{"id":110838,"date":"2017-11-30T13:24:00","date_gmt":"2017-11-30T13:24:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2023-01-08T11:04:33","modified_gmt":"2023-01-08T11:04:33","slug":"audiences-nix-rather-pix","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/2017\/11\/30\/audiences-nix-rather-pix\/","title":{"rendered":"Audiences Nix Rather Pix"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;\" class=\"sharethis-inline-share-buttons\" ><\/div><h3 class=\"post-title entry-title\" itemprop=\"name\"><\/h3>\n<div class=\"post-header\"> <\/div>\n<p>Like most conservatives, I must confess to a bit of schadenfreude over the utter failure of <i>Truth.<\/i><\/p>\n<p>Based on box office receipts, audiences have completely rejected the  Robert Redford drama, which is based on Dan Rather&#8217;s failed (and  fraudulent) &#8220;expose&#8221; of George W. Bush&#8217;s service in the Texas Air  National Guard.&nbsp; According to <a href=\"http:\/\/www.boxofficemojo.com\/movies\/?id=truth.htm\">Box Office Mojo<\/a>, <i>Truth<\/i> has grossed barely $1 million since its limited opening in mid-October  and fared poorly in its first weekend of wide release.&nbsp; On its current  trajectory, the film won&#8217;t even recoup its modest marketing budget, let  alone production costs. <\/p>\n<p>And better yet, some of the reviews have been scathing.&nbsp; From <a href=\"http:\/\/www.theatlantic.com\/entertainment\/archive\/2015\/10\/truth-a-terrible-terrible-movie-about-journalism\/412036\/\"><i>The Atlantic<\/i><\/a>, not exactly a house organ of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy:<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">&#8220;..Late in the movie <i>Truth<\/i>, the former <i>60 Minutes<\/i> <i>Wednesday<\/i> producer Mary Mapes (played by Cate Blanchett) offers a Big Speech  about the state of journalism, decrying the fact that all that people  want to read or watch on television these days is \u201cconspiracy theories.\u201d  The irony apparently lost on her (or at least on the writer-director  James Vanderbilt) is that she makes this charge while she herself is in  the midst of presenting a conspiracy theory.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">[snip]<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">The film concerns <i>60 Minutes<\/i>\u2019s  2004 pre-election reporting on George W. Bush\u2019s service in the Texas Air  National Guard. Two documents central to the news program\u2019s contention  that Bush was granted preferential treatment were subsequently revealed  to be almost certainly fraudulent. This error ultimately resulted in the  retirement from CBS of Dan Rather (played here with likable  understatement by Robert Redford) and the firing of Mapes and others.  It\u2019s in the midst of her \u201cconspiracy theory\u201d speech that Mapes suggests  that the fraudulent documents were a cunning ploy by pro-Bush  forces\u2014immaculately sophisticated in some respects, but childishly  certain to be recognized as fake in others\u2014intended to discredit further  reporting into his military record. Could this be true? Stranger things  have happened, I suppose. But it\u2019s pretty much the definition of a  conspiracy theory.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">This is, alas, of a piece with <i>Truth<\/i>,  one of the worst films about journalism (and there have been plenty of  bad ones) to come down the pike in a long while. The movie loudly,  hectoringly stresses the importance of always \u201casking questions\u201d\u2014my  notes include, among others, the lines \u201cQuestions help us get to the  truth,\u201d \u201cYou stop asking questions, that\u2019s when the American people  lose,\u201d and \u201cYou\u2019re supposed to question everything, that\u2019s your job\u201d\u2014and  yet the very quality it celebrates in its protagonist is that she never  questions whether or not her reporting might have been wrong. This is a  film in which acknowledging error is treated as some terrible surrender  and betrayal of trust; in actual journalism, it\u2019s considered a moral  obligation\u2014one that, sadly, most people in the field have had some  experience with, in one capacity or another.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">Similar thoughts from <a href=\"http:\/\/www.oregonlive.com\/movies\/2015\/10\/truth_review_dan_rather_and_cb.html\"><i>The Oregonian<\/i><\/a>, another MSM outlet that should not be confused with say<i>, <\/i><i>National Review<\/i>:<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">&#8220;The less obvious reason is &#8220;Truth&#8221;  wants to be a movie like &#8220;All the President&#8217;s Men&#8221; or the upcoming  &#8220;Spotlight&#8221; that shows journalists fighting powerful interests in  pursuit of a story that could change history. They lost &#8212; but it wasn&#8217;t  their fault. It was the Internet &#8212; those pesky bloggers distracting  everyone with their obsession with fonts and superscript &#8212; or it was a  conspiracy between Viacom and the White House, or both. The Bush  administration was furious at Rather and Mapes for breaking the Abu  Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal, reporting that won a Peabody Award after  they were gone from CBS, and wanted to get even.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">But it was their fault. Rather, by all  accounts, was detached, uninvolved in the reporting process until the  end. Mapes and her team felt under competitive pressure and didn&#8217;t do  enough to verify the documents or their sources. The reporting was  sloppy under any circumstances; on such a crucial piece, it is  inexcusable.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">Beyond  the fatal flaws of the film (and its underlying &#8220;story&#8221;) there are  elementary questions that bear asking.