Katy Perry song banned from Sesame Street Season 41

[minor muppetz]

It's true that there have been a lot of celebrities famous (or infamous) for certain things. They reworked "Put Down the Duckie" in later years and Pee-Wee Herman's cameo was cut.

I wonder if that removal was really just because of his 1991 controversy as much as it was him being a bit "dated". Other celebrities were also removed from the segment (baseball players, football players, and Pete Seger... I can't imagine why Pete Seger was cut... Then again they did keep John Candy in after his death).

 

[zns]

Personally I see it from both sides of the issue. There are of course worse things in life than what is shown on television. But it's probably better to try and keep things down a notch so they do not create too much of a problem. It's not as if Sesame Workshop is trying to give into political correctness either. It's making sure that Sesame Street can provide a safe learning envorinment for children today without talking down to them like Dora or Barney . In other words, it's about making things better and fun for today's generation of kids.

 

[Jessica]

Meh, I could see why they hated it, if only I could post the most horrifying GIF I made out of it, but it's WAY TOO INAPPROPIATE and awful to the point that I asked God for forgiveness for my sin.

Even if she was dressed as a ballerina, or anything else, it'd still be considered vulgar. She just has that unfortunate figure that doesn't work on Children's TV.

 

[Drtooth]

I don't really know how they'd be able to do that. If you're referring to 4Kids Cartoons, then those are easier to alter. If anything, they could blur the area, but then that'll look weird. They do it on PS with logos on shirts and such.

You can easily do it with live action. Think CGI. They could easily CGI a very large feather boa or CGI alter the top of the dress. Or they could go the "we're gonna be VERY obvious about it" route and just have it tastefully hidden with a big obvious CGI butterfly that just SOOOO happens to be there. And if they need to blur, I still don't see how that's any less awkward looking than banning it all together. They paid the money for the segment, they have so little of it, it's not good for anyone.

Banning completely was a sign of weakness, and a disturbing one at that. Same thing with "I want a Monster to Be My Friend." it took them how many years to realize they could just rerecord it? And honestly, the way those girls sang it in the cover sounds a LOT more suggestive. How much would it have cost to just get someone else to redub the song completely, and just change the offensive lyric. no... ban to cave into pressure. It's like when perverted people started talking about how they hid certain things in Disney movies (some actually were on purpose) and they had to go back and realter the footage. Not because they're admitting to any wrongdoing that was only implied, but because they're fessing up and apologizing for something they didn't do or mean to do in the first place.

And again, who's to say SW didn't argue her down to the compromise of a body suit? I think if anything they should have tried a little harder to get her to wear something less revealing (and more socially acceptable 10+20 years ago... wait... people were dressing like that for a while... hmmm...). Dang thing wasn't even strapless. And i'ts not like we haven't seen low neck puppet costumes before. Cleavage on puppets is a LOT more disturbing, IMO.

Wait, were you making a theoretical scenario, or was Beyonce really on the show (I haven't heard anything, but I don't really care if she's on the show or not)? I especially don't know of her being on every Sesame Street DVD (nothing is on every DVD release, even if they are frequently released).

She was part of Destiny's Child at the time. New Way to Walk.

SW is spineless and pandering to the most shallow adults to ban a video because of some youtube comments...but they made the darned video in the first place because they are spineless and pandering to the most shallow adults to try to convince them that the show is trendy enough to show their kids.

in addition to spoofing the current trends, Sesame Street used to do spoofs of 20s through 60s celebrities/songs too, and have celebrity guests of wider renown, and from a wider range of professions. now they stick mostly to the flavor of the week.

look at the celebrity list for this season. almost all actors in recent tv shows or movies aimed at a young audience (therefore i've never heard of half of them). a couple of comedians, a journalist & a football player. for musicians it's katy perry, the run dmc guy & someone from american idol.

no classical, jazz, folk, or rock musicians, no painters or sculptors, no theater actors, no dancers, no tennis players, no gymnasts, no architects or gardeners or animal tamers, no [insert interesting profession here]. there are only two celebrities of an older generation or who transcend generation (run & mckean). and they're mostly not being used in creative ways, either--they're almost all the word of the day, & which neither spoofs nor showcases what they're known for--it can be done by anyone. so they pick a bunch of b-list actors who are currently enjoying their 15 minutes of fame.

and this is the way they promote it, too. they think they need to convince grownups of the parenting age that the show is still hip, and that it's still the same cool-for-adults-too show as always but still has contemporary relevance. so they point to the celebrity guests & the spoofs, and how current they are. um...so? doesn't mean they're good. & it doesn't mean parents & kids wouldn't watch a less mainstream celebrity...

