ghostshrimpfacebook-b ghostshrimpfacebook-b

Ghostshrimp Exposes the Hypocrisy of Cartoon Network

Ghostshrimp (aka Dan James), an artist on Adventure Time and The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack, is currently developing his own seven-minute pilot for Cartoon Network called Mars Safari. This is a peek at some of the pitch materials:

A few months back, Ghostshrimp posted some of the pilot’s insanely fussy notes he received from Cartoon Network’s standards & practices. They include such gems as:

The gang would need to be wearing seatbelts in this car.

This pooping bit would need Rob [Sorcher]’s okay before we elevate for Stu [Snyder]’s approval.

We’d need to see color models for the Alien guys here. There may be some issues with them stealing the car radio as it could play like an offensive stereotype

The references to the Afterlife would need Rob’s okay before we elevate for Stu’s approval.

Mister Nuggets suggesting that Bull Goose has mental problems would need Rob’s okay before we elevate for Stu’s approval.

It raises the question, If Cartoon Network is worried about such trivial matters, why would they greenlight a pilot for someone who openly jokes about incest and rape on his Facebook fan page? Ghostshrimp’s latest Facebook update asks, “But what would you do if you woke up and your mom was giving you a hand job?”

An earlier Facebook posting, which appears to have since been deleted, asked, “If you could rape anybody, ever, anywhere, who would it be?” This is a screengrab of the post (click for a larger version):


It’s the height of hypocrisy for Cartoon Network to be so finicky over innocuous gags expressed in an animator’s cartoon, and yet turn a blind eye to a show creator’s public persona, which would be considered genuinely offensive by many people. The art we create is a reflection of our values and principles (whether we intend it to be or not), and when someone treats serious subject matter in a flippant manner, that attitude will inevitably seep into their work, too.

This is fine, of course, if Cartoon Network embraced the crude ideas of the artists they hired and if they’d given Ghostshrimp a long leash to explore his unconventional sense of humor. But the standards & practices notes tell a different story: Cartoon Network goes to great lengths to preserve a veneer of decency, while ignoring the fact that some of their show creators are anything but decent.

  • Andrew

    Boy, GhostShrimp sure made a mistake accepting a friend request from CartoonBrew.

    The guy’s PERSONAL life & facebook jackassery should have no bearing on Cartoon Network’s professional dealings with him, and should not be posted and held up to public scrutiny on a blog like this. Dan’s a nutcase, sure. He’s also a hell of an illustrator. Leave the guy alone. Anything he posted was for his facebook friends, not for Cartoon Brew. And anything he made for Cartoon Network was for Cartoon Network, not his facebook friends. Why should this represent any kind of hypocrisy?

    Gilbert Gotfried provides the voice for countless G-rated animated projects. He also tells the world’s filthiest sex jokes and 9/11 jokes in his adult material. One shouldn’t and doesn’t interfere with the other.


    This report was a swing and a miss, to say nothing of the dangerous precedent it creates for our facebook pages to be treated as fodder for muckraking.

    • amid

      Andrew – If you had bothered to read the post, he posted all this material on his public fan page on Facebook, not on his personal Facebook account.

    • David

      I agree with this completely. This is a very weak article from Cartoon Brew, and illustrative of Amid’s tendency to let his personal views get in the way of objective journalism. This seems, primarily, an attack on Ghostshrimp’s Facebook persona, but is masquerading as a comment on Cartoon Network.

      If Amid disagrees with the content of Ghostshrimp’s status updates, it seems as though it would have been better to debate this on Facebook, either privately or as comments below any offending status. To bring this onto an external website, and jeopardise the guy’s professional career, seems unfair.

      • Ghost Schlump

        Nope – you’re both wrong and Amid is totally right.

        An animator who jokes on his own personal website about ‘Rape Vans’, for any and all web users plus potential employers to see has no place as the driving creative force on a commercial channel.

        For Cartoon Network to turn around and nitpick about his characters wearing seat-belts is absurd in the extreme and speaks of an extreme confusion and hypocrisy at the top of the tree in that company.

        Rape ain’t funny – and there’s something seriously wrong with you if you go around spouting it in public as a calling card for your ‘out-there’ humor. It’s not some private frat-dorm chat – it’s how he wants the public at large to perceive him.

        Are you all seriously suggesting that it’s acceptable for Cartoon Network to commission a show from someone that uses rape and incest his default stock-in-trade punchline on his public Facebook and personal website?

        It’s not exactly going to net them the next Spongebob…

      • Snagglepuss

        Why wouldn’t it net them the next Spongebob? Ren and Stimpy and Invader Zim were both given from filthy comics, and there was a weird forced sex scene in that Meanwhile… where those aliens made that guy have sex with a chicken (that he ended up marrying!) Those two became characters in Zim later, besides. The joke is done better than this guys’, but Zim is the second biggest money maker for the Nicktoons channel, and is a huge influence on so many.

    • James


      The Ghostshrimp page is viewable to anyone. No “friend” requesting required

    • I completely agree. This is just a personal attack by Amid via Cartoon Brew that has no bearing on the artist’s professional work or its entertainment value to me, the viewer.

      The second I started reading this I was HORRIFIED. As an animator and friend with other animators, artists, etc. I know of those whose humor in their personal lives is much more obscene and graphic than the kids movies they animate professionally. Does this make them a bad person? NO! They’re adults, they’ve lived a full life with experiences, they’re not children, they shouldn’t have to pretend to be, and most importantly: not all people are the same! There is not ONE brand of humor that ‘decent’ people have. Just because their humor is dark doesn’t mean they can’t create something lighter, say for a kid’s network? Oh man, I’ve seen some foul and perverse comics done by old and current Disney animators.

      This entire article is a personal attack and one that basically says, “If you don’t have the same tastes and humor as Amid and Cartoon Brew, you have NO RIGHT to create cartoons for public consumption.” Garbage.

      Congrats Cartoon Brew for being a shining beacon of personal judgement. I’m sure Cartoon Brew would lynch a homosexual for being openly gay working on a heterosexual film, but only after posting all about their ‘dirty’ life for all the world to see.

      • Ghost Schlump

        You’re missing the point entirely.

        Here’s a guy who is given the fantastic opportunity to produce his own show for a commercial network and is happy to place images from said show, paid for by said network alongside pretty much the most distasteful humor imaginable.

        Here’s a network that will send off memos private internal emails about characters wearing seatbelts whilst the content they’re paying for is online, amongst dullard gags about rape.

        Geez – who’s saying anything about discrimination of any sort here? A network should be paying more mind to how the artist working for them is promoting himself in public, if they want the characters in his pilot to wear seat-belts so kids won’t copy them.

        If they want the Happy Go-Lucky Rape Van Hour to air during Adult Swim then there’s no problem here, but if they want seat-belts on sharks then maybe they should ask their creatives to tone down their public profiles before handing over a bag of cash to them to go make a show for kids.

        Who knows what the Nine Old Men got up to in private – the point is Disney didn’t let them waltz around in public saying ‘here’s a great rape joke, by the way go out and see Bambi’.

      • Julian

        I agree, despite weather you feel the article is fair for using an opinion or not, here are some facts. Cartoon Network is watched primarily by CHILDREN. Many , if not most, children do NOT understand rape and why it’s a serious issue. This guy has been invested on to make a show for children, so you would expect his public FB page to reflect and respect that. Now I agree he won’t change who he personally is, but you see nothing wrong with him saying that in place many kids could possibly see it, Daniel? Ok, lets say you have a job outside animation, and you publicly make a rape joke in front of your customers and co-coworkers. You would find it odd you were fired? Is that where you’re coming from? Because this is what this guy is essentially doing, and getting away with it it seems.

