Made for TV - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-10-2003, 08:36 AM   #1
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 09:38 AM
Made for TV

This takes the cake.
Talk about inbed with the media. I can't believe the lengths this admin will go exploiting 9/11.
It makes me much more sick than the GI Joe landing with the padded crotch shot.
I read another article yesterday but didn't take it seriously.

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16735
9/11 Propaganda, Hollywood Style

By Danny Schechter, MediaChannel.org
September 8, 2003

"In an age when actor Arnold Schwarzenegger embodies a growing convergence between the worlds of movies and politics in one hulking frame, entertainment-oriented media once again manifests their power to influence what we think.

There was a good reason that Time magazine described the coverage of the war on Iraq as "militainment," and there is a good reason that the Bush Administration is turning to Hollywood to embellish the president's declining popularity. Their latest preemptive strike takes form of a movie packaged to remake the historical record on the 9/11 attacks and reelect Bush at the same time."


With the networks all downplaying the real-world events planned for the second anniversary of 9/11, it is not accidental that a made-for-TV movie is likely to draw most of our attention this time around. This is the story behind the making of a cable movie titled "DC 9/11: Time of Crisis," a well-made and insidiously persuasive docu-drama that airs Sunday Sept. 7th on Showtime, a movie channel owned by Viacom, the company that runs MTV, VH-1 Comedy Channel, Nickelodeon and so much more."

...

"So move over Madonna and the Rug Rats and even Leni Riefenstahl, Viacom presents our latest TV superstar: President George W Bush as produced by Karl Rove. the president's in-house Machiavelli, with the help of Lionel Chetwynd, a Republican toady, screenwriter and producer. The production includes the cast of Star Trek, a comedian known for his role as "the ripper," and financial subsidies from Canada where this pro-American patriotic epic was actually made to avoid paying union wages."

...

"And so as your client's ratings began to fall, as Iraq transitioned from the great victory to an unmanageable mess, all the patriotic slogans and political rhetoric began to lose their magic. Soon, the best thing you had working for you was the disarray among the democrats.

But, no fool you, Karl, you had a media card up your sleeve. You had planned for this contingency. You knew well how media and political interests are entwined in a political system that has become a media-ocracy in which candidates need media attention and media companies need access and favorable legislation


Media is power and using media well projects power. As the New Yorker's media writer Ken Auletta put it most succinctly, "Communications is the United States' fastest-growing industry, and is highly dependent on the government's favor." To curry favor and promote their interests, media outlets would soon be favoring the government. "

...

"Rove knew his resume. Chetwynd had produced TV movies and documentaries on POW's at the Hanoi Hilton, Kissinger and Nixon, the Bicentennial, Eisenhower, Carl Foreman, Tom Clancy's "Net Force Bloody Winter," "The Man Who Captured Eichmann," "Ruby Ridge: An American Tragedy" and the Bible. He also did "The Heroes of Desert Storm" and was brought in to finish the "Movie of the Week" lionizing New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani after it was decided that the original script did not portray him uncritically enough.


All of his films including his latest, a holocaust thriller about an American Schindler, "Varian's War" have had questions raised about their accuracy. Daryl Miller's review in the LA Times called it "A mess of a movie that leaves viewers with more questions than answers about Varian Fry ... Clumsily constructed and hollowly acted, it's a project that its lead performers – William Hurt and Julia Ormond – along with Barbra Streisand's Barwood Films, should quickly try to bury in their resumes ... Writer-director Lionel Chetwynd fudges a lot of facts."

...

"Richard von Busack of Silicon Valley's weekly newspaper explained how this product is structured: "'DC 9/11: Time of Crisis' will follow the attack from the Washington, D.C., perspective, beginning with the attacks and ending with George W. Bush's speech of revenge on Sept. 20. In what some might see as a disturbing blend of documentary and dramatic reenactments, actual news footage of the Twin Towers and Pentagon attacks will be woven in with the drama of Bush's flights around the country on the fateful day and the comments he made as he went."
...
"DC 9/11" illustrates the direction our propaganda system is taking because it is also the direction that our news system is already headed. More storytelling instead of journalism. More character-oriented drama. More narrative arcs. More blurring of the line between fiction and truth.


"DC 9/11: Time of Crisis" is also a sign of the crisis in our media system. Made by a "liberal company," it may help reelect a conservative president. It is the latest tool in the media drift to the right, but it is not the last."

The article also has some interesting background on th elobbying of the FCC for media relaxation.
__________________

__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 12:11 PM   #2
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 06:38 AM
I wonder how the ratings for this movie comapred with the ratings for the real-life president's TV appearance that night. Kind of ironic that they should air the same night.
__________________

__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 12:22 PM   #3
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:38 AM
Is this an issue now because GWB is being shown in an ostensibly favorable light? Docudramas have been on television for years.