Things have been like that for a while. Every so often they manage to do older references (does Total even do the "You need X bowls of Corn Flakes to equal the nutrional value" commercials anymore? They've been doing that since the 80's.) even the Walk this Way parody is a reference to a 1980's music video. The fact of the matter is, parody media has been huge since the 90's, and it really blew up last decade with the advent of those TERRIBLE movies. You know exactly which ones I'm referring to. I do say there's very little difference in seeing Jim Parsons now and seeing Henry Winkler then. But there's too much NOW and not enough less topical references. They even manage to sneak in wry political humor from time to time. Frankly, I can't fault them for being too hip, and therefore madTV-esque (an insult, actually) because that's our culture of humor these days. And yes, I think they try to hard to stay ahead of the competition. Personally, I hate the block format and the fact every celeb has to work with Elmo much, much more. If I was a celeb on Sesame Street, I'd specifically ask to work with Telly and or Oscar.

And I've said it a trillion times, it just wouldn't be a season if they didn't have a celebrity come on and sing a poorly written overly laborious parody version of their song to say "I'm so famous I'm on Sesame Street." A) Remember the good old days when they used puppet facsimiles to sing sound-a-like parodies that were actually FUNNY? and B) Puh-lease. Get Weird Al on the phone. Get someone who REALLY can do a parody. That said, this is actually a good one. Unlike Feist's whispsy sing song parody of her whispy sing song song with obvious lyrics... or Jason Mzyzptlix's whatever that was (I agree with Family Guy. Jason Toomanyconsonantscrushedtogether is basically a guy with a hat). I haven't seen a good one since Furry happy Monsters. And this season we were supposed to get 2 good ones. Love Hop this Way.

over all, yes... I get it. As parents the costuming is questionable and they should have got her to wear an ugly sweatsuit like Cathy (ACK!). But maybe it's my philosophy. I agree in not letting kids get exposed to sex... but I don't think the dress is anywhere near that, even though it's a centimeter from crossing the line. I could say something very inappropriate about it, visa visa the target demographic, but I won't. We have to remember, things progress and change. What wasn't acceptable before is totally acceptable today, things that were acceptable aren't now, and people react to things strangely leaving a serious of inconsistencies, double standards, and discrepancies. I watched a legally officially posted episode of Bill and Ted's Saturday Morning cartoon show on youtube, and it had a "Viewer discretion is advised" disclaimer for Drug use that wasn't present or even hinted at.

 

[dwmckim]

My earlier post pretty much says everything i could say about the whole flap, but just to further the discussion and make it more interesting, i thought i'd throw in something that hasn't been covered (insert your own joke here)

As i said before, i think there was an accumulation of little things that all combined made the clip a bit too much aside from Katy's dress (even though that's what's received the lion's share of the attention) but let's focus on the issue of wardrobe for a moment.

I've not worked on SST nor know what their specific practices and policies are (it would be great if someone who has that inside knowledge could pipe in!) but i've done enough acting work to know that one's wardrobe on a tv show is usually handled one of two ways:

1) It's either provided or pre-approved for you by the show's costume/wardrobe department (of course fitted, tailored, altered...)

2) If talent provides their own clothes, it's almost always in the contract or communicated to the talent in some way or another (usually written document) that goes over what may or may not be worn. Not just for "censorship" issues but for basic logistics or preventing day-of-shooting faux pas - you may be asked to avoid certain colors due to technical issues or aesthetics of a scene, of course if you're playing a character, you would wear something appropriate for your character, not wear clothes with a huge designer logo on it or something that may be advertising something else (this is usually one of the biggest bones of contention since it gets into issues of advertising/endorsements), nothing torn, ripped, or frayed, nothing that has four letter words on them (FCC violation), etc. Each production will have its own rules based on the kind of show it is, but it's pretty standard to have this kind of wardrobe "do's and don't's" provided to the talent when they get hired to appear on the show and it's more common than not for that to occur.

