trump has inappropriately promoted and used various AI depictions of some seriously fucked up shit, and therefore would immediately lose in court if trying to sure based on the existing laws. In fact, they never showed Trump’s dick. They just alluded to it being his dick…with AI.
I would FUCKING LOVE for Trump to try and sue them, because Matt and Trey will make it the circus it deserves to be, get some amazing stuff in discovery, and they can fucking afford not only defending themselves and their content from frivolous lawsuits, but then countersue and fuck Trump and all of his cronies up when it comes out who has been pulling the strings with the absolutely batshit insane stuff that gets posted on his accounts, and government accounts being misused in an official capacity to push dogshit.
I look forward to this with a shwaybone.
The fucker put out an AI generated video of Obama being arrested in the Oval Office. There’s no standing.
Show me a judge that will put him in a cell
Rules for thee…
To qualify, the depiction must appear, in the eyes of a reasonable person, indistinguishable from a real image.
So if the act is used to criminalize this depiction, in doing so it acknowledges that tiny pecker is indistinguishable from Trump’s penis?
Frankly, while the general depiction is realistic, the actual penis doesn’t look like any real penis, regardless of size. It shouldn’t fall in the scope of the law.
“Matt and tray so loved America they were willing to burn $1.5 billion to save it.”
Where are all those liberals at who just recently defended Dems for voting with Republicans to pass this law?? Where are all their bullshit justifications now?
According to the article im a Joe Rogan and Andrew Tate fan. I’ve only seen Rogan a few times from Fear Factor and no idea who Andrew Tate is, so I guess they fucked up there.
What do you mean? The article just points out that the show’s demographic may somewhat overlap with, for example, Rogan’s demographic:
The show’s core demographic—predominantly men aged 18 to 49—overlaps meaningfully with the audiences of figures like Joe Rogan and, to a lesser extent, Andrew Tate.
They are not saying that Rogan listeners also watch South Park, or that South Park is republican. The article is just pointing out that this demographic of men aged between 18 and 49 overlaps with “Joe Rogan[’s] and, to a lesser extent, Andrew Tate[’s demographic].”
They even frame this as a potential advantage, saying that
South Park holds a rare cultural position in that it can potentially speak directly to groups adjacent to the MAGA movement without preaching, pandering, or being immediately dismissed [emphasis added].
I don’t know about you, but it didn’t feel like it was calling South Park fans like us Joe Rogan listeners. It felt more like the article was pointing out that some, maybe even a majority, of fans could also be Rogan fans, which would make the audiences that South Park reaches with this anti-Trump episode especially influential.
Idk; I certainly didn’t feel offended or anything like that, but I might be misunderstanding you here.
pay him no mind he just wanted to type out Andyou Taint multiple times
