In what legal sense is the YouTuber with the pug less protected by the "art form" argument than the movie production? Did the latter get a permit for Nazi jokes? (Sincere question, maybe they did: UK speech norms and laws are incredibly alien to me)
In terms of legal sense, since you asked about that specifically - all films shown in the UK(in theatres or released on home media, or for streaming/download) have to be approved by the British Film Commission. If something is approved for release, anyone would have an extremely hard time getting the author arrested for the content - they can still be sued for a number of different reasons, but making a nazi salute in a film with nazis would be allowed for artistic purposes.
A random guy making a nazi salute for a joke and uploading it on youtube is more like documentary evidence of a crime, not an art form. There is a reason promoting nazi salutes is a crime in most of Europe, and it really doesn't matter he did it as a joke - it's simply not a laughing matter. Yes to American ears it might sound weird - that there is a topic that cannot even be joked about or you risk getting arrested. I don't really have a reply for that, other than the fact that it feels right to me, given the attrocities comitted by Nazis against our people - I think doing a nazi salute publicly(and I count uploading videos on youtube as "public"), even as a joke, is not acceptable at all.
> Yes to American ears it might sound weird - that there is a topic that cannot even be joked about or you risk getting arrested. I don't really have a reply for that, other than the fact that it feels right to me
Sure, this is a difference in norms (and law) that I'm intentionally taking for granted, and trying to further understand. If equally-applied, it's a little more comprehensible to me (eg Germany requiring massive game studios to censor Nazi symbolism in WW2 games).
But I have a much stronger revulsion reaction to the idea that the govt should be in the business of deciding whose expression is "actually" art, and inconsistently allowing well-connected creators latitude that nobodies aren't privy to. I don't doubt that there are many people find the Nazi pug funnier than the Father Ted joke (and vice versa); the idea that the latter is uniquely acceptable because a _British govt agency_ decided it was funny is astonishing to me.