  • eeteed

    amid said “…The art we create is a reflection of our values and principles…”

    the art we create for OURSELVES is a reflection of our values and principles.

    commercial art portrays the values and principles of our client.

    if cartoon network had a list of all of its values and principles, and said that no person could work for them unless said person shared all these values and principles, they would have NO persons working for them.

  • amid

    commercial art portrays the values and principles of our client.

    If that were the case, then every piece of animation on TV would be exactly the same. But South Park has a completely different worldview from Adventure Time, and neither show is anything like King of the Hill. Artists will find a way to put something of themselves into their work regardless of whether its personal or commercial.

    • Obo

      Isn’t this why there are so many “the views of this product don’t necessarily reflect the views of the network. blah blah blah” disclaimers out there.

      I just don’t see the controversy here. CN didn’t ask this guy to be their mascot. He isn’t a human face on a show like Andrew W.K. Should CN make sure to visit the FB pages of all their employees to make sure they reflect the values and opinions some executives have?

      Artists rein in their views and opinions all the time when dealing with employers. The only difference between this and southpark is southpark is popular and powerful enough to take a stand against CC forcing their morals and opinions on a show, and even that isn’t 100%

    • I’m curious what the motivation is here. Are you seriously concerned for the young viewers of GhostShrimp’s work? Or were you simply commenting on the hypocrisy implied by CN’s standards and practices, and it inadvertently came across as criticism of GhostShrimp?

      I don’t know you, so I can’t judge your seriousness. perhaps this was your version of a public service announcement, but for all I know you wrote this while bathing in a tub of dead Bunnies’ hearts. What I know for sure is you maintain a standard of “reporting” that is just enough to keep me coming back. Similarly, I know nothing about GhostShrimp’s true character other than the fact that he draws funny stuff and makes me want to see more. That’s all I need to know, everything else is just incidental.

      • amid

        Gavin, I think my motivation is clear and that’s that Cartoon Network is exhibiting a lot of hypocrisy by hiring Ghostshrimp to make a cartoon.

        For example, I don’t have an issue with the following S&P note, “We’d need to see color models for the Alien guys here. There may be some issues with them stealing the car radio as it could play like an offensive stereotype,” UNLESS that note is going to someone who writes on their website:


        Ghostshrimp is publicly posting racially-charged stereotypes, and Cartoon Network is asking him to change the color on his character because it might inadvertently be seen as an “offensive stereotype.” That sort of willful ignorance on Cartoon Network’s part defies common sense.

      • eeteed

        @ amid

        If a family friendly company like Disney or dreamworks asked you to do some writing/reporting aimed at kids for them, would you turn them down because a while back you posted a story here about an art exhibit that featured he-man and friends in adult and immoral situations (accompanied by uncensored images)?

      • Jon H

        Because we hold artists responsible for what they do on their own time and we hold networks responsible for what they put on the air.

        I really can’t see this as anything but an incredibly passive-aggressive way to try and get this guy fired. You know how this industry works, you know that Cartoon Network isn’t going to read this and throw away all standards for what they air, if this does anything it will get Ghostshrimp fired or shut up and create a chilling effect where any artist who wants to work in cartoons.

        This guy is making jokes, I honestly think that rape jokes are odious and he should be criticized for making them, but not on the grounds that cartoon network either has to allow rape jokes on their channel or not hire people who make them off the job because no artist has a personal life that would make it past standards and practices.

  • Dan Kyder

    The only reason this sort of thing becomes an issue, is by people trying to stir up drama by telling people its an issue

    Like the three or four people who write in to the broadcast standards agencies to complain about some inane little detail that the tens of millions of other viewers didnt care about.

    Next up- furries working on Kung Fu Panda! Entire film series written off because 0.2% of the production team find the cast sexy.

    • OK, this comment made me laugh out loud.

      I have to generally agree that this is mostly a non-issue. I’m working on a project right now where we are in revisions over what amounts to corporate timidity. I also can’t say the media group (said corp.) doesn’t have a point; what with an environment of SLAP suites from other businesses, and social conservative action groups (that fund litigation with tax free money).

  • Murray Bain

    I don’t find those notes insanely fussy,pretty standard BSP for a kid’s show. c’mon amid,just because someone says something off color online,they can’t work in children’s TV? south park & king of the hill are adult shows. Admittedly,he should watch what he says if he wants a young fanbase but it’s a bit big brothery of you to call this out. What if ghostshrimp loses his pilot because of your “Journalism”? (Obligated now that you muck raked it into the public ) I don’t like rape humour either, but he has a right to say what he he deleted it!! have you found any juicy stories in pen ward’s trashcan?

    • Jon H

      I’m pretty sure Pen used some R rated words on his twitter, is Cartoon network hypocritical because they won’t allow them on Adventure Time?

  • Tony

    So unnecessary, Amid…”Cartoon brew, the animation tabloid”.

  • I don’t mind the notes; they should be expected on such a show that obviously. However, I also wholly support Amid’s comments on this man’s immature, thoughtless and obviously misogynist comments. He should not be working on a show that will reach children.

    Cartoon Network has got to do a better job of knowing who their suppliers are.

    • This network notes are fine.

      The guy’s personal views (or persona’s views) should have no bearing on his employment.

      Cartoonists -especially in humor comics -will often mine the unsavory. At their best it’s like Robert Crumb or Dan Clowes or Eddie Murphy or Mort Sahl. While there may be a precipitous drop off in quality from top tier gender or race based humor to the standard morning show hacks, the ability to speak about these matters (even in ill-conceived and thoughtless ways) must not be stifled.

      If we call on networks to only contract with artists who have nothing but “kid friendly” portfolios, we may not be too happy with the results.

  • Jorge Garrido

    Those comments aren’t all that funny, but they were clearly trying to be, in a Louis CK kind of way.

  • I have to agree with Murray Bain. The BS&P notes weren’t out of line with anything I’ve seen coming from a kids TV broadcaster. They were actually quite reasonable.

    Sometimes what looks like a good story simply isn’t a good story.

  • Nicole

    I don’t doubt Ghostshrimp’s talent, I just wonder why people who behave like this get to have pilots, or even shows. It must be a “who you know” factor, because if I wrote politically incorrect content on my website or fan page, I would probably lose my clients AND friends.

    I understand these statements are meant to be jokes They just aren’t funny in the context of Facebook. Ghostshrimp should take this act to a comedy club and see how he does.

  • Stefano

    I totally agree with Nicole and I want to defend Amid’s work. This post, I think, it’s not aimed to insult Ghostshrimp or to point out that CN’s notes are silly. I think it’s all about the way CN is developing its series and its brand. Why continue to produce those weird pilot that seems a sort of lysergic trip? And then have care to make them politically correct? It’s completely stupid. There are a lot of people able to tell great story, out there, and make great tv shows… why employ someone that needs to do very stupid jokes to make people laugh? I haven’t understand if this series would be produced for a young audience, if so this is going to be the nth show produced by CN totally out of target.

  • Old Man Father Time

    If you link his Facebook page here, wouldn’t it prevent his chance of ever getting his cartoon okayed anyway!?

