Jack Bauer of '24'

[Jenn! 918]

By Peter CarlsonWashington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, February 20, 2007; Page C01

Is it just me or is the world getting weirder?

The other day, I'm reading an article in the latest issue of the New Yorker -- "Whatever It Takes" by Jane Mayer -- and for a while I couldn't tell if it was an outrageous satire or a simple, factual depiction of a world gone mad. It turns out the story is true. Maybe that's why it's laugh-out-loud funny. These days, reality is funnier than satire.

The key scene in Mayer's story occurred last November, when Brig. Gen. Patrick Finnegan, the dean of West Point, decided that he needed to do something to end the horror of Americans torturing prisoners. So he gathered three of the top military and FBI interrogation experts and they headed for the airport.

Did they fly to Abu Ghraib? No. Guantanamo? No. One of those secret prisons where the CIA allegedly tortures terror suspects? Nope.

Finnegan and his experts flew to Hollywood to meet the producers of the TV show "24," so Finnegan could urge them to stop the actors who play American agents from pretending to torture the actors who play terrorists in the show.

Really. This actually happened.

The problem, Finnegan told Mayer, is that his students at West Point see Americans torturing terrorists on "24" -- which happens nearly every week -- and they wonder why they're not supposed to do it in real life: "The kids see it, and say, 'If torture is wrong, what about "24"?' " he says.

Gee, if these cadets can't tell the difference between TV and reality, I sure hope they're not watching "Superman" reruns. They might try to fly out windows or catch bullets.

But wait. The story gets better. When the general arrives at the studio, wearing a uniform decorated with countless ribbons, people figure he's an actor playing a general and they ask when his scene will be shot. Then, at the meeting, one of Finnegan's experts suggests some non-abusive interrogation techniques including -- get this! -- "giving suspects a postcard to send home, thereby learning the name and address of their next of kin."

And when the show's lead writer, Howard Gordon, hears that, he slams his fist on the table and says, "You're hired!"

Do you see why I thought this might be satire?

Am I crazy or is attacking torture by lobbying the producers of "24" almost as ridiculous as trying to make nuclear power plants safer by urging the producers of "The Simpsons" to stop letting Homer play with plutonium in the lunchroom of the Springfield nuke plant?

For those of you who haven't had the pleasure of watching "24," and it is a pleasure if you have a strong stomach, here's a bit of background: The Emmy-winning show depicts the amazing adventures of agent Jack Bauer, who specializes in stopping terrorists from blowing up America. Nearly every week, terrorists torture Jack, or Jack tortures terrorists, or both. In one episode, the president orders a Secret Service agent to torture his national security adviser, whom he suspects of treason.

The show, as Gordon tells Mayer, consists largely of "improvisations in sadism." Not surprisingly, "24" is very popular in the Bush administration.

Last March, Rush Limbaugh hosted a dinner for "24's" executive producer, Joel Surnow, and invited Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife, Virginia, who works at the conservative Heritage Foundation. (Wouldn't it have been fun to be a fly on that wall?) Inspired by the dinner, Virginia Thomas organized a full-blown Heritage symposium with the wonderful title " '24' and America's Image in Fighting Terrorism: Fact, Fiction, or Does It Matter?" Michael Chertoff, the real-life homeland security secretary, showed up to praise the show, saying, "Frankly, it reflects real life."

After the symposium, Surnow and other "24" honchos went to the White House to dine with Karl Rove, Tony Snow, Lynne Cheney and Mary Cheney.

"People in the administration love the series," says Surnow, who described himself to Mayer as a "right-wing nut job."

He was joking, sort of, but he does hang out in what might be called the "right-wing nut job community." He's pals with the twin blond bomb throwers of the right -- Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham. Coulter and Surnow have discussed collaborating on what Surnow describes as "a movie that depicted Joe McCarthy as an American hero." And Ingraham invited Surnow on her radio show and then informed the world that while she was undergoing chemotherapy for breast cancer, "it was soothing to see Jack Bauer torture these terrorists, and I felt better."

Satire? Who needs satire?

As for Limbaugh, Mayer asks him about "24's" treatment of torture and he replies, "It's just a television show! Get a grip."

Good advice. Let's hope Gen. Finnegan and his cadets heed it.

Meanwhile, when Rush Limbaugh becomes the voice of sweet reason, you know the world is getting very weird indeed.

source

[Savanphil 3]

People take TV too seriously....

[Caladan 19]

I don't think it's taking it too seriously to consider the effect that the torture scenes have on public discourse. (Witness: rightwinger bloggers arguing "but what if was a ticking time bomb and if you didn't torture the terrorist a hundred fluffy kittens would get blown up?") Especially when Chernow is saying "it's just like real life." Honestly, after that ignorant statement someone should take away his crayons. If fighting terror was like on 24, it would be easy: just arrest anyone who would come to Jack Bauer's birthday party, based on the previous seasons. (dad, girlfriend, bro, mentor)

Or other TV, really; people know that it's not 'real', but without any idea of what is real, it's hard to keep the two mentally separate. When I had jury duty last year, the judge made a point of mentioning that the standards of evidence in a courtroom weren't like CSI or L&O.

