If this article's premise (Seinfeld is boring and conventional, Shapiro is edgy and interesting) were true, it would still be problematic, because, simply put, Seinfeld is funny and Shapiro isn't. Shapiro's "act," judging by his Myspace clips, seems to based on the inherent beliefe that naughty words (as well as gay jokes and racial stereotypes) are funny all by themselves, whereas Seinfeld addressed real situations in imaginative, subtle ways.

However, the theme of the article doesn't doesn't hold water to begin with. Far from dull, Seinfeld's show was revolutionary and it changed network TV throughout the '90s. I haven't seen "Bee Movie", and by all accounts it doesn't live up to this standard, but it doesn't change the fact that Seinfeld set one.

I'm glad Shapiro no longer has to give sexual favors for heroin. However, he may have been more talented at that than he ever will be at comedy. The author of this piece is a skilled writer, but his cultural insights are as flawed as Shapiro's act.