    And I will give them a T-shirt for Christmas that says “Run it by Rob before Stu’s approval.”

  • Derik

    I was wondering why there was a painting of a rape victim in the backgrounds of Adventure Time….

    • Snuggleplus



  • Bob

    I fall entirely into Amid’s camp on this. What do artists owe us a human beings? Nothing … other than their art. However, when an artist is an odious human being, that always seeps into their work. More important, consumers of art do not have to purchase (or do business with) objectionable people. If — in some fantastic science fictional world — the content on Dan James’ public Facebook page would also be found that of, say, John Singer Sargent, I could never really look at that artist’s work again in the same light.

    There’s a very good fine arts blog that addressed the question of what artists owe us — it can be found here:

    Thanks for bringing this up, Amid.

    • “However, when an artist is an odious human being, that always seeps into their work.”

      no, it does not. Anti-semitist and not-so-nice-character composer Richard Wagner is a prime example of the contrary. Another good example is the writer Céline.

      The history of art is dotted with despicable, unfriendly, self-centered characters who made great art, anyway…

  • Michael

    I’m not sure what you’re criticizing here, Amid. Is it the artist because he’s offensive or the Network because it’s skittish? You seem to be suggesting that an artist who is offensive MUST always be offensive. Which is a fairly fuzzy-headed idea. You also seem to be suggesting that a network shouldn’t deal with “edgy” artists unless they are prepared to let them go wild. Broadcasters are REQUIRED to limit art. In fact it’s what they do. They do it with notes but also with development decisions, with budget decisions, with scheduling decisions etc. They are gatekeepers. If you don’t like the game, then don’t play. Get real. And by the way, there’s nothing “fussy” about those notes. They are standard broadcaster thinking. They might be a pain in the ass but notes always are.

  • Marina

    I think that a lot of the shows success (at least in my older teen peer group) comes from a warped mind trying to see how much he can get away with. Rules and prohibitions can aid creativity. And remove unfunny jokes about rape and other lurid sex acts.

  • The Flea

    I actually agree with Amid on this one. I have no issue with GhostShrimp’s sense of humor (in fact, mine and his are simpatico), but it IS unusual for CN to hire someone with a HIGHLY abrasive public persona to create a children’s cartoon. What do they really expect? Surely they could have just rejected the pilot and told them to take it to Adult Swim or some other network instead of stifling who he actually is.

  • With the End of the Creator-Driven Era in TV Animation, you can stop worrying about what your creator does in real life =P

  • DonA

    Cowardly. I’d love to see Amid put John K’s personal life under the same Cartoon Brew microscope. I’m sure you’ll find more skeletons in John’s closet than you will Ghostshrimp’s.

    • Dirge

      I’ve never seen John K. joking about rape on his public forum.

      • Snuggleplus

        Just in his sexist cartoons.

      • these where aimed at an adult audience.
        and i haven’t caught John making these weird out of place jokes. John is not about “look at me posting these controversial remarks”.

      • well he has, sooo….

      • Snurglepulse

        Isn’t that the reason he’s not getting work in children’s animation? A lot of remarks about “hippie CEO’s” and how “good cartoons should be masturbated to”? Or did I miss something? (I do see a lot of blog entries how his stuff wasn’t put on the air for being toooooooooo funny!)

      • it depents on the context of the joke and who post the joke. Personaly i think Johns cartoons don’t go to far, altough some things are just on the edge.
        But he does not make random jokes wich are out of context like: what would you do if your mother gives you a hand job or anything like that. this joke has no purpose, it’s only there to be vulgair. And John does not go promoting his stuff with senseless remarks like that.

    • yup

      [Comment removed by editors. Per our commenting guidelines, “Stay on-topic. Comments are not a place to post random thoughts, “say hi,” or discuss ideas not directly related to the post.”]

  • Scooch

    I’d be a little less offended by this guy’s comments if that cartoon didn’t look so God awful.

  • HC

    Cartoon Network’s development execs hired this guy because of his ‘edgy’ perception. They apparently believe that such hires give them cred as a cutting edge cable entity. That can be their little fantasy. If there is an issue with content created by said hire reflects on the parent company, it should have been clearly stated in the contract agreement. If it’s not in there, Cartoon Network is saving money on hiring really competent legal help. Maybe they went for an attorney with ‘edge.’ God knows ya gotta have hip barristers, or you’re just not a player.

  • “It’s the height of hypocrisy for Cartoon Network to be so finicky over innocuous gags expressed in an animator’s cartoon, and yet turn a blind eye to a show creator’s public persona”

    You mean like how Ice Cube from N.W.A. does “Are We There Yet?” movies and a dirty comedian like Eddy Murphy does “Dr Doolittle” films or how animator Danny Antonucci did an animated short called “Lupo the Butcher”, but then did a cartoon called “Ed, Edd n Eddy” for Cartoon Network?

    • amid

      The difference is that Ghostfish is promoting himself and the pilot on his fanpage while expressing himself through these kind of statements.

      Antonucci didn’t associate himself as the creator of “Lupo the Butcher” and use it as a publicity tool for “Ed, Edd n Eddy.”

      Cartoon Network has hired an artist with an inability to censor himself in public forums. They’re hounding him over the most trivial matters in his work while ignoring how he’s promoting the pilot he’s making.

      • Snagglepurse

        So if you influenced Cartoon Network to fire Ghost Shrimp over this, would this be a victory for you? Or would it be if Cartoon Network standards ignored their instincts and allowed an offensive cartoon to make it on the air?

      • Ghost Schlump

        So, Snagglepurse – are you basically saying that you think someone who’s trademark humour is based entirely around rape, incest and masterbation should be at the helm of show for kids on a kid’s network?

        Who knows what John K does in private? He might go around telling everyone his five latest rape gags on a weekly basis, but he sure as hell doesn’t do it in public, on a website promoting himself and his work on a kids show for a kid’s network.

        Yup – Ren & Stimpy was gross out stuff, and his work could be construed as having lots of sexist connotations, but there is a HUGE difference between making a bad taste misogynist gag and repeating one-note humour based around rape, for crying out loud.

        If Ghostshrimp loses his pilot over this then great – he’s obviously not that interested in his work being on a kids channel, so he’s free to shop it around elsewhere or use his own finances to make it like 100s of talented animators do these days.

        If Cartoon Network cleans up it’s act and maybe looks a bit further for talent than it’s own backyard, then all the better.

      • Snurglepulse

        Man. I don’t know his trademark humor. And neither do you! He’s a relatively unknown quality! And that rape joke was more of an offensive joke for offensive’s sake than a joke about rape, but that’s picking hairs. If you were offended, it’s not my right to take away your offense, just as it is not your right to take away my offense at this witch hunt.

        Cartoon Network also deserves a hand for promoting from within. God bless a company you can work your way up within instead one where you hit a dead end because they bring in folks from the outside.

        Ren and Stimpy: Adult Party Cartoon was homophobic, in a way that was dumb because they were, after all, Ren and Stimpy, two characters who may as well have been small piles of rubber, but in an off putting way nevertheless. John K once said that he made the Ripping Friends because he felt men were getting too effeminate. He said both these comments as kids were committing suicide in schools, and homophobia was rampant and instituionally accepted. He probably didn’t mean to have any of this come off as homophobic, and it can be interpreted as just against a certain attitude instead of an orientation. So I bet everyone on this website, a big supporter of the guy, is pretty glad these comments didn’t get put up as weird off color comments to be hated and over analyzed.

