"Tom And Jerry" Smoking Scenes Banned

Wouldn't it be nice if Ofcom (or whoever) could actually take the time to conduct surveys amongst parents of those children who fall within the target audience?

I think those who support this "editing" may be surprised at the results.

I'm not sure I would condone a rather expensive consultation paid for by public money when a dose of common sense would have sufficed.

Anyway, its done now. I doubt trimming two out of thousands of cartoons makes much of a difference in the grand scale of things.

Number 1. It is only on one network.
number 2. it is only smoking scenes which glamourise the disgusting habbit.
Number 3. I'm guessing that 'adult-screenings' will leave them how they were (and how they should be for an adult audience [any censorship for an adult audience would be falling down that slippery road (in my opinion)])

Number 4. What is more important—children's health, or keeping an adult cartoon suitable for an adult audience, in its children's slot?

Number 5. Far too many, far too many children smoke. Surely things have to change. Saying that it has aired un-changed for so many years, isn't any use, because children have smoked for many years (I'm guessing), so that doesn't mean it is right. I fail to see what is wrong in this banning, for a station's child 'T.&.J.' audience.

1. One network could lead to other networks doing the same.
2. The smoking scenes don't glamourise smoking. They use it for comic effect, just like scenes involving alcohol.
3. I don't think many adults will want to sit down and eagerly watch Tom and Jerry. It is a children's cartoon, and it was made specifically for children, and thus for a timeslot suitable for children.
4. Children's health is more important, but not if we are going to Tom and Jerry in the argument. It is a separate issue.
5. It's the choice of the children to smoke, and we should let the parents decide what to do about it, but this shouldn't include spoiling a cartoon for others. We may be able to dissuade them through PIFs or adverts, but cartoons won't stop them. Kids will hardly notice the difference if they smoke or not. What they will notice is if a gag has been ruined, just because the character smoking was cut.

Rob, there are many more worrying things in the world than an animated cat smoking a hand drawn cigarette.

And in the larger sense, as long as cigarettes are on sale legally (an endorsement by HM Government if ever I saw one), then adults have the right to choose to smoke them.

It is illegal to sell cigarettes to under 16s, and stores like Asda intend to extend the ban to anyone under 18.

If kids are smoking, then you should be asking where they buy them, and why their parents haven't put a stop to it.

Erasing frames from a 50 year old animation is somewhat besides the point.

Well said, couldn't agree more.

My point is that I think a fundamental change in the way censorship is applied in this country may be long overdue, certainly when it involves the editing of older, classic material to pander to modern sensitivities; sensitivities which in a lot of cases are completely unrelated to any "on-screen representations".

It's the way all politically-correct decisions are made - if those in positions of authority actually had the brains to realise that a little bit of consultation and debate with those supposedly "affected" could go an awfully long way without upsetting as many people, then we wouldn't be in the damn mess we're in today!
What the hell is the social side of education for if the big, bad world is going to be laden with rules and barriers to prevent upsetting anybody?!

That statement is false for a start. These old theatrical shorts were not made for children, though that's clearly how they are seen these days.

Well, they contain childish humour, as well as subtle adult humour which children won't get. Thus, they are now shown in a pre-watershed timeslot. But children still enjoyed them, and still do today. I really don't think they are going to view things like blackface, smoking or Mammy Two-Shoes too seriously, and they aren't going to be influenced by them.

Also, the Mammy Two-Shoes element was dubbed by Turner in the mid-1990s, but this is one of the most memorable things about the old cartoons. I still say it's ridiculous that the smoking thing will come from only one complaint, rather than hundreds.

One final thing is The Simpsons episode "Itchy and Scratchy and Marge", which sent up the whole idea of editing out the fun bits of a cartoon, making them less well respected as a result.

Very valid comments here.

Seeing an authority ridicule something can glamourise it. If a child sees an obvious censor, it could irritate them.

This is madness. Show me any evidence at all that children start smoking following being exposed to the shock of smoking in a 60 year old cartoon. I doubt you'll find any!

What next? Thomas The Tank Engine being banned because it might encourage chlidren to use scarce fossil fuels? Roadrunner banned because it's constant depiction of things and people being blown up with elaborate setups of TNT might be giving a terrorist tips?

Using fossil fuels isn't so definate as smoking or not.

Also, of course it isn't "I started smoking because of Tom and Jerry!" it is a mixture of things, that make people smoke.

Yes, it is a mixture of things. However why would it be, get rid of everything that encourages / glamourises smoking, except 'Tom and Jerry', because it wasn't just 'Tom and Jerry's fault.