“South Park” and the high price of free speech

It’s been amply established that “South Park” creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone are maestros of phallic humor. No subject is too lofty for a joke related to male genitalia, even if the punchline amounts to little more than a penis’ presence.

What makes these moments count isn’t the exposure but who’s getting pantsed. In 2023’s “South Park (Not Suitable for Children),” Stan Marsh’s father Randy makes balls-out OnlyFans videos as part of a plot satirizing influencer culture. Rewinding to 2016, its “Wieners Out” episode is named for an incel movement that “Butters” Stotch launches by Winnie-the-Poohing it at school.

But it took CBS ousting Stephen Colbert and its parent company Paramount’s $16 million payoff to settle Donald Trump’s ludicrous $20 billion lawsuit to inspire what might be Parker and Stone’s equivalent to Michelangelo’s David, sans fig leaf. “Sermon on the ‘Mount,” the long-awaited 27th season premiere of “South Park,” reproaches the religious right’s interference in public education; MAGA voters’ gullibility; Paramount’s cave-in to Trump over its “60 Minutes” Kamala Harris interview; and Trump’s unconfirmed claim that the company promised him millions of dollars in public service announcements.

Nevertheless, “South Park” ensured that the part nobody will soon forget is the show’s renderings of Trump’s “teeny tiny” manhood. The president’s staff wilts in a series of ridiculous portraits hanging on the White House’s walls. It limply dangles between his legs as he slides into the sheets next to a very turned-off Satan, who dumped Saddam Hussein only to fall for someone who sounds and acts exactly like him. When Trump shows off supposed evidence of his arousal, the Prince of Darkness rolls his eyes and says, “I can’t even see anything, it’s so small.”

Saving the pièce de resistance for last, “Sermon” closes with a deepfake of an obese, pasty Trump collapsing in the desert as his micropeen, festooned with googly eyes, rises to bleat, “I’m Donald J. Trump, and I endorse this message.”

The White House responded by claiming the show “hasn’t been relevant for over 20 years and is hanging on by a thread with uninspired ideas in a desperate attempt for attention.” That was before Comedy Central shared its ratings. The premiere drew nearly 5.9 million viewers on Paramount+ and Comedy Central, and was the No. 1 telecast on cable on July 23. The second episode, which debuted August 6, pulled in 6.2 million viewers on Comedy Central and Paramount+ in its first three days. Now more than ev — um, recently, “South Park” is a can’t-miss show.

Praise poured forth from entertainment journalists of every stripe, with some highlighting satire’s importance in fighting fascism. The “small penis rule,” explained in layman’s terms in a 1998 New York Times story, floated into conversation again. This questionable strategy suggests that giving a character a small penis might shield creators from being sued by the people they might be based on, since claiming that such a depiction is slanderous requires the would-be plaintiff to confirm that he possesses the world’s smallest trouser dowser.

All this glee misses the real measuring contest that’s going on, which is about who has enough wealth and will to fend off this administration’s efforts to muzzle criticism.

Hours before the premiere’s debut, Paramount Global locked down a five-year extension of its overall deal with Parker and Stone’s Park County and South Park Digital Studios, for a reported $1.5 billion, according to the Los Angeles Times. The agreement includes 50 new episodes that will be exclusive to Comedy Central and Paramount+ and grants both the right to stream the previous 26 seasons.

(Comedy Central) “South Park”

As The Wrap explains, this follows a 2019 streaming rights deal with WarnerMedia (which became Warner Bros. Discovery) worth a reported $500 million, which, according to Bloomberg, expired in June. Then, a $900 million deal in 2021 gave ViacomCBS (Paramount’s former incarnation) 14 specials exclusive to Paramount+ while renewing “South Park” for multiple seasons.

Since Parker and Stone signed a deal in 2007 securing a 50-50 split with Comedy Central on all digital revenue, they reap half of the money generated by all these streaming deals. Park County and Paramount Global run South Park Digital Studios as a joint venture.

All to illustrate the point here, which is that the “South Park” creators have very deep pockets and a nearly three-decade track record of not respecting any Cartman-esque claims to authori-tah. If the notoriously thin-skinned Trump sends his lawyers against them, he may be chagrinned to find that what he’s really threatened this politically agnostic duo with (and, vicariously, everyone who can’t stand this president) is a very good time.