Or do some believe that GWB is soooo bad that any positive light is manipulative, propaganda, part of the right wing conspiracy or a result of corporate "control" of media?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 03:09 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
oliveu2cm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Live from Boston
Posts: 8,334
Local Time: 10:38 AM

A "mind-numbingly boring" propaganda film
A 9/11 widow reviews last night's Showtime film about President Bush's actions on and after that fateful morning.

http://www.salon.com/ent/tv/feature/.../index_np.html (my emphasis in bold)

Quote:
A "mind-numbingly boring" propaganda film
A 9/11 widow reviews last night's Showtime film about President Bush's actions on and after that fateful morning.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Kristen Breitweiser


Sept. 8, 2003 | The film "DC 9/11: Time of Crisis," which premiered Sunday night on Showtime, is a mind-numbingly boring, revisionist, two-hour-long wish list of how 9/11 might have gone if we had real leaders in the current administration. This film is rated half of a fighter jet -- since that is about what we got for our nation's defense on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.

Despite the title, the film only budgets approximately 10 minutes to the actual morning of 9/11. Most of the movie is spent cataloging the myriad Cabinet-level debates as to whether to declare "war" against terrorism and how to effectively sell that to the American people.

It is understandable that so little time is actually devoted to the president's true actions on the morning of 9/11. Because to show the entire 23 minutes from 9:03 to 9:25 a.m., when President Bush, in reality, remained seated and listening to "second grade story-hour" while people like my husband were burning alive inside the World Trade Center towers, would run counter to Karl Rove's art direction and grand vision.

Remember the aircraft-carrier photo op? Bush is a man of action; in fact, he is an action hero. Except, of course, when it really counts, like in those early morning hours when this country was under attack and our commander in chief was drinking milk and eating cookies with second graders. Can you imagine one of those second-graders years from now when they are asked where they were on the morning of 9/11? They will simply say, "I was sitting with the president reading him a story."

<Today's Daypass sponsored by ACLU >


It also confuses me that the filmmakers would allot so much time to the war posturing in Afghanistan because that, too, has been a failure. President Bush is quoted in the fictional drama as saying he will take Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." But, I'm sorry, have we captured him? And why so much time spent on this war plan anyway? I thought there was a copy of it on the president's desk the day before 9/11? So what's all the fuss about? Why all the Cabinet meetings with all the dignified speak?

The real Condoleezza Rice apparently didn't know planes could be used as weapons, but she is portrayed in the movie as a woman who knew an awful lot about bin Laden and al-Qaida by 8 p.m. on the evening of the attacks. The real FBI was caught flat-footed by bin Laden and the 19 hijackers, but in the movie they gather the names and photos of the hijackers very rapidly. I guess their "networking" problems, like Rice's bin Laden knowledge, got "cleaned up" by the evening of 9/11 in the movie version.

It's also interesting to watch the fictional versions of Ari Fleischer and Karen Hughes "strategizing" and "orchestrating" to make President Bush look like a strong leader. Who knew that it was such hard work to frame the president as an empathetic, strong and competent leader in the face of the nation's worst tragedy? Forgive my naiveté, but I never knew how meticulously planned the president's every single word and movement were. And if his words are that carefully and painfully chosen, just how did those 16 words get into his State of the Union address anyway? But I digress.

What is so "off" about the film is that it is too slow, too methodical, too calm. There are no suit jackets hanging over chairs, no 5 o'clock shadows, no empty coffee cups strewn about, no shirt-sleeves rolled up, no people pulling all-nighters. No tempers flaring. No panic. No raw emotion. Nothing but a lot of talking, walking and more talking, and the occasional workout session by the president -- who knew he could bench-press so much weight?

When juxtaposed against the recently released transcripts of 9/11 phone calls from inside the towers, the administration's attitude doesn't look good. How could they all be so relaxed? So unemotional. How could any of them even sleep? Why weren't they worried about a second wave of attacks? How did they know for sure that there was not another attack soon to follow? Why were they so uninterested in the rescue and recovery efforts? Maybe this would explain why the Environmental Protection Agency couldn't be bothered to monitor the air quality of lower Manhattan. Nobody cared. If the administration is this relaxed facing the nation's worst tragedy, are they asleep when they negotiate healthcare reform?

Just as an aside, I especially liked the tender moments shared between the president and first lady, particularly when she mentioned the atrocities the Afghan women faced under the rule of the Taliban. We -- the 9/11 widows -- have requested meetings with the first lady to discuss our goals for the 9/11 Independent Commission. She never answers. Honestly, we take offense that Mrs. Bush will fly halfway around the world to meet with Afghan women and yet she won't meet with us. All we want to do is make this nation safe for our children.

I did learn some things in the film. First, I didn't realize that it took President Bush until Friday afternoon to visit New York. Frankly, I don't remember much of the month of September 2001, but why would the administration want to publicize the fact that it took the president so long to visit the place terrorists had attacked? Are we buying the story that it was for national security reasons?

And since we are talking about the visit to ground zero, I found it particularly offensive that there was so much posturing about how to get the best photo op. The worst part comes when the president meets a young mother and child who are desperately searching for their missing husband and father. President Bush takes the picture of the child's father and signs his name across it, telling the young girl, "When your daddy comes back, tell him you met me." For a child and wife facing the devastating loss of a loved one who very likely has just been burned, crushed and buried in rubble, meeting the president doesn't rightly matter. ( )Nor does it matter having his signature scrawled across a photo that you wanted to display on a wall of missing victims -- something that would have offered at least a glimmer of hope.

