@GoodRobotUs

Yeah, there were so many cartoons in the 90's that I can imagine being edited somewhat for today's mindset. Animaniacs, somewhat. Rocko's Modern Life, definitely. Cynics attempting to reveal their views and point them out to a younger audience isn't constructive. It's more like revealing a huge "spoiler" that dampens a kid's wholesome view on the world.

What is a 'socially vulnerable' child? Anyone who's spent any time in a school playground soon realises that children are not socially vulnerable except in a few unfortunate cases, and those kids need help, not sanctions.

As Terry Pratchett once said, it's lovely to hear kids playing, as long as you aren't sitting close enough to actually hear what they saying....

One more thing : among other defenders of Fredric Wertham, you can find James Reibman and Daniel Patanella.

James E. Reibman is responsible of the Wertham Archives. He published many articles and book chapters in order to defend Wertham, including "Fredric Wertham : A Social Psychologist Characterizes Crime Comic Books and Media Violence As Public Health Issues" in the collective book "Pulp Demons : International Dimensions of the Postwar Anti-Comics Campaign" (Fairleigh Dickinson University Press/Associated University Presses, 1999). Excerpts :

« ... The publishing history of [Seduction of the Innocent] and vilification Wertham personally endured are anything but democratic. For example, the Book of the Month Club selected [Seduction of the Innocent] as an alternate choice and planned to run in its club newsletter a favorable review by Clifton Fadiman. However the Club abruptly cancelled both the offering and the review. »

« More disturbing was the news Wertham received from many bookstores and outraged book buyers who found their copy of [Seduction of the Innocent] had pages 399 and 400 missing. These pages contained the bibliographical notes where Wertham has listed the publishing sources for the book's illustrations. Apparently, Wertham's own publisher, Rinehart and company, succumbed to pressure from both comic book publishers and distributors and agreed to have the offending pages excised. Thus, a finished book was mutilated, neither with the knowledge nor the consent of the author. »

« Today both the vilification of Wertham and the harmful effects of violent comics continue. (...) Eclipse Comics published in November 1985 a lurid series of books under the cover title Seduction of the Innocent ; and vicious caricatures (2) of Dr Wertham appear in many comic books. » (Pulp Demon, op. cit., p. 252-254)

About Patanella, I have much less details. I just know he wrote the article « The Persuasive Techniques and Psychological Validity of Seduction of the Innocent » in the International Journal of Comic Art (vol. 1, n° 2, fall 1999, p. 76-85.).

Finally, there is also Amy Kiste Nyberg, who wrote a critically acclaimed book about the history of Comics Code (Amy Kiste Nyberg, "Seal of Approval: The History of the Comics Code", University Press of Mississippi, 1998). She doesn't really defend Wertham, but she concedes he may have had some good points.

Funny, I saw some old shows of the 1970's Batman series and I found nothing wrong in Batman and Robin in their tight outfits.

And I was something like 5 years old at the time and this was some TV re-runs that were still going on in the early 90s.

Now Wonder Woman turning young girls into Lesbians????
I thought he might have been more conserned about young boys being turned on by Wonder Woman....

But yet again, I was young around the age of 6 to even see old re-runs of Wonder Woman and yet my puberty hit me when I was 12.

While some critics have their points, even anti-gamers have their valid points, But the real thing that not many of them have understood that sometimes children see things differently than what adults do.

What an adult might see something as harmful to their child's development might be so innocent in the kid's eyes.
I hope I am not like that when I have kids.

@ GoodRobotUs Yeah, it took me a while to realize about Mr. Humphries (sp?). I have heard the phenomenon you talk about as "backchanneling", I think. The lack of the backchannel for adults in Barny is what the author of the article I read about it in says caused the backlash against it.

So basically it can be said that some objectors to a medium are only going on about the backchannel in the story, the subtext that is to appeal to outside of the primary demographic.

Who is right and who is wrong? Well, going by the state of the media in question today I'd say it's obvious. They've abandoned the CCA and no one has raised a stink in a long time about it. The subjects in question usually just go with the times. They use the pages of comics to address their fans and engage them to think about the world around them and it's goings on in a way that the news never will. Comics are far more powerful than the "old fogey" crowd will ever be willing to admit. As with every medium ever in question.

Finally, Beaty notes, Wertham actually never advocated censorship: He wanted a rating system to keep the most violent of comics away from kids… The comic-book crackdown, according to Beaty, was caused by unscrupulous publishers who were unwilling to regulate themselves until forced to by a huge public backlash…

Sounds strangely familiar...

@Soldatlouis:

Quoth Reibman & Patanella "Today both the vilification of Wertham and the harmful effects of violent comics continue"

So I guess I can't presume these folks are anything resembling an objective source? Hell, we've got Ann Coulter trying to rehabilitate McCarthy, why the heck not?

As for me, I don't give a tinker's damn what Wertham's good intentions were. In fact, I think they should stand as object lesson in what we actually get when people call for "just a label".

Racism in comics, eh? That certainly hasn't changed much but that's because racism in regular society has sold the farm yet.