[almaty 19]

Jack gives interrogation a bad name....maybe he was at aby ghraib and learn his craft

[pedroh 21]

I don't think it's taking it too seriously to consider the effect that the torture scenes have on public discourse. (Witness: rightwinger bloggers arguing "but what if was a ticking time bomb and if you didn't torture the terrorist a hundred fluffy kittens would get blown up?") Especially when Chernow is saying "it's just like real life." Honestly, after that ignorant statement someone should take away his crayons. If fighting terror was like on 24, it would be easy: just arrest anyone who would come to Jack Bauer's birthday party, based on the previous seasons. (dad, girlfriend, bro, mentor)

Or other TV, really; people know that it's not 'real', but without any idea of what is real, it's hard to keep the two mentally separate. When I had jury duty last year, the judge made a point of mentioning that the standards of evidence in a courtroom weren't like CSI or L&O.

LMAO

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I wonder how this ties with that other thread on violent TV… I’m not sure that I agree it influences or encourages certain types of behaviour, but certainly I think it’s fair to say that shows like 24 simplify the issues they portray. If there really are people who take the show that seriously, they are incredibly naïve IMO, and it underlines the generally simplistic attitudes that many people have towards politics and current affairs.

As for the show itself, the (now very loose) real-time format is so frenetic that it seems you can get away with the odd continuity error here and there (even when I went back and rewatched season 1 on DVD, it struck me how completely illogical the “twist” in the penultimate episode was). More importantly - there's no time for any serious reflection on the issues portrayed, because each episode is a "ticking bomb".

[Caladan 19]

According to the original writers of 24, when they pitched it, they only had the arc plotted through the first 12 episodes (right about where they rescue Terri and Kim). So the reason the big twist is such a twist that isn't alluded to is that they had no idea it was coming, either.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Does anybody else see the irony that here is a hollywood depiction of something political - but because it espouses views of the Right, it not only gets praised by people like Limbaugh, but they invite them into their political circles.

...I thought Limbaugh and his ilk had a distaste for hollywood poking it's nose in politics...they habitually lampoon Sean Penn and other hollywood types for being too political. hmmm...

[Nancy2015 2]

Oh come on, it's just a show!

[DeadPoolX 9]

Does anybody else see the irony that here is a hollywood depiction of something political - but because it espouses views of the Right, it not only gets praised by people like Limbaugh, but they invite them into their political circles.

...I thought Limbaugh and his ilk had a distaste for hollywood poking it's nose in politics...they habitually lampoon Sean Penn and other hollywood types for being too political. hmmm...

Hmmm...I'd say that's because there are so few depictions of Right-Wing politics in shows on television that aren't immediately insulting (i.e. The West Wing), that those who adhere to the conventions of the Right are thrilled to see something like this come out of Hollywood. It's the old "throw a dog a bone" sort of thing.

Anyway, I've never seen 24 so I can't say for certain if it's too violent or not. Regardless, I am completely against censorship of any kind, and wish that the United States could take a few cues from Canada and Europe in how they operate their television programming. That'll probably never happen, of course, but it's a nice thought.

The people who're getting "up in arms" about this obviously have little else to do in their lives and have difficultly telling reality from fiction themselves. Otherwise, they wouldn't have the sort of problems they do with 24 as it's only a TV show meant to entertain the masses.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Does anybody else see the irony that here is a hollywood depiction of something political - but because it espouses views of the Right, it not only gets praised by people like Limbaugh, but they invite them into their political circles.

...I thought Limbaugh and his ilk had a distaste for hollywood poking it's nose in politics...they habitually lampoon Sean Penn and other hollywood types for being too political. hmmm...

Hmmm...I'd say that's because there are so few depictions of Right-Wing politics in shows on television that aren't immediately insulting (i.e. The West Wing), that those who adhere to the conventions of the Right are thrilled to see something like this come out of Hollywood. It's the old "throw a dog a bone" sort of thing.

Chalk one up for consistency. In other words, it's only OK if Hollywood's politics are in line with theirs....hmmm.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The people who're getting "up in arms" about this obviously have little else to do in their lives and have difficultly telling reality from fiction themselves. Otherwise, they wouldn't have the sort of problems they do with 24 as it's only a TV show meant to entertain the masses.

On that last point its always interesting to me to hear mention of “the masses” as being separate the individual. Its much like how media types talk about “the media” in 3rd person, seemingly forgetting that they are actually part of it.

[DeadPoolX 9]

The people who're getting "up in arms" about this obviously have little else to do in their lives and have difficultly telling reality from fiction themselves. Otherwise, they wouldn't have the sort of problems they do with 24 as it's only a TV show meant to entertain the masses.

On that last point its always interesting to me to hear mention of “the masses” as being separate the individual. Its much like how media types talk about “the media” in 3rd person, seemingly forgetting that they are actually part of it.

I rarely, if ever, watch network television, so I don't really include myself in the masses regarding TV. Other things, maybe, but not the box.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The people who're getting "up in arms" about this obviously have little else to do in their lives and have difficultly telling reality from fiction themselves. Otherwise, they wouldn't have the sort of problems they do with 24 as it's only a TV show meant to entertain the masses.

On that last point its always interesting to me to hear mention of “the masses” as being separate the individual. Its much like how media types talk about “the media” in 3rd person, seemingly forgetting that they are actually part of it.

I rarely, if ever, watch network television, so I don't really include myself in the masses regarding TV. Other things, maybe, but not the box.

I know what you mean - just kinda funny. That's why I find the "its just entertainment" argument applied to discussing movies/TV etc a little questionable. If I'm one of the masses - then it suggests that there must be something wrong with me if I don't find it entertaining. Entertainment is subjective of course - not universal.