        We don’t know the guy’s sense of humor, really. We will though if he gets a series.

        Also, Cartoon Network has a show where a man made of butts runs about a creature who spits up boogers. Who cares?

        And historically, from Jhonen Vasquez to John K. to Rocko’s Modern Life, to the R. Crumb Power Hour (ABC, 1981-1984), the filithier the cartoonist, the better the cartoon.

      • Ghost Schlump

        There’s no denying the guy is a talent and looking at his work it becomes pretty apparent why he’s been given a crack at his own show.

        GhostShrimp seems not to care a jot how he’s perceived and more power to him. I guess he’s just young and doesn’t know anyone who’s been raped – I wouldn’t know, as I don’t know the guy – as you correctly point out.

        But when he’s potentially the main creative force of a show aimed at children and can’t self-censor in relation to the product, Cartoon Network should maybe consider a word in his ear about that.

        If he wants a bite of that kiddie market cherry that could set him up for life it’s up to him to either compromise his artistic integrity for awhile and censor himself or maintain the edgy identity he’s creating by doing something for a more appropriate audience without compromise.

        Geez Man – I’ve got kids. The art of Mars Safari looks pretty good, I wouldn’t be surprised if they went for it hook, line and sinker but I’d have the right to be pretty angry if they went surfing one day and saw a bunch of rape gags alongside their favorite characters.

        In fact, I’d have every right to sue the hell out of Cartoon Network and GhostShrimp if I found a lawyer canny enough to think he could make a buck doing that.

        GhostShrimp can afford to say and do whatever he likes – he’s an artist. Cartoon Network is a company looking to pick parents pockets every time they go down the store and sell as much commercial space on their channel as possible. They can’t do whatever they want – they have to work within standards and practices.

        If they’re paying him for a kids show, and asking him to stick seat-belts on sharks it’s crazy that they’re either allowing him to post the art from that show in a self-promoting forum with humor that dark, or aren’t even aware of it.

        It’s just a big barrel of litigation waiting to spill over.

        Maybe you’re right and Amid should have kept this to himself – or maybe he’s saved Cartoon Network from a raft of lawsuits and promoted GhostShrimp to a project that he’ll be more suited to by raising the guy’s profile and making him the hero of animators with a perverted sense of humor.

        Me, I’ll just reserve the right to stay pretty disgusted anytime someone repeatedly uses rape as a laugh-a-minute gag fest regardless of their very obvious talent in their chosen artform.

  • Dirge

    Wow, Cartoon Network is getting more and more inbred every day. Everything on there looks like Adventure Time now. It’s as if they didn’t care how idiotic this guy is, they just see that Adventure Time style in his work & instantly gave him a pilot.

    Time to mix it up a bit, CN. I can guarantee you that there are a lot more mature creators out there with amazing show ideas you can develop.

    • Old Man Father Time

      That’s the way CN works now. The shows they pick are either 1.) created by someone who worked on another creator’s series on a lower position, usually a personal friends of there’s and bonus points if both went to CalARTs (Adventuretime, Chowder, Flapjack, and Regular Show all share various storyboarders between them), or 2.) adapted or spun off of an already-established money-printer (Ben 10). The evolution of cartoon shows in this country have always been “inbred” from past shows to the point where they are lost in identity.

  • Scarabim

    “But what would you do if you woke up and your mom was giving you a hand job?”

    The hell?

    This is that guy’s idea of humor?

    It’s not “edgy”, it’s sick.

    I don’t like that guy.

    And I don’t like his cartoon either. And not because the guy’s a facewad. The cartoon is horrible-looking and braindead, and has none of the daffy charm of Adventure Time, the success I’m guessing Cartoon Network is trying to duplicate via Ghostshrimp’s drivel.

    I don’t feel sorry for that guy. I hope that if Cartoon Network is dumb enough to use his stuff, that it watches what he does very carefully. CN is not a gallery for offbeat “edgy” artists to fart around in. It’s a network that children watch. And yes, I actually do think that CN should take that into consideration when reviewing the work of a would-be show producer. Thank goodness CN does have Standards and Practices. Or at least standards.

    • i agree!
      That adventure time crap is being watched by kids and cartoon network is a family oriented channel. It’s just unprofessional posting creepy remarks like that on a public facebook account or what not. His jokes are totally out of place. The fact is that cartoon network is being associated with her employees and should tell him to stop making these remarks on his professional accounts.

      Wouldn’t it be creepy to learn that a program like yo gabba gabba is created by a pedophile, do you still have the same view on that program after found out about that? same thing! you always going to associate this guy with that program.

      I think Amid did a good thing telling his opinion about this matter. He’s not desperately trying to get this guy fired. He’s only showing how hypocrite the situation is.

  • Larry

    Studio gives notes! Animator is immature! Amid is a shameless muckraker!

    This is a non-story.

  • Hank

    If mars safari were remotely interesting, funny, or good looking–I suppose I’d care more. The witless posts of this dan james is all the evidence anyone should need to see this junk isn’t worth pursuing.

  • James

    Well, Ghostshrimp has worked on two very successful CN shows. Makes sense that CN would gamble with an “edgy” (and successful) personality in an attempt to get an edgy new show to rake in the profits. The low-budget animation only sweetens the deal.

    Besides, I doubt any of the parents that watched the show like a hawk with their kids would really “research” beyond supposed subliminal messages in the show itself.

  • AmPhotog

    In a corporate world fixated on “brand image,” and on guard against public backlashes of Political Correctness, CN hiring an artist with such baggage is quite a risk. Public perception cannot separate the artist from the art. It is like hiring George Carlin or Sam Kinison to entertain at your six year old child’s birthday party.

    • Kevin Martinez

      Pixar sure didn’t have any qualms about hiring Carlin for the first Cars. And he was Mr. Conductor years before THAT. Do your RESEARCH.

      • AmPhotog

        I was aware of Carlin’s work. However, my point was not directed at the artist, but how the general public today cannot separate the perception of the artist from one project to another.

    • Ted

      I will take this opportunity to point out that George Carlin was Mr. Conductor on PBS’s Shining Time Station…

  • “The Love Bug”

    “The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm”

    Disney’s “The Little Mermaid”

    Rankin/Bass’ “Jack Frost”

    “The Music Man”

    Anybody ever see Buddy Hackett’s nightclub act?

    If every performer’s talent was judged solely on his/her personal life, past indiscretions or individual viewpoints, how could anyone be acceptable for anything?

    • Ryoku75

      Buddy Hackett didn’t go around in public spouting rape jokes.

  • Ghost Schlump

    I totally agree with Amid here – if an animator is happy to joke about rape on a public forum, as if something as horrendous as that is an hilarious punch line, Cartoon Network, or another other production company should consider things carefully before employing them as the driving creative force of a show in the first place.

    I don’t doubt the guy is a good artist – his work on his site is sound, but for Cartoon Network to commission a show from someone who jokes on his personal blog about ‘Rape Vans’ and then nitpick over characters wearing seat belts is absurd in the extreme.

    That’s the story here – how can a channel like Cartoon Network not screen a talent is beyond me. I doubt they’d hire a director with a career in Pornography – regardless of their talent or creative intentions – so what’s the difference between that and a guy who thinks that one of the most perverted, gross, vile acts that could be perpetrated to another human being is a bottomless source of gags?

  • Derp

    Amid has become the Matt Drudge of animation.

