Lanterns remains one of the best DC TV series ever, so far, though its third episode has been exceedingly controversial and ultimately brought down its audience scores.

Episode 3 of Lanterns was heralded by most critics as one of its best, but because of its perceived “politics,” it has cut down its audience scores on both Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB. While Lanterns started out at an 89% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes, it is now down to a 77%, below the likes of The Penguin and Watchmen . At a 7.6 on IMDB, that’s the lowest episode thus far by a good margin.

What happened? The “politics” in question occurs when John Stewart’s mother questions the ring and ring selection process by not factoring into the equation that black people are more prone to live in terror than others, therefore “be afraid” when asked. That led to an online audience conclusion in some corners that the show is saying Hal Jordan got the ring “because he’s white,” when the show spells out that isn’t the case. Here’s what I said about this last week:

“It is flat-out said that the Guardians don’t know about the racial differences on Earth; therefore, it is impossible that they selected Hal Jordan “because he was white.” It is also made clear that there were many other candidates who were recruited and failed the test, like John Stewart Sr., without us knowing their races.”

“It’s very clear that what Bernadette is saying here is her specific point of view. She may be right about the experience of black people in America, but she is hardly a reliable narrator in the context of this episode, and is literally proven wrong about her initial plan to train John to be a Lantern (it’s only when he sheds the no-fear training and pursues what he loves in art school that he’s finally recruited).”

The “ Lanterns is being racist against white people” narrative still spread despite this, however, and almost every new low rating for the series mentions “politics” or “woke” or “identity politics.” A sampling:

  • “I don’t understand why writers keep reshaping beloved characters around divisive political beliefs. Do they enjoy the outrage and loss of viewers?”
  • “I thought we learned audiences are interested in being scolded and condescended to. I guess not. The creators seem to know what they are doing since they waited three episodes to lay it on thick, hoping at that point viewers invested enough to stick it out. We will see if that works. I’m out.”
  • “It started strong until the terrible episode 3. Is this 2020 again? Is woke anger cool again? Jeesh just let me watch a fun show without lectures please.”

Is this translating into something that actually hurts the show? Not so far. Lanterns’ viewership has actually increased with each episode since the pilot, including the third episode in question. If there really is some falloff due to people being offended about episode 3’s “politics,” I suppose we’ll find that out soon, but it seems unlikely.

Follow me on Twitter , YouTube , and Instagram .

Pick up my sci-fi novels the Herokiller series and The Earthborn Trilogy .