Have to say, that's pretty much spot-on with The Simpsons

I'm not seeing a problem here if it has actual educational benefit. It's not like they'll just be sat watching the Simpsons, there'll be some work involved somewhere.

Then there is the incentive to read the lines that bart has to write at the beginning of the show. Dangers of not following health and safety in a nuclear plant, environmental issues, health issues re smoking and Alzheimer's in grandparents.

It's funny 'cause it's true

"Parent Joseph Reynolds" is a stuck-up bigot who can't see outside his own tiny little mind.

The level of intellect shown in the cartoon vastly exceeds that of most so-called "educational" material and probably that of the Reynold's dinner table. I think it should be compulsory viewing throughout the country. 20 minutes of The Simpsons is hardly going to corrupt his precious ickle baby any more than reading Shakespeare would, and it is absolutely worthy of similarly serious study.

For a start, theatre in Shakespeare's time was definitely not regarded as high art. Wouldn't it be hilarious if the academic establishment in 3/4 hundred years time regarded the simpsons as today's academics regard Shakespeare? People talk about learning the lessons of history, but one thing they never seem to appreciate and apply is that almost all that is now considered high art was, in it's time, considered frivolous and meriting little attention. (The music of bach, haydn, mahler, the paintings of Van Gogh among countless others (yes, I do watch Dr. Who). J.S. Bach wrote over 300 cantatas, averaging on about one a week for 6 years. Each was only performed once in his lifetime, as the music was regarded as a cheap commodity. And now many of them are considered to some of bach's best work. okay, I may be labouring the point a little.
And even subscribing to the view that the protest is based on (that the simpsons is essentially worthless rubbish), surely one of the points of teaching people to analyse things is to teach them to work out how good or bad something is, and how well it achieves it's desired effect? What is the point in teaching them to analyse things if the only things you give them to analyse are 'quality'? Slightly tangentially, it seems to be the same attitude seen in the teaching of science, that a result that supports the hypothesis is better than a result that goes against it, when it is equally valuable to disprove a hypothesis as rubbish as it is to prove one correct.
As I don't subscribe to the protest viewpoint, I think the simpsons is an excellent resource to teach 'about different aspects of the media; audience, visual narrative, presentation and stereotypes, and some quite high level thinking ideas like satire, irony and parody', for a start, the simpsons was designed specifically to appeal to, and be understood by high school age students? What is the point in making parody a (for some) harder concept to grasp by using a pretentious example, in difficult language, when it can be made easier by using devices and examples they are more likely to be familiar and comfortable with.

sounds like they are just analyzing it in Media Studies, we studied Family Guy in one of our lessons, and Young Ones in another unfortunately the article focuses more of the guys ranting, and less on what hes actually ranting about.

id say angry parent needs to calm the hell down. if they are looking at sitcoms in lesson, then The Simpsons is the best and most successful example i can think of.

And now the truth for all you beautiful people. I have a certain degree more knowledge on the situation due to the fact that the Wench teaches at this very same school.

The gentleman in question, when choosing a high school for his daughter, wanted her to go to the local private school. Neither the Mother nor the daughter wanted this, they both wanted her to go to Kingsmead. The apparent level of bitterness and bad blood in the family that this has caused is simply staggering. This guy's petition has nothing to do with the concept, and everything to do with trying to get at his wife over the decision on where to send the daughter.

And just to make life even more entertaining, Kingsmead get's a better GCSE pass rate in this subject that the school he wanted his daughter to go to!

I actually think that moral standards shown in the Simpsons are far better than you would get in any soap. And as long as the kids are actually learning rather than just watching the show then what is the big deal.

Jon, a very good insight in to the issue.

I was wondering why the OP hadn't given their own opinion. I guess we're not surprised by that story, since it explains the unpleasant ranting rather well.