  • doobleydoo

    The official Dan Vs. Facebook page jokes that Dan was raped by a clown in his childhood.

    Just saying.

    • axolotl

      …Shatner. I’d rape William Shatner….
      …Wait, what were we talking about?

  • Rajesh

    We put dogs and horses “on a leash” for a reason. We like their power, but also want to control it, not letting them run totally free.

    This is simply Cartoon Network saying “when you’re here, these are your limits”. They’re harnessing his creative energy for their personal gain. The same way an artist tells his pencil what and what not to do.

  • Confusion

    Heehee. Rape. That’s a real knee slapper!

  • Thomas Hatch

    Hahaha, Amid you hilarious bully!

  • Albert

    I read comments and think “Guy’s, you know we have XXI century? Kids use facebook more often then the you look trough windows.”.
    It sound like censorship but if you run a company that want to get to the kid you have to remember: it’s only take one kid to discover ghostshtrimp page and then ask question: “mommy, do you give me hand job while I sleep?”.
    If you hire a guy who jokes about rape it’s crazy to try to tell him not to do rape jokes.

    • Zib Zabzo

      “It sound like censorship but if you run a company that want to get to the kid you have to remember: it’s only take one kid to discover ghostshtrimp page and then ask question: “mommy, do you give me hand job while I sleep?”.”

      That was really funny Albert!

  • tgentry

    I’m not really clear who this is an criticism of, Cartoon Network or GhostShrimp…

    I don’t see what the big deal is with working with an artist/comedian/anyone and asking them to tone down their work for your forum. Chris Rock has edgy humor, but he didn’t bring it to Everybody Hates Chris because it wasn’t appropriate there. Most likely they had silly rules, some of them their own, some of them probably handed down from the FCC. Was UPN wrong or hypocritical in working with Chris Rock?

    Artists have a right to be multidimensional. Just because you want to be edgy in one place doesn’t mean you can’t do something “clean” somewhere else. Ask someone like Shel Silverstein. An artist should also understand the forum they’re in. If GhostShrimp is offended or surprised that a major network is acting like a major network, he should take his cartoon to the Internet, where things are much less stifling. I just don’t get what the fuss is.

    • Jon H

      Exactly, if this post was about Cartoon Network standards and practices I’d be interested. If it was simply calling out Ghostshrimp for his callous and offensive sense of humor I could see the point, although I’m not sure that it’s bad enough to necessitate public shaming. Mixing the two issues together just seems to me like muddying the waters and putting all network artists at an increased level of scrutiny just so Amid here can get passive aggressive about someone who personally offended him.

  • tgentry

    After rereading this post, and the comments, I’m afraid I’m removing Cartoon Brew as a bookmark. I’ve been on enough sites and seen enough witchhunts and holier-than-thou people, so eager to label ‘hypocrits’, ‘phonies’, and anyone else that doesn’t meet their narrow view on what is right in the world. I’ve found the best thing to do is just to leave them alone with their negativity, so that’s what I’m doing. As an aside, I don’t any of these many, many negative posts on CB has ever had a single positive, constructive influence on the animation community. They’re certainly not why I’ve come here over the years and I won’t miss them. I would love to see Jerry do a blog alone that celebrates and showcases the world of animation without all of the bitterness and pettiness. Goodbye CB.

  • Snuggleplus

    Amid really loves those click views huh? More than he loves animation I guess. Or at least interesting animation. Forget MLP, this is the death of creator driven animation, when dumb things creators say are plastered as
    fireable scandal. Hoo boy. You’ve chosen to create a scandal where before there was none. As always. You want to be the news. Good luck getting there, but try a more humane approach. One that builds instead of destroys. If you can I guess.

  • what_in_the_cel

    I really hope this guy doesn’t get his show cancelled because you don’t agree with his sense of humor Amid. Seems like you don’t like what he’s saying so you went and told on him. If he’s doing anything wrong let him get caught on his own and let his bosses decide if he should be reprimanded or not. There are people that do have harsh senses of humor because they understand that there are certain things you just don’t do, so joking about them is funny because it’s so uncalled for, so not safe. “Nothing is sacred” is sense of humor most people don’t understand. But not understanding it doesn’t give you the right to condemn him here. I personally know several big named show creators that talk just like this outside of Facebook. Are they to be condemned too because they don’t put it in writing? Would you stop watching Warner Bros. cartoons because of the things the guys at Termite Terrace did outside of making a cartoon? No one ever said cartoonists had to be saints, and tattling on them seems kind of low. And if I looked at this right this is his personal fan page for his art, not the official Cartoon Network show page.

  • Bob Harper

    Jack Cole, Carl Barks, Wally Wood , the gang from Monty Python, Paul Reubens all created work for kids and adults. I don’t see the big deal about participating in more than one market, and the notes address what they think will fly in the kids audience. if it were an Adult Swim Cartoon then those notes probably would’ve never get made.

  • Tom

    Great, I was just wishing Cartoon Network would have some kind of reason to ban all its employees from posting any material related to their shows. Thanks for ruining the fun, Cartoon Brew.

  • Rick R.

    We may put dogs and horses on a leash, but I don’t understand something

    A) How does all CN make a brand of all the really bad drawings that make up Adventure Time and this? I know there was the UPA backlash to Disney, but really, most of the CN, Adult Swim, etc stuff is painful to the eyes and looks like stuff most ten years olds would crumple up if they had drawn them.

    Why is the current school of animation all about giving the finger to basic draftsmanship and appealing character design?

    • Snagglepuss

      Hey, all those fans seem to dig it!

    • Ryoku75

      With todays flat angular crude designs it saves time having to draw around figures and opens the door to creativity and quicker production.

      It also produces garbage that any child can draw.

    • In large part in agree with your sentiment, but I find the Adventure Time character deseigns to be incredibly appealing. They’re have a kind of satirical adorableness to them that’s funny in and of itself.

  • Amid,

    These kinds of posts are only going to make things worse for all of us. Way to go.

  • Adam

    Rebecca Sugar has some illustrations of children (Ed, Edd, and Eddie) going down on each other which were spotlighted here. She works on Adventure Time. Where’s the torch and pitchforks for her?

    • Jorge Garrido

      It’s not about obscenity, it’s about politically correctness.

  • Tony

    [Comment removed by editors. Per our commenting guidelines, “Stay on-topic. Comments are not a place to post random thoughts, “say hi,” or discuss ideas not directly related to the post.”]

  • AJ

    One’s personal sense of humor (likable by you or not) has NOTHING to do with his ability to work within parameters acceptable to an employer. Amid, the point you’re trying to make completely undermines creative, free thinking people who are ALSO successful in the professional world of art. Instead of targeting someone who works hard and aims for professional success in a manner that is unique and genuine to himself, why don’t you spend your time putting together the whole picture to make a valid point instead of this moot one. How about researching ALL artists who ever had rash senses of humor or tasteless personal opinions and the correlation of their ability to create successful content acceptable for children. You might actually learn something valuable about what you’re trying to express and not shine a negative spotlight on the future of creator driven shows. Big, fat, loud, BOO on Amid for force feeding the public the notion that creators should only be allowed vanilla thought sensibilities in all aspects of their lives. This only makes things more difficult for anyone creative who ALSO wants to make a career out of their talents. So way to go you jackass. (oh wait, can I say ass and still keep my job now?)

