What A Pitiful Culture

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
Looks what ABC may do:

http://www.variety.com/VR1117949675.html

Pols pound 'Path'
Under fire, ABC mulls yanking mini

By WILLIAM TRIPLETT

Bill Clinton
Clinton

'The Path to 9/11'
Democrats accuse ABC of painting a partisan portrait of events in its miniseries 'The Path to 9/11,' airing Sunday and Monday.
advertisement
Click here to find out more!


"The Path to 9/11" is looking a lot like "The Reagans, Part II."

Bill Clinton loyalists are demanding wholesale changes to the upcoming miniseries -- and while ABC is making some snips, the alterations, insiders say, may not please the Dems.

But a bombshell decision may happen anyway: Sources close to the project say the network, which has been in a media maelstrom over the pic, is mulling the idea of yanking the mini altogether.

As for specific criticisms -- and changes -- the original mini contained a scene in which then-National Security Adviser Sandy Berger declines to give the CIA authority to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, even when CIA operatives know where the al-Qaeda leader is.

"This account has been expressly contradicted by Richard Clarke, a high-ranking counterterrorism official in both the Clinton and Bush administrations," certain lawmakers wrote in a letter to Disney topper Bob Iger.

While ABC declined to comment on specific changes, it's believed that the Berger scene was among those being reworked.

Controversy -- fueled by screaming headlines on the Drudge Report and treated as a "developing story" by CNN -- threatened to obscure the Alphabet's attempt to offer what execs there firmly believe is a socially important piece of TV filmmaking in the tradition of "The Day After" and "An Early Frost."

But much in the same way right-wing groups mobilized to attack CBS' "The Reagans" a few years ago, Democratic partisans were doing everything they could to discredit ABC's "The Path to 9/11."

Network hinted it was still making changes but refused to say whether the edits were due to pressure.

The Clinton Foundation issued a statement, broadcast by CNN, calling the mini "factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate," while the Democratic National Committee sent a mass email to its troops denouncing "The Path to 9/11" as a "despicable, irresponsible fraud" and directing them to a Web site where the party has set up a way to let activists email Disney CEO Bob Iger a form letter.

"Does a major national broadcast network want to stain itself by presenting an irresponsible, slanderous, fraudulent, 'docudrama' to the American public? Not if you and I have the last word," begins the email from exec director Tom McMahon.

Four senior Democratic lawmakers also joined the chorus of former Clinton administration officials calling for removal of what they claim are "false assertions of blame" and "partisan spin" in the mini.

Reps. John Conyers Jr. (Mich.), John Dingell (Mich.), Louise Slaughter (N.Y.) and Jane Harman (Calif.) have written to Iger saying they have "serious questions" about the dramatization's account of counterterrorism actions -- or inactions -- in the Clinton White House.

The alleged inaccuracies are the subject of complaints that former members of the Clinton administration -- Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger, Bruce Lindsey and Douglas Band -- raised in letters that they sent earlier to ABC and that were the subject of news reports on Thursday.

ABC limited its response to the brouhaha to a single statement arguing its mini "is not a documentary of the events leading to 9/11. It is a dramatization, drawn from a variety of sources including the 9/11 Commission Report, other published materials and personal interviews. As such, for dramatic and narrative purposes, the movie contains fictionalized scenes, composite and representative characters and dialogue and time compression.

"No one has seen the final version of the film because the editing process is not yet complete, so criticisms of film specifics are premature and irresponsible," the statement continued.

"The attacks of 9/11 were a pivotal moment in our history, and it is fitting that the debate about the events related to the attacks continue. However, we hope viewers will watch the entire broadcast of the finished film before forming an opinion about it."

ABC thought it was limiting controversy by basing its mini on the nonpartisan 9/11 Commission's report and having commission co-chair Tom Kane serve as a producer on the project.

At least one Hollywood producer empathized with ABC, noting the firestorm of criticism is the latest example of partisan groups attempting to use their clout to bully nets and producers into serving up noncontroversial portraits of political and social matters. Even if the Dems are right in their criticism, the producer noted, ABC should be able to air its take.

"How many miniseries have there been on the Kennedys? Did anybody complain as they dragged them through the mud?" the producer said. "Starting with 'The Reagans,' everything is now political. It's become so divisive and nasty. It's very sad."

One thing ABC doesn't need to worry about: advertiser defections. Net decided to air the five-hour mini sans commercials after failing to find an appropriate sponsor for the project (Daily Variety, Sept. 5).

Of course, the controversial nature of the project -- even before the left-wing attacks -- may have caused many sponsors to shy away from a sponsorship deal.

