Which is the greater evil?

[JockSporran]

1) MAKING a joke (e.g. cartoon, TV sketch, film scene) that laughs at an innocent person being harmed

or

2) CENSORING a joke that laughs at an innocent person being harmed?

[naomi24]

I wouldn't laugh at a joke about an innocent person being harmed because I don't think that would be funny, but I don't much like censorship either. Whether or not I would call the situation you describe 'evil' would depend on the nature of the joke.

[Cheesefreek]

Definitely number 1 - censoring is an emotive word that makes most people fight against it - but in this case I wouldn't call it censorship, I would call it inappropriate, tasteless and callow

[naomi24]

But surely one's perception of taste is a matter of ..... taste?

[heathfield]

There's also such a thing as ethics, Naomi. That aside, a philosopher once pointed out that all jokes are based on ignorance in one or other of its very many forms, which means they all take advantage of innocence,

[jojojojoanne]

jokes are social signifiers

[123everton]

Nietze said "there's no such thing as a joke" but he was a miserable sod.
One man's meat is another man's poison, personally I don't like jokes that are too cruel there does need to be a boundary.
I don't know how or why people think Jimmy Carr is funny.

[mibn2cweus]

Apples and oranges. Contrasting one evil against another does not change the distinction. Fruit is fruit and evil is evil. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Censorship obscures the reality behind the intention. Hiding a tigers stripes does nothing to make tooth and claw any less deadly nor does silencing a snakes rattle make its venom any less lethal and denying an idiot incapable of human compassion of that which makes them laugh does not make them any less an idiot.

Responsibility and consequences, not censorship, are the essential elements for maintaining freedom of speech.

[ludwig]

Depends entirely on the joke.

Ficticious man slips on banana skin and bangs his head - not a very evil joke, shouldn't be censored.

Joke about a real person, perhaps someone that's just been murdered in a terrorist atrocity - quite evil, probably better to censor it out of taste and courtesy to the persons grieving friends and relatives.

..which jokes fall into which category of course is entirely subjective.

[Ankou]

i agree with ludwig, the q reminds me of the �joke� that billy connolly made on stage about kenneth bigley around five yeas ago.

for those that don�t remember billy told a london audience during an on-stage live performance that he wished mr bigley�s iraqi captors, who threatened to behead the british engineer as they had two americans, would "just get on with it".

generally i like connollys humour, but sick? yes of course and quite probably evil - even if without evil intent. i don�t know what censoring would have achieved in this instance really, but if it had been done you could hardly call it evil.