  • Yvette Kaplan

    While my comment refers to what is obviously, at best, only 1/2 of Amid’s post–I’m going to add to what others have said about the Cartoon Network notes: they are not at all fussy or random, they are actually quite sane, mild and logical, and the same exact Standards and Practices notes I’ve received as a director on kids shows for over twenty years. You can’t show kids engaged in dangerous, imitatable behavior (helmets and seatbelts are required in all vehicles), and any questionable content (for kids) of course gets run by key execs. The notes listed aren’t even vetoing the gags– maybe Ron or Stu will say “fine, go ahead.” And there are many occassions of show creators rewording or reworking material to “slip it thru” standards. These notes actually leave a window open for that to happen. CN is totally on track here.
    I’m kind of speechless though about the much more troubling half of Amid’s post, including the “outting” and its implications. But it seems accurate to say that in this world, where every thought and action can be instantly judged and worse, acted upon in ways we can’t predict, both GhostShrimp AND Cartoon Network should be more careful.

  • Ryan

    Quick, everyone de-friend Cartoon Brew on facebook. Otherwise you’ll be next in line for a career-wrecking article.

  • My mama done told me when I was in kneepants that if you joked about alcohol, drugs, and sex on Facebook that it’d come back to bite you in the ass. Listen to your parents, kids. Because they’re older – and know stuff.

  • Toast

    Great…I can’t believe a lot(not all) of the readers sees it as an article reprimanding Cartoon Network and not Ghostshrimp. The article just stated the obvious, Shrimp is er… vulgar. So basically the article praised Shrimp for exposing CN’s preposterous decision making.

    The point is if CN wants a SAFE cartoon hire a SAFE cartoonist slave not er… you know. It’s like Nickelodeon asking R. Crumb to make the next Dora the Explorer.

  • Ted

    I am deeply offended that someone in the FB screencap refers to “Jack Nicholas”, not only misspelling The Shining actor Jack Nicholson’s name, but potenially misspelling golfer Jack Nicklaus’s name at the same time.

    Also, I’m deeply offended that I missed the Mr. Conductor comment immediately below the post I was previously responding to and made a shadow post.

  • Agreed!

    I’m guessing the point was CN is being a real pain in the ass you guys, I mean, giving GhostGimp a 10-15,000 dollar check to produce a short then brow beating him w/ notes.

    BTW, I can’t see the short, I can’t see the Facebook post in question either so looks like GhostPimp bowed down to an all mighty Network Pimp Hand.

    In all fairness Networks have mighty Pimp Hands.

    And Cartoon Network has NETWORK in it’s name fer’ crying out loud. Coincidence? I think not.

    I’m curious to hear from GrossLimp what the reason behind that is. I’m sure he doesn’t want anyone rocking his boat but on the other (non-pimp) hand he did put some abrasive stuff out there so weird that he’d back up off it (as I’ve been told they say in the streets). We all have our price I suppose. Or maybe he was just a victim of bad decisions and now he’s doing some mandatory clean-up. Who knows.

    I think he has talent and I think the real issue here is how much are Animators and Animation Artists a victim of the perception that animation is for children? Not a genre but a medium. I think that’s probably what Amid was trying to get at right?

    But what do I know. In the end, I wish Ghostshrimp all the best and hopefully he still manages to get his vision through all the negative(/positive?) attention.

    Wish the short was still up :-/

  • Old Man Father Time

    Oh. Look at that. The video was REMOVED BY THE USER.

    Hmmp. – _ –

  • A Painter

    “I’m Still waiting for your daughter”

    lmaooo wow

  • BT

    There is no hypocrisy here. The notes are for his pilot, not for his rape jokes. If they were writing notes for those I’m sure he’d have to run it by Rob also.

    This post made me cringe, but I think I would respect it if it was written in a straightforward manner. In my opinion Amid should just come out and say that he believes Cartoon Network should fire the guy because of a, b and c. I think he’s uncomfortable coming across like Tipper Gore so instead of writing the words “fire him because he offends me” he just implies as much in this transparent, passive aggressive way.

    I don’t know anything about the guy. His jokes (at least in the context Amid has presented them) are dumb and unfunny and I tend to have no respect for people with that type of humor. But I’m not really comfortable endorsing this type of background-check muckraking either. There were all kinds of crazy stories about John K. in the ’90s and if they were true I’m glad they didn’t prevent him from making Ren and Stimpy. Maybe Cartoon Network should choose what cartoons to produce based on the quality of the work?

    • amid

      BT – Like you, I think the humor he uses to promote himself is dumb and unfunny, but I have little feeling about it beyond that.

      My issue was plainly stated: Cartoon Network’s S&P notes make no sense when Ghostshrimp is promoting the pilot on his website and public Facebook fan page alongside material that is clearly inappropriate for the show’s target audience. Why is Cartoon Network hounding the guy about political correctness, but allowing him to promote his project publicly through the crassest means possible?

      • Dan Kyder

        Probably because the notes aren’t their own opinions- merely broad industry and countrywide staples that pressure groups and angry moms have insisted inflicted upon them. No smoking, no drinking, wear seatbelts ect.

        Until a mob of moaning people bombard them with demands to stop working with crass people, then its not in their own interests to delay the product for issues that aren’t even issues

      • Another Artist

        Here’s why the notes might make sense:

        1. Cartoon Network has standards and practices that they follow.

        – Some are standard to set a good example for kids: all characters buckle up when they are in a moving vehicle.

        – Some are standard to avoid offending certain groups: Avoiding the appearance that the thieving aliens represent poor immigrants, or avoiding making light of religious beliefs or mental illness.

        These standards wouldn’t be trivial or picky to parents or the groups mentioned. If you chided GhostShrimp for complaining about how fussy the notes were, THAT would kind of make sense.

        2. CN is giving notes and influence content on the commercial work that GhostShrimp is producing for them. It’s not their position to monitor or control what he says in his free time. (Even director commentaries on DVDs come with a disclaimer!)

        3. CN gave these notes because — even a pilot needs to pass BS&P to be produced, and to be considered as a series. Giving notes now avoids getting shot down because someone was concerned about BS&P. It’s nice that they were willing to have the boss review the jokes rather than simply veto them.

        4. Unless the promotional posts were CN branded or sponsored, you could easily argue that they didn’t know about them. It’s hard to know for sure whether they were turning a blind eye to his Facebook jokes or not. Any claim that they did is speculation.

        —-As an aside, it seems likely GhostShrimp thought his crass jokes were funny because they were outrageous and taboo, the adult version of getting a thrill “saying a bad word” . He might also have meant them as satire– a grotesque spin on banal questions like, “If you could have lunch with anyone…” — or an absurdist response to a question about color. Insensitive, maybe, but not worth affecting the guy’s career. Do you REALLY think he actual racism or rape are funny? — beyond the very human tendency to mock & belittle awful things?

      • CJ

        This I can agree with. In this case, he should have put his FB on private to distance the two. Despite this, even though his humor isn’t my cup of tea, I don’t think this kind of behavior is shocking when you consider the other people CN has hired and what work they do on the side.

        All in all, I’m gray on this matter.

      • And you know, maybe Cartoon Network will ask him to put it on private if/when the pilot gets picked up. Right now, they’re just covering their asses with regard to the content they’re paying for, which is well within their rights.

  • ctrayn

    I think the real travesty here is how many Cartoon Brew readers don’t know how Facebook works.


    Because we all know Group pages are such friend whores.