&nbsp; Namely, why would any studio&#8211;in  this case, Sony&#8211;elect to spend millions on a film that is based on  lies and bound to fail?&nbsp; Why would Hollywood &#8220;A&#8221; list talent (led by  Robert Redford as Rather and Cate Blanchett as Mary Mapes) sign on to  such a project?&nbsp; And for that matter, why did a couple of publishing  houses give Ms. Mapes hefty advances for the hard copy and paperback  editions of her book, which serves as the basis for the film? &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">The  answers, of course, lie in the politics of the news business and the  entertainment industry.&nbsp; Needless to say, there aren&#8217;t any conservatives  on the creative team that gave us <i>Truth<\/i>, and I&#8217;m guessing  registered Republicans are a closeted minority in the executive suite at  Sony Pictures, which released the film.&nbsp; For members of those groups,  George W. Bush is still a target of opportunity; after all, he stole the  2000 presidential election from Al Gore; helped arrange the 9-11  attacks and used falsified intelligence to send us into Iraq.&nbsp; Surely  those rumors about Bush using family connections to join the Texas Air  National Guard (and avoid service in Vietnam) must be true.&nbsp; And if you  believe all that, it only stands to reason that Mr. Bush would avoid  fulfilling his ANG service obligations. &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">Unfortunately,  there isn&#8217;t a speck of real evidence to back up the guard story.&nbsp; Ms.  Mapes reporteldy began pursuing the story in 1999, before Bush entered  his first presidential primary.&nbsp; There were tantalizing rumors but no  documentation until she encountered Bill Burkett, a former Texas  National Guard officer with an axe to grind against his superiors and  the Bush family.&nbsp; The &#8220;memos&#8221; that supposedly proved Bush had been AWOL  from the ANG turned out to be crude fakes, created on a computer and  easily replicated by anyone with a copy of Microsoft Word and a  printer.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">After  that, the story quickly fell apart, and the subsequent CBS investigation  (headed by former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh and retired AP  chairman Louis Bocardi) exposed just how shoddy the &#8220;reporting&#8221; had  been.&nbsp; Mapes was rightfully fired and Rather left the network as well,  after working at CBS for 43 years.&nbsp; He later spent millions suing his  former employer, but the case was dismissed.&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">So why  perpetuate an obvious fiction&#8211;beyond the pathological hatred for Mr.  Bush and his administration?&nbsp; It&#8217;s no secret the left is adept at  re-writing history, or at least the popular interpretation of key  events.&nbsp; Making a movie out of <i>Truth <\/i>allows the media wing of the  progressive movement to place a new spin on an embarrassing moment.&nbsp;  Instead of (rightly) focusing on the deficiencies in the original  reporting, the new film takes a different tack: suggesting that Mapes  and Rather were dismissed for asking the wrong questions about the wrong  people at the wrong time.&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">Clearly,  movie audiences aren&#8217;t buying this revisionist tripe, but dont&#8217;  underestimate the film&#8217;s long-term staying power.&nbsp; It will become  required viewing in journalism schools around the nation, with  sympathetic professors suggesting that Redford, Blanchett and director  James Vanderbilt actually &#8220;got it right.&#8221;&nbsp; In time, the &#8220;new&#8221; version of  events will largely supplant the truth, making it easier for fraudulent  journalists to try similar stunts in the future.&nbsp; After all, Dan Rather  himself suggested back in 2004 <a href=\"http:\/\/archive.mrc.org\/campaign\/04\/rather.asp\">it was acceptable to use phony evidence<\/a> &#8220;if the major thrust of the story was true.&#8221;&nbsp; That led to the infamous  characterization of the ANG memos as &#8220;fake, but accurate.&#8221;&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">Following  that line of logic, it&#8217;s almost as important to have the final say on  something, particularly if you can alter long-term perceptions and  opinions.&nbsp; As entertainment, <i>Truth<\/i> is an absolute bust (and  deservedly so).&nbsp; As an attempt to change perceptions among key, liberal  constituencies, the jury is still out. &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">***<\/span><\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\"><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\">ADDENDUM:&nbsp; Despite poor reviews, <i>Truth <\/i>is  actually being touted as an Oscar contender, with Redford and Blanchett  has potential nominees.&nbsp; Nothing like a gold statue (or two) to burnish  the latest lie from Hollywood. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;  &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;<\/span> <\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Like most conservatives, I must confess to a bit of schadenfreude over the utter failure of Truth. Based on box office receipts, audiences have completely rejected the Robert Redford drama, which is based on Dan Rather&#8217;s failed (and fraudulent) &#8220;expose&#8221; of George W. Bush&#8217;s service in the Texas Air National Guard.&nbsp; According to Box Office [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110838"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=110838"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110838\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=110838"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=110838"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cvnextjob.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=110838"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}