Sesame Street, being the type of show it is - a very high profile, heavily scrutinized, partially government funded show aimed at pre-schoolers with the primary objective being educational, i'm sure would most certainly have this kind of policy in place and have a lot of stuff that's covered and outlined in their dress policy. (On a sidenote, pretty much any job regardless of whether it's in the entertainment industry or not has a dress policy if employees are wearing their own clothes) Again, insiders are welome and encouraged to back me up on what the specific case is with Sesame Street, but i'm guessing it's actually a provision of the talent's contract (or probably a mixture of providing one's own clothes and being preapproved or provided before the shoot).

So in Katy Perry's case, she may have actually gone against what was asked of her - and if it was in her contract, that could even be a breech of contract issue. Yeah, SW would bear some responsibility because she went before the cameras in something that ordinarily would not be approved to begin with - so in a way, SW may be seeing this as an issue of "we violated our own internal rules and policies/procedures and people publically noticed and are taking us to task for it" so it may very well be for their own protection.

 

[Drtooth]

I just realized something.

Look at these three UNALTERED G rated Disney character pictures...

Ariel
Jasmine
and
Esmerelda

Now look at Katy again...

Now, of the group, cartoon characters or NO cartoon characters, who looks MORE inappropriate?

The Disney princesses. And they're basically for the same basic demographic.

Now, I'm sure there were complaints on some level there, but not nearly as loud and vocal as that. Take a good look at those Princesses again, and ask me, why DIDN'T anyone think Katy was dressed inappropriate at the time?

Think about it this way. When you watched Ghostbusters as a kid, did you realize what "Key master" and "gatekeeper" meant? Now add to the fact that they sort of showed as much as they could get away with... and the third piece of the puzzle... there was a Children's cartoon series BASED on that movie. And a very successful one at that. Kids either know it or they don't know it.

Now here's another thing I realized. All Sesame Street segments are routinely subjected to testing with children. I'm sure if the test group had any negative feelings about the segment, it would have been pulled before air and refilmed. I still say they should retest kids. And I'm sure they'll come out saying, "Who was that girl Elmo was singing with?" and basically hinting that all they focused on was Elmo.

SW DID get her to wear a body suit, making it look a little less obvious. Pulling without altering the skit WAS for their own protection, sure... but only because they were very panicky about comments on Youtube (again, snicker snicker... go to ANY of their videos and read the comments) and afraid of overzealous parental groups jumping on them.

Because of this, I can see SW policing the heck out of who they hire, making sure we'll have no one relevant to adults, and a very long list of boring personalities that make everyone in the house only want to flip to Nick Jr. as fast as possible to see the VERY same acts guest star on even more juvenile shows without complaint. This is a very disturbing and depressing development, and we haven't seen the last of this.

Oh, and mentioning the FCC... hmm... that now pointless government agency that lets massive mega corps buy up all the stations and media influences they want, while only over-reacting to silly no nos? Yeah. That's protecting us.

Edit: Oh... speaking of Youtube comments, I just popped over the SS's channel to see if I could find any objectionable material posted on their site.

Guess what? Someoone's porno channel spammed VERY explicit stuff, someone else used NOTHING as a platform to whine about illegal immigrants (in NO capitals with the worst spelling a human could possibly have). Yeah... I'm SOOO glad SW pays very close attention to their comments.

 

[Jessica]

I don't see your point with the Disney princesses to be honest. Yes, they have cleavage, but it's not ( )( ) which is the whole problem with Katy's. It's not just you see SOME, they're VERY visible from all sides. Had the dress been in black, it'd be different.

 

[Katzi428]

I took a look at the video yesterday & wondered if they were out of their minds letting Katy Perry be dressed up like that for a little kids' show! My Gosh! Jim Henson,Joe Raposo,etc. must've been rolling over in their graves!
I'm personally glad they pulled it! (My 3 year old niece likes the song "Hot & Cold" But she doesn't watch Sesame Street anymore. And I'm sure if she still did & the skit wasn't pulled my sister in law would have had a FIT!)
OK..rant over.

 

[antsamthompson9]

I agree with Oscar and SSLfan. There was nothing wrong with it, and the kids would have been paying more attention to Elmo. I noticed the dress and everything, but I didn't think it was inaproprate.

 

[dwayne1115]

personally I think this is just was Katy and Sesame Street needed. Now they are all over the news, and we know everyone loves a scandlle and everyone loves drama. Now people will be watching Sesame to see if there is something else that needs to be band, and some people will feel sorry for Katy for being banned from Sesame Street.