Impotent Newsroom
I finally watched a few minutes of HBO's docu-screed The Newsroom the other night and found it even worse than I’d imagined it would be.
For those of you smart enough not to watch it, I’ll save you the trouble. In The Newsroom, golden boy/producer/writer/czar Aaron Sorkin uses a fictional network anchorman as his proxy to revisit real recent events - the Gulf oil spill, the Arizona immigration bill, the Times Square Bomber - to educate us on the real important lessons supposedly buried by the lede.
It’s Sorkin’s self-important vision of how the news should have been reported and shaped to result in a more comfortable narrative (for Sorkin). By making the anchorman a supposedly staunch Republican who is “evolving,” the show's creators think they’ve given themselves some cover. And how should the news actually be covered? Apparently, with epic monologues about taking truth to power and confronting the man, with witty banter no real person has ever used, and, most of all, with lessons that should be learned. Future episodes – each one reads like one of those “special episodes” we’ve always dreaded -- have enticing titles like “Bullies” and “Mock Debate.” Gee, I’ll bet they’ll be good. Woo, boy.
But this is not a post about how the entertainment industry leans left. That’s a given. The Newsroom is so awful it actually makes me optimistic. Seriously.
In the past, the center-left narrative just sort of took care of itself. The New York Times, Walter Cronkite, Tom Brokaw, or Peter Jennings would tell us what the news was and what it meant. There were few alternatives to their monolithic Upper East Side Democratic world-view. Hollywood didn't need to slap sloppy movies or television shows together -- think Game Change (Sarah Palin as Caribou Evita), Good Night and Good Luck, Nixon, Recount, Rendition, Green Zone, In the Valley of Elah,The Iron Lady, Fair Game, Lions for Lambs, and now the limpid and pathetic The Newsroom. The people, they thought, were with them. They had to be.
Now, there is a stink of panic in the air.Who even remembers Fair Game? (Trivia Buffs: It was the Valerie Plame thing.) Would the Hollywood left feel the need to rush out these revisions so quickly if they were confident history would vindicate them? I don't think so.
I'd contend it simply no longer works. No one cares, no one watches, and no one believes them anymore. We're on to them.
What do you think? Is my optimism misplaced?
- Comment (29)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Oct '10
Re: Impotent Newsroom
Boston Legal did that better - or should I say worse? - than just about anyone. The writing was so hackneyed and predictable and false that I couldn't get through an episode without arguing with my TV at least 4 times.
Feb '12
Re: Impotent Newsroom
KC Mulville: It's astonishing that, given the enormous volume of evidence to the contrary, there are leftists who think the news hasn't been slanted to their side sufficiently enough.
They feel the need to escape into the world of fiction, where they aren't constrained by any bonds of truth.
It's like Toontown. · 9 hours ago
I occasionally help out with the local public radio station's pledge drive. (It's a good way of meeting other lawyers.) During the fall 08 campaign, I had a caller say that he was not pledging his normal amount because he was disgusted with NPR's "pro-business slant."
The other volunteers and even the broadcasters in the room laughed at that one.
Apr '11
Re: Impotent Newsroom
How much longer can HBO hang on with shows like Newsroom, Veep, Girls, and Lucy?
I'm going to Audible.com (thanks Ricochet) to order Boardwalk Empire for my ipod and then cancel HBO.
Enough is really enough.
Jul '11
Re: Impotent Newsroom
EJ, egad. I like the power drill though.
Mar '11
Re: Impotent Newsroom
Newsroom starts running in Australia on August 20. I will probably watch a few episodes at least. When The West Wing first showed, I never missed an episode of the first season. I thoroughly enjoyed getting a weekly reminder of just how truly detestable liberals are.
Unfortunately, the liberal white ants' constant efforts to rewrite history is largely successful. Just recently, conservatives called Dingy Harry's ranting about Romney's tax returns McCarthyism and the arch-RINO smeared Michelle Bachmann by accusing her of McCarthyism. Senator McCarthy was the victim of an orchestrated smear campaign which continues to this day. Real, and pretend, conservatives should not consent to this type of distortion of history and language. They cannot spend their time and energy trying to rehabilitate the victims of liberal smears but they should not add to the damage by using their names as metaphors for evil. If they need metaphors there have been plenty of liberals they could choose from.
Jul '10
Re: Impotent Newsroom
Sorkin gave up Sports Night, a rare TV series that I actually liked overall, to do his unwatchable, naive, and bigoted political schtick. I made it through one, and only one, episode of West Wing, and then only because Mrs. Sisyphus thought it an important thing to do for reasons way beyond my understanding.
He has a gift for dialogue and pacing, but he cannot overcome his own moral vanity. The Newsroom made it to my (very long) don't bother list based on the reviews. Even the Nation was unimpressed, and if they aren't Sorkin's target audience for this stuff, who is?
Edited on August 8, 2012 at 8:19pmJul '11
Re: Impotent Newsroom
Sisyphus: Sorkin gave upSports Night, a rare TV series that I actually liked overall, to do his unwatchable, naive, and bigoted political schtick. I made it through one, and only one, episode ofWest Wing, and then only because Mrs. Sisyphus thought it an important thing to do for reasons way beyond my understanding.
He has a gift for dialogue and pacing, but he cannot overcome his own moral vanity. The Newsroommade it to my (very long) don't bother list based on the reviews. Even the Nation was unimpressed, and if they aren't Sorkin's target audience for this stuff, who is? · 56 minutes ago
Edited 56 minutes ago
The target is anyone who is undecided. HBO, Hollywood, and the media are doing anything to save their special president.
Jul '10
Re: Impotent Newsroom
When I see Aaron Sorkin's name on anything I walk away. It's not because he's a smug, self-congratulatory liberal - the entertainment industry is packed to the rafters with such people. It's because he isn't very good.
His dialogue confuses velocity with wit, and all his characters are always far too impressed with their own cleverness. I watched about five episodes of The West Wing, which is way more than I give most shows I don't like. It had its moments here and there, but for the most part just patted itself on the back for its "intelligence" while getting a bunch of things wrong. (Presidential Detail Marines with sideburns? Really?)
Jul '12
Re: Impotent Newsroom
I looked past the obvious leftward slant and found the focus on generally low brow news coverage to be of interest. Many lament the low level of political literacy in America so, to them at least, better news coverage would be useful.