Miscellaneous things that surprised me included the fact that the film perpetuates the big fat lie that Air Force One was a target. Forgive me, but I thought the White House admitted at the end of September 2001 that Air Force One was never a target, that no code words were spoken and that it was all a lie. So what gives?

Also surprising is the debate about whether the military may or may not have shot down Flight 93 over Pennsylvania. You would think that the president of the United States would know the answer to this query, and yet a shoot-down is raised as a possibility and never definitively answered -- even to the president.

There was also no mention of the Saudi royals and bin Laden family members who were allegedly flown out of the country in the first few days after the attacks. I guess that got left on the cutting room floor.

Not surprisingly, there is no mention of accountability. Not once does anyone say, "How the hell did this happen? Heads will roll!" I was hoping that, at least behind closed doors, there were words like, "Look, we really screwed up! Let's make sure we find out what went wrong and that it never happens again!" Nope, no such luck.

Finally, with the abundance of creative license taken in the film, I was surprised to see that it didn't take better "care" of Donald Rumsfeld. On the morning of 9/11, Rumsfeld remained at his desk -- apparently unaware that we were under attack until the Pentagon was hit, a full hour after the WTC. Why the film editors decided not to rewrite this history I don't know -- maybe in real life, thanks to recent developments in Iraq, Rummy will be leaving soon to spend more time with his family.

I watched this film with three of my widow friends. We have spent the last two years fighting this administration to try to get answers to the many questions that plague us about 9/11. When they're finally answered, our questions will undoubtedly make this nation safer than it was on that morning. But our reality is that our husbands are never coming home. We are left to raise our children without them. Too bad Showtime can't rewrite our history of 9/11 -- that would be something worth watching.

__________________
oliveu2cm is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 04:29 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
DrTeeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Q continuum
Posts: 4,770
Local Time: 03:38 PM
I think Riefenstahl did read this
__________________
DrTeeth is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 07:44 PM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 02:38 PM
Fact vs. fiction. Fact lost big time.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 07:47 PM   #7
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:38 AM
Let's all get out our painsticks.....
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 10:27 PM   #8
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 09:38 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Is this an issue now because GWB is being shown in an ostensibly favorable light? Docudramas have been on television for years.

Or do some believe that GWB is soooo bad that any positive light is manipulative, propaganda, part of the right wing conspiracy or a result of corporate "control" of media?
No, it's because it is supposed to be a documentary/drama but is in part produced with the aid of Karl Rove, so yes it is propaganda and lies. Something this admin. knows alot about.

YES.
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 11:14 PM   #9
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 940
Local Time: 02:38 PM
Yeah, I'm thinking that when it comes from Karl Rove there's not much of an argument there...
__________________
TylerDurden is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 11:15 PM   #10
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:38 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by DrTeeth
I think Riefenstahl did read this


Quote:
31 july 2003

Ex-Nazi Filmaker Sues Bush

"Outrage" says Riefenstahl

(AFP, Munich)

Adding to George Bush's woes, Hitler's former moviemaker, 101 year old Leni Riefenstahl has accused him of copyright infringement. According to papers filed in Bavarian district court yesterday, Bush's carrier landing was directly lifted from her 1934 film "Triumph of the Will".

Riefenstahl's film opens with scenes of Adolf Hitler landing in Nuremberg.

Interviewed on German television, Riefenstahl called Bush's carrier rally "outrage and a theft". "Adolf (Hitler), Joe (Goebbels) and I wrote that script. They just stole it. But we did all the work."

Bush denied the charges. At a Washington press conference earlier today, Bush said ultimate responsibility lay with former press secretary Ari Fleischer. "Ari made the decision, not me."

A preliminary hearing is scheduled for December 16.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 11:29 PM   #11
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 09:38 AM
Shit just doesn't stick to the man. I've never seen an elected official that can't take any responsibility for his actions. Where are his apologies for lying? Even Clinton apologized for getting a hummer, much less a crime to the military families that have lost loved ones.

edited to add:.

Thanks Deep I didn't know what he was refering to.
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 09-11-2003, 12:20 AM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:38 PM
Scarletwine,

What has Bush lied about? Can you prove it?
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-11-2003, 11:59 AM   #13
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,656
Local Time: 08:38 AM
Proof, seems hard to come by these days. Seems like both sides haven't found the proof they are looking for.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 09-11-2003, 12:33 PM   #14
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:38 PM
Everyone knows Saddam never complied with the UN resolutions including those with regards to disarmament of WMD. No country would dispute that.

But what specifically has Bush lied about and what makes you think that is in fact the case?
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-11-2003, 12:54 PM   #15
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,656
Local Time: 08:38 AM
Well I believe there is a whole thread on this subject that has gone back and forth. This thread was started about a TV drama about 9/ 11 that some may not think it was completely accurate. It has nothing to do with Saddam or Iraq.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com