It isn’t wrong to celebrate the show’s skewering of a president hellbent on diminishing our First Amendment rights. When Trump is turning the military on blue cities to stifle protest and suing major news organizations over coverage he doesn’t like, watching his “South Park” incarnation flapping his shortcoming in the wind confirms theories about his dictatorial behavior.

Instead, we might take note of how high the price of unfettered free speech has become. Trump’s lawsuits against major media outlets, including social media giants Facebook and X, have gained him tens of millions in settlement cash. For ABC’s parent company Disney and CBS’ Paramount Global, forking over $15 million and $16 million, respectively, to make their legal headaches disappear quickly was worth more than defending their journalists’ integrity in court.

Paramount Global’s recently finalized merger with Skydance Media required approval by the Federal Communications Commission, which is currently headed by Trump appointee Brendan Carr. Trump knew this when he sued CBS. The payout, then, was viewed by many – including the Writers Guild of America and Colbert – as the equivalent of “a big fat bribe.”

Neither cable nor any streaming service falls under the FCC’s jurisdiction, which keeps “South Park” out of its reach and grants Parker and Stone more latitude than their broadcast peers. In fact, they are among the few media figures who can afford to go toe-to-toe with Trump in court — and may even relish the opportunity to subject him to a different kind of indecent exposure.

Another is Rupert Murdoch — against whom Trump filed a defamation lawsuit along with the Wall Street Journal, which Murdoch owns —and reporters Khadeeja Safdar and Joseph Palazzolo. Safdar and Palazzolo share a byline on the Journal’s July 17 scoop alleging that Trump sent a “bawdy” birthday greeting to Jeffrey Epstein that included a drawing of a naked woman, with his signature serving as the woman’s pubic hair.

Trump insists the letter is a fake and probably thought Murdoch would kill the story, claiming as much in a Truth Social post. A reasonable interpretation of why he didn’t is that Murdoch saw no reason to prevent reporters from his most legitimate American media outlet from leading the charge on a scandal that has dominated the news cycle for weeks.

Murdoch’s net worth is estimated by Forbes to be somewhere between $23 and $24 billion, which, as we saw with Fox’s $787.5 million settlement with Dominion Voting Systems in 2023, is gigantic enough to belch up a substantial bag without choking on it.  While that also means he wouldn’t miss anything in the range of the $10 million X paid to settle with Trump and the $25 million payout that Meta forked over, Murdoch is also proud and demonstrably petty. If you’re in for that much, why not fork over a few million more to take Trump to court and compel the administration to hand over documentation clarifying the extent of Trump’s ties to Epstein?

Yes indeed, wealth will buy you plenty of free speech. Murdoch’s cable news propaganda machine has proven that for years. As for what a lack of funding costs our democracy, take a look at what’s happening to Trump, Fox News, and Elon Musk’s common adversary, Media Matters for America.

In May, Trump’s Federal Trade Commission initiated a probe into the progressive research organization to determine whether Media Matters had illegally worked with other groups to negatively impact X’s advertising revenue.

Media Matters described the FTC action to Status newsletter founder Oliver Darcy as a political hit job. A month later, Media Matters filed a civil complaint against the FTC, accusing it of launching a “government campaign of retaliation.”

(Comedy Central) “South Park”

“Now the Federal Trade Commission seeks to punish Media Matters for its journalism and speech in exposing matters of substantial public concern—including how X.com has enabled and profited from extremist content that proliferated after Elon Musk took over the platform formerly known as Twitter,” the complaint reads. “The campaign of retribution against Media Matters must stop.”

This follows a string of lawsuits Musk’s attorneys launched against Media Matters in the wake of a November 2023 report about ads appearing on X next to antisemitic and pro-Nazi content.

Advertisers fled shortly thereafter, although Musk’s endorsement of an antisemitic conspiracy theory that same month didn’t help his case. Neither did it stop him from waging lawfare against the organization, including encouraging investigations into Media Matters by the Republican attorneys general of Texas and Missouri. A Federal Court blocked the Texas investigation, citing First Amendment rights infringement. The Missouri attorney general’s office dropped its investigation.

A July 25 New York Times article enumerates these details. It also says that defending against Musk’s lawsuits as well as investigations by those states’ attorneys general and the FTC have saddled Media Matters with $15 million in legal fees.