  • Anonymous Shrimp Hater

    [Comment removed by editors. Per our commenting guidelines, “It is OK to post with a nickname or alias, but your email address (which we will NEVER share publicly), must be a real, permanent email address. Comments with fake or non-permanent emails will be deleted.”]

  • tredlow

    The way I see it, this article is pointing out that what Cartoon Network has done is like hiring Quentin Tarantino to make a movie, and telling him that there can’t be any violence in it.

    I am neither a fan nor really care about Ghost Shrimp, but why hire a guy who’s famous for something, and tell him not to do that exact thing?

    And sure, he makes rape jokes, but while a cartoon will always, one way or the other, reflect the cartoonist, will the TV show really reflect the part of him that makes rape jokes? Do you really think that the guy has no filter, and that he puts rape jokes in everything?

    The only real issue I’m seeing here is that children who watch the show will look him up and find his Facebook page.

    Also, can’t it just be an Adult Swim show or something?

    • Ted

      Might it be more like hiring Quentin Tarantino to direct an episode of ER and then telling him he can’t have swearing in it?

  • Anonymous Shrimp Hater

    [Comment removed by editors. Per our commenting guidelines, “It is OK to post with a nickname or alias, but your email address (which we will NEVER share publicly), must be a real, permanent email address. Comments with fake or non-permanent emails will be deleted.”]

  • Rajesh

    The real hypocrisy is in the world we and CN live in. “It’s okay to tell dirty jokes, but better make sure your cartoon characters are wearing seatbelts, or parent groups will sue your ass.”

    • tredlow

      Actually, it’s;
      “It’s okay to tell dirty jokes, but make it so that kids don’t understand it.”

  • CJ

    @ Ghost Schlump:

    “An animator who jokes on his own personal website about ‘Rape Vans’, for any and all web users plus potential employers to see has no place as the driving creative force on a commercial channel.”

    Well if this is the case then why aren’t people all in a rage about some of the artists who worked for EEn’E? Some of them drew underage erotica of the main cast and I see none of them being chastised for it. Or what about John K? While Amid has a good point, there are many artist (visual and comical) who make “inappropriate” jokes all the time but still work in industries that are targeted for a younger audience. In fact, some the portfolios of these people are just as raunchy and “inappropriate” as Ghost Shrimp’s humor.

    To be fair though and realistic, seeing how this show was aimed at a younger audience maybe he should have put his FB on private or had a disclaimer of sorts.

    “Rape ain’t funny – and there’s something seriously wrong with you if you go around spouting it in public as a calling card for your ‘out-there’ humor. It’s not some private frat-dorm chat – it’s how he wants the public at large to perceive him”

    Neither is murder, genocide, matricide, fratricide, and various other topics that are comically hinted at or exploited. Just watch Ren & Stimpy, Rocko’s Modern Life, Adventure Time, South Park, Superjail! (which has made fun of murder, molestation, and rape) and many other shows that exploit various forms of murder for a joke. Humor isn’t objective obviously, and just because his jokes aren’t your cup of tea doesn’t mean that he’s any less of an option to pitch or promote a show through.

    “Are you all seriously suggesting that it’s acceptable for Cartoon Network to commission a show from someone that uses rape and incest his default stock-in-trade punchline on his public Facebook and personal website?”

    Which begs to question how is it excusable through other artists like John K who’s done all of the above but not for this guy? I understand both sides of the issue. If guy is making a show for children then he should not be making rape jokes on a public FB show where kiddies can see. At the same time to criticize his sense of humor when many other artists exploit these themes for their humor is a bit hypocritical.

    If this guy is such a big bad, then we should criticize any artist who works in a children’s industry and had art, videos, ect on other sites that make jokes that are inappropriate to a younger audience. And that would be a lot of people to out.

    • Because most of those raunchy playful drawings stay in the locker room, we all have our fun doing them to amuse each other. But to make a name of oneself as a professional douchebag and encouraged to be vulgar just for the sake of it, reminds me of Tom Green’s 15 minutes of fame.
      John Waters and George Carlin did it with class and style.

      • CJ

        @ allari

        I don’t disagree in the least. Personally if I were GhostShrimp I would have set my FB to private with the kind of commentary he is making. I don’t find his sense of humor particularly funny, and as you said before, it’s the way you tell the joke that makes or breaks it.

        And yes, most of them are in the locker room, but they’re not all there, are they? The fact that they can be easily found in numerous numbers in various chans and other sites is testament to that.

    • Ghost Schlump

      CJ – I can totally see your point of view, and I agree with alot of what you are saying.

      I totally agree that artists have always (and should) push the boundaries of taste to the extreme – whether you’re talking about Tex Avery or John K – and whatever they may said and got up to out of the public eye might have made anyone blush.

      Yup – in cartoons Bugs Bunny pulls out a gun and shoots his adversaries and even turns it on himself. Yeah – in John K’s work Stimpy and his cousin go into a cupboard and it’s hinted that they play with more than Fisher Price. I can’t seem to recall ever seeing Woody Woodpecker being raped by Chilly Willy for some reason, though.

      The difference here is that this guy seemed to have a one-note obsession with a particular subject which is particularly distasteful and was building his public profile around it. In a mock interview with himself in the side bar of his public blog he just went on and on about rape like a broken record, whilst the rest of the page contained nicely realized images of his characters for his kid show that a commercial network was paying for.

      As Amid has said – the issue here is Cartoon Network sending out memos about seat-belts whilst the guy who’s created this series cracks-wise about rape in public, alongside images of the potential show.

      I work as an independent producer and you better believe that when I’m paying someone to do a job for me I would go insane if I found them sticking images of our project on their blog next to frat-boy rape gags. An as an employer, with contracted staff it’s not only my right, but my BUSINESS to see how they conduct themself IN PUBLIC with a property I’m investing in when they’re working for me.

      I want talented staff but I also want professional staff – not someone who’s going to embarrass himself and lead to litigation for me.

      Even Shrimp himself must have realized his screw up – cos all the rape gags and images have suddenly gone. If he was right and we were all wrong why has he suddenly gone to the effort to clean up his act?

      • CJ

        “The difference here is that this guy seemed to have a one-note obsession with a particular subject which is particularly distasteful and was building his public profile around it. In a mock interview with himself in the side bar of his public blog he just went on and on about rape like a broken record, whilst the rest of the page contained nicely realized images of his characters for his kid show that a commercial network was paying for.”
        – – – – –
        This I did not have the chance to see in full. I presume he’s removed a lot of the content in question. If this is the case then I agree more with you and Amid than GhostShrimp.
        – – – – –
        “I work as an independent producer and you better believe that when I’m paying someone to do a job for me I would go insane if I found them sticking images of our project on their blog next to frat-boy rape gags. An as an employer, with contracted staff it’s not only my right, but my BUSINESS to see how they conduct themself IN PUBLIC with a property I’m investing in when they’re working for me.”
        – – – – –
        This I can agree with as well. If GS where doing a pilot for AS that would be one thing. But from what I gather, this pilot was supposed to be for children. As stated before, if this were the case, then what he was saying and doing in a easy to access public forum was inappropriate.
        – – – – –
        “I want talented staff but I also want professional staff – not someone who’s going to embarrass himself and lead to litigation for me.”
        – – – – –
        You should be a writer for CB lol. I don’t mean that in a bad way, it would be a good thing. I think a lot of what you’re saying is probably what Amid was trying to say but went about the wrong way of expressing it. All in all, from the pov you’ve given, I agree whole heartily.