As for the specific scenes, lawmakers said, "The film reportedly contains a scene in which the CIA declines to share information about the 9/11 hijackers with the FBI and ascribes that failure to the so-called wall limiting information-sharing by the Dept. of Justice. ... This scene is puzzling at best, inaccurate at worst.

"These two examples alone create substantial doubt about the overall accuracy of this program," they wrote. "Sept. 11 is a day of mourning and remembrance for every American. We do not believe that it is appropriate to be tainted by false assertions of blame or partisan spin."

In their letter, Lindsey and Band rejected any claim of dramatic license. "While ABC is promoting 'The Path to 9/11' as a dramatization of historical fact, in truth it is a fictitious rewriting of history that will be misinterpreted by millions of Americans," they wrote.

Albright alleged a scene involving her was "false and defamatory," according to the Associated Press, which quoted her letter.

The New York Post reported Clinton himself had also written ABC, demanding the show "be pulled" if corrections were not made. Specifically, he sharply disputed the characterization that he was too preoccupied by the Monica Lewinsky scandal to do much about terrorism.

Criticism of "The Path to 9/11" carries strong echoes of the barbs hurled at CBS over "The Reagans." Reagan partisans railed against scenes showing Nancy Reagan consulting an astrologist and Reagan condemning AIDS victims.

Conservative drumbeat against "The Reagans" started months before the mini was slated to air and intensified after a copy of the script was leaked. Eye ultimately decided to sell the project to sister company Showtime -- a move that, ironically, prompted howls of protest from liberal groups who accused CBS of censorship.

Cliff Kincaid, editor of publications for conservative watchdog group Accuracy in Media, said the Democratic outcry is a bit of a surprise.

"Usually Democrats can count on the support of big media in Hollywood," he said. "It's like things are upside down now."
And Scott Ott has a few thoughts towards the future:

Lots of links:

http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2326

September 8, 2006
ABC Drama Marks 50th Anniversary of 9/11
by Scott Ott

(2051-09-11) — As part of the nation’s month-long celebration of the 50th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, ABC television tonight will show an educational drama called ‘The Path from 9/11‘.

The docudrama recounts the initial resistance to global jihad mounted by the infidels of the former United States of America in the immediate aftermath of the great martyrdom operation.

But then the tide turns in favor of the budding Islamic caliphate (Allah be praised!). As memories of the 2001 attacks fade, world opinion turns against the Great Satan. Then the Great Satan turns on itself, consumed from within by a toxic combination of political ambition and cowardice masquerading as tolerance.

The Path from 9/11: A Triumph of the Will illustrates the righteousness of Usama Bin Laden’s cause, and how his unswerving commitment to jihad ensured the establishment of our glorious global Caliphate, upon which today the sun never sets.

The program begins tonight at 7 p.m., right after Chief Justice al-Zawahiri leads Sunset Prayer Live from the National Mosque and just before a very special episode of American Idol.

The Path from 9/11, includes a scholastic study guide for boys, and is required viewing for all subjects of the Islamic Republic of America.

Advanced overnight ratings indicate the show will notch a 100 share and shall win its timeslot.
 

Nienna

VIP Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
4,515
Reaction score
334
Points
83
Location
Ohio
But a bombshell decision may happen anyway: Sources close to the project say the network, which has been in a media maelstrom over the pic, is mulling the idea of yanking the mini altogether.
Did anyone NOT expect this to happen?
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,122
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
Did i sleep for 45 years or something? We are having a 50th anniversary to 911??! Dang i missed all the fighting...
 

musicman

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
5,171
Reaction score
533
Points
48
Location
Ohio
I say good.
Me, too - but for different reasons, I'm sure.

The conclusions of the 9/11 Commission Report always had to be viewed in the context of the Sandy Berger theft - which is to say, skeptically. And, if the American people had any remaining doubts about Bill Clinton's culpability in regard to 9/11, I'd say that the frantic reactions of Clinton, Albright, Gorelick, Berger, et al, to this show, have effectively laid them to rest. There's no need, really, to even run the show now. America has seen what it needs to see.
 

Abbey Normal

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
4,825
Reaction score
393
Points
48
Location
Mid-Atlantic region
Me, too - but for different reasons, I'm sure.

The conclusions 9/11 Commission Report always had to be viewed in the context of the Sandy Berger theft - which is to say, skeptically. And, if the American people had any remaining doubts about Bill Clinton's culpability in regard to 9/11, I'd say that the frantic reactions of Clinton, Albright, Gorelick, Berger, et al, to this show, have effectively laid them to rest. There's no need, really, to even run the show now. America has seen what it needs to see.
Interesting pov, MM. Maybe you are right about people already seeing what they need to see.

