Do we know if anyone in the real world called these episodes offensive or are these cases of the streaming services being a little overzealous in self censorship? If so I can certainly agree with the idea that self censorship (out of fear) can be based in ignorance and I would go so far as to say it might actually fall under the "soft bigotry of lowered expectations" category, in that those doing the censoring don't trust that their audience is savvy enough to "get it." I mean, it's in some ways understandable as every major corporation is panicking right now (it's a sign of the times) but I imagine cooler heads will eventually prevail (I hope.)
In the case of 30 Rock, it was reportedly Tina Fey who asked for the episodes to be pulled, in an attempt to get ahead of the issue before someone else remembered those jokes and called for her head. Nevertheless, that didn't stop The Daily Beast from publishing an article the next day decrying Fey as the most racist woman in America. The writer of the article (a white woman, of course) feigned offense at the show's use of ethnic caricatures for some of its black, Hispanic, and Asian characters - but was apparently not bothered that the white characters such as Kenneth (an inbred hillbilly), Jenna (a privileged white b***h), and Jack (an alpha male Republican dripping in toxic masculinity) were also exaggerated caricatures.
I don't know who made the decision to pull the Community episode.
(Post Edited by Moderator) I get that systemic racism is a real thing and decisions that may seem harmless to the cultural majority can be hurtful to people in minority groups. On the other hand, there is a genuine outrage industry in our culture right now that thrives on making people angry and inflaming the divisiveness that's tearing our country apart. That Daily Beast article, for example, was not written because the author was actually offended on behalf of people of color. It was written because "hot takes" generate clicks that drive revenue for the publication's corporate owners, advertisers, and stockholders, many of whom probably also invest in other publications saying exactly the opposite to a different audience.
I'm of the feeling that context is always important. I have no problem with putting a disclaimer in front of Gone with the Wind. I agree that the film's stereotypes and attitudes are problematic from a modern viewpoint. However, I don't think the makers of the film understood that at the time, or had malicious intentions in making the movie. In fact, they probably saw themselves as progressive for casting black actors in prominent speaking roles. But times have changed, and the movie hasn't changed with them. That's something we can learn from.
I also feel that teaching people how to behave better in the future is more important (and more effective) than punishing them for things they did in the past. Apparently, that puts me in the smallest minority group in the world right now.