      • Ghost Schlump

        Thanks CJ – much appreciated!

        Aside from my righteous indignation over the guy’s dubious fascination with a certain subject, there’s no denying he’s a very talented artist. His background designs on his site are pretty unique and full of character detail.

        I think, as Amid tried to get across, it’s Cartoon Network who are most at fault here. In commissioning a show from a guy who’s over-the-border humor they must be aware of it’s up to them to give him the rules and regulations on what he does with the property.

        If he’s not prepared to clean up his act in public – and why should he, it’s a free country – then they probably should think twice about giving him the chance to produce a show that they’d be looking to cash-in on kid’s lunch boxes, t-shirts and talking clocks and place his talents on a more appropriate, adult orientated project (which he’d probably prefer anyhow).

  • Isaac

    Amid, the intended or unintended gist of this article is that you don’t want Cartoon Network picking up Mars Safari. It doesn’t come off as a criticism of CN’s S&P at all, only as a criticism of Dan James.

  • M. Seegz

    I wish I could unlearn that the creator of my two favorite CN shows is a lowbrow, racist and misogynistic douche. I don’t care about CN’s business practices so much as I care about this louse’s sociopathic sense of humor. I mean, wow.

    Oh, and rofl, this is like the only time the Brew has ever cared about racism.

    • Jon H

      If it helps he hasn’t actually created any shows yet, they’re still making the pilot for the first show he’s created.

  • Lurker

    I am a long time reader of Cartoon Brew, however I have never felt the need to comment on a post until now. Let it be known that I am not an animation professional; just a guy who enjoys cartoons and animation. I would like to be the first (I believe) to say I think this Ghostshrimp character is funny. His humor is obviously satirical, and because of this thread is doing exactly what the creator intended: GETTING HIM ATTENTION! There most certainly can exist a disconnect between his work for CN and his personal work. Hell, Tom Araya from Slayer has been singing about Nazis and Satan for 30 years, but is also a devout christian. Amid, your posts on Cartoon Brew are invaluable to countless folks, Cartoon Modern and Inside UPA sit prominently on my bookshelf, but this does seem like an unjustified attack.
    Godspeed Ghostshrimp!

  • Peter J Casey

    this is why I don’t post much on facebook. For fear that it will one day comeback to haunt me even if I didn’t mean what I posted at the time.

  • big bad balloon

    Can Ghostshrimp make crude jokes about racism, masturbation and rape on their facebook fan page? SURE!

    Right alongside artwork for a kids show? well…no.

    It’s a FAN page – meaning people(kids included) are open to see all the wonderful cool artwork from a cool kids show. Also they get a nice dose of “who ya wanna rape”. Oil and water.

    I agree with the POINT of the article – that rape jokes and art for kids show shouldn’t be on the same page.

    Good riddance to the idiots who think they’ll actually be missed when they prudently “unbookmark” CB. Get a grip.

  • There is a weird tabloid logic at work here.

    On the one hand I commend Amid for calling out Ghostshrimp on his uninformed offensive bs, and publicly shaming him by posting about it here.

    That much is solid. And I even think it would be commendable if the guy got dropped by CN as a result.

    But I don’t follow the logic that this has anything to do with CN, or that there’s any implication that CN advocate this? Do we even know what they say about it?

    CN have bought a show from the artist, they haven’t bought the artist themselves or purchased their business, so (as is also the case with any rapist) Ghostshrimp is wholly personally responsible for his actions and to blame for their outcome.

    The argument that CN are practicing hypocracy by hiring a man who then does something unsavory, firstly doesn’t even make chronologic sense, and secondly carries the worrying implication that a public figure should only ever be a mouthpiece for their employer.

    Buried in here is the difficult ‘freedom of speech’ issue that any individual employed by a company should still be free to act publicly as an individual, so Ghostshrimp should correctly be free to post whatever stupid shit he likes.
    Then you have the wholly separate issue that if ‘whatever stupid shit he likes’ is wholly inappropriate, then an employer has every right to drop them.

    But we should at least wait until CN even hear about this before retroactively holding them responsible.

  • let’s not lose sight of the real enemy here…. ‘hipsters’

  • Nicole

    We’re a competitive industry: thousands of artists make it their life’s goal to one day have their own TV show.

    This is what stems such anger towards CN and Ghostshrimp: the cavalier and immature attitude towards having such a privilege.

    If having a kids show was Ghost’s dream, the rape jokes are not elevating his prestige as an artist. He clearly doesn’t know what a special opportunity he has, has made it clear he doesn’t deserved it.

    • Karen

      People don’t just “get the privilege” to have their own show. People work hard, come up with an idea, and then a company decides to invest money into that idea. Then that company earns millions off of it, sharing very very little with the person who actually came up with it. Ghostshrimp doesn’t owe the network anything except what they’re paying him for, to come into work and make the show that will earn them viewers. You’re acting like he should completely change who he is and be humbled and grateful because a huge network decides to leech off of him. He’s an investment, not a “chosen one”.

  • Animators have to be a little crazy, how else can we entertain? I made a few cartoons about Emo’s and poking fun at them and their suicidal tendencies. lol

  • Samjoe

    Wow, I was actually thinking of clicking on the
    media page to see some of his work and why Cartoon
    Network was being pissy. But did some more reading.
    threw up in my mouth abit,and thought this whole thing
    was a bad idea.

  • Ryoku75

    Wait wait wait, Cartoon Network has standards?

  • jim

    I think people are missing the real point here, if ghost shrimp had either not made incest, racial, or rape jokes (which most of which weren’t funny) publicly viewable on his facebook page then this would not be an issue. private lie is one thing but profession life is another. if he want to do the indie thing fine but when making a cartoon for kids you should at least have the common sense to know how to present your self to the public.

  • While I’m not condoning the statements made on the Facebook page, these personal attacks are getting entirely out of hand.

    There’s some great info on this site, but these types of articles threaten to negate that. Many articles of late have seemed petty and not at all objective.

    Please turn it around.

  • Zib Zabzo

    Talk about hypocrisy. The Brew itself is guilty. You guys put up the Out of context animation blurb with a link to famous cartoon characters in what appears to be sexual situations. Mickey Mouse gettin’ it up the A** by a sofa chair? Take a look in the mirror!

  • The Realworld

    No surprise here, a lot of these people who work for CN have potty mouths that they seem to run freely on their personal (public) sites and blogs despite being in a central position on a popular children’s show, while the rest of us are worried we’ll get fired from a low profile job simply for posting a picture of ourselves with alcohol on Facebook. Heck even the people who work on Network shows are more conscientious about how they’re image is seen. And they don’t do shows for children! Thing is, being a cable cartoon show exec has to be one of the best jobs there is. You get paid a lot and can go “hey, I made that”, yet not have to worry about public image because nobody outside the animation industry gives a crap about you.

  • It’s time for Ghostshrimp’s Mom to weigh in here. I will not comment on Cartoon Network, but on the nature of Dan’s humor. The writer of the article is mistaken in the assumption that what someone jokes about is to be taken at face value as an indication of their values. Has not the writer ever heard of, say, Stephen Colbert? Does the writer not perceive the very pointed critique embedded in Dan’s confrontative humor–meant to provoke thought and challenge complacency about very tough issues? For the record, Ghostshrimp is a kind and loving son, father, and husband who would not hurt a soul. So find a real bully to pick on, Amid Amidi, and work on your skills at identifying sarcasm, parody, and social critique when you see them.