I still see this as censorship from the left, who just can't stand to see their favorite propaganda medium- TV- not in their control. Just look at the left's reaction to FOX News' popularity. They'd remove that also from the airwaves in a heartbeat if they could.
 

musicman

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
5,171
Reaction score
533
Points
48
Location
Ohio
Interesting pov, MM. Maybe you are right about people already seeing what they need to see.

I still see this as censorship from the left, who just can't stand to see their favorite propaganda medium- TV- not in their control. Just look at the left's reaction to FOX News' popularity. They'd remove that also from the airwaves in a heartbeat if they could.
That they would, Abbey. I've always thought that, A) DU is liberalism in microcosm, and, B) the motto over there is, "Never is heard a discouraging worrd - and this means YOU". And that's just the way they treat EACH OTHER - LOL! Shrill, hysterical tyranny cannot co-exist with open, honest discourse; fresh air is fatal to liberal socialism.

One way or another, ABC will cave on this. Still, the very attempt represents a sea change in the perceptions of at least one of the alphabet networks. Something bearing a suspicious resemblance to sanity and courage appears to be going on over there - I think there are exciting days ahead!

And I really do think that the damage has been done here. Clinton&Co.'s panic too closely resembles the scrambling of cockroaches at the snap of a flashlight. This pathetic spectacle will not be lost on America.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
32,450
Reaction score
17,462
Points
1,905
Location
Arizona
My question is will they show Sandy Berger stealing the classified documents and being caught? I'd love to see the liberals scream about that being 'inaccurate'.
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
If the Clintonistas don't like the show they can turn off the TV or change the channel. God knows I've heard that from them enough about shit I didn't wanna see. You're right MM--they have been exposed for the hypocritical bastards that they are and I plan to use this against them at every opportunity.
 

musicman

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
5,171
Reaction score
533
Points
48
Location
Ohio
If the Clintonistas don't like the show they can turn off the TV or change the channel. God knows I've heard that from them enough about shit I didn't wanna see. You're right MM--they have been exposed for the hypocritical bastards that they are and I plan to use this against them at every opportunity.
LOL - me, too!

What the hell's going on over at ABC, dillo? They scared me to death for about half a minute there - thought they were actually going to grow a set of balls. Oh, well - when a jackass flies, I guess you don't condemn him for not staying up very long...
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
LOL - me, too!

What the hell's going on over at ABC, dillo? They scared me to death for about half a minute there - thought they were actually going to grow a set of balls. Oh, well - when a jackass flies, I guess you don't condemn him for not staying up very long...
Do you see any libs DARE come in here and debate this topic? Neither do I. They know what whiney babies they are.
 

musicman

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
5,171
Reaction score
533
Points
48
Location
Ohio
Do you see any libs DARE come in here and debate this topic? Neither do I. They know what whiney babies they are.
I'll bet ONE of them shows up pretty soon; she's probably busy Google-bombing ABC right now...
 

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
Does any one remeber when that mini-series docudrama about Ronald Rreagan was yanked after conservatives screamed it was factually inaccurate and distorted the image of their messiah?

The only difference here is that the facts support the assertion that ABC's cheap commercialization of this national tragedy does distort facts and create from whole cloth events that never happened.
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
Does any one remeber when that mini-series docudrama about Ronald Rreagan was yanked after conservatives screamed it was factually inaccurate and distorted the image of their messiah?

The only difference here is that the facts support the assertion that ABC's cheap commercialization of this national tragedy does distort facts and create from whole cloth events that never happened.
Sick aint it---WTF are politicos doing messing around with our entertainment?
 

musicman

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
5,171
Reaction score
533
Points
48
Location
Ohio
Does any one remeber when that mini-series docudrama about Ronald Rreagan was yanked after conservatives screamed it was factually inaccurate and distorted the image of their messiah?

The only difference here is that the facts support the assertion that ABC's cheap commercialization of this national tragedy does distort facts and create from whole cloth events that never happened.
There's only one little problem with your assertion, Bully: Sandy Berger HAPPENED.
 

Abbey Normal

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
4,825
Reaction score
393
Points
48
Location
Mid-Atlantic region
You mean 'the wall?' That would be anti-Clinton Abbey. Your bad! :slap: :laugh:
Yes indeed- the wall. Pink Floyd never knew how important it would come to be, did they?

Shoot, I must have violated the anti-anti-Clinton rule. I'd better hide before they get me. :fifty:
 
OP
Annie

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
Yes indeed- the wall. Pink Floyd never knew how important it would come to be, did they?

Shoot, I must have violated the anti-anti-Clinton rule. I'd better hide before they get me. :fifty:
Too late. Umm, remember the double negative rule. :slap: :laugh:
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top