Propaganda, Truth, and Censorship

"The Path to 9/11" was a docudrama about the build up to 9/11 that screened a couple years ago on ABC. I watched part of it and thought it was pretty good. Especially given the budget of 500,000 and that it was a TV movie. I liked it better than say, Hotel Rwanda, a political film which got a lot of traction.

At the time, the Clinton's called the film "a right wing hatchet job," and convinced the network to cut some scenes before screening the film. They didn't like how the film presented their administration as being partially responsible for not dealing with the Bin Laden threat prior to 9/11. Given that the movie was about the build up to 9/11, I think it's pretty obvious that the Clinton administration would come out looking not very good...considering, well, that thye failed to stop the growth of Al Queda.

I have long personally advocated a "pass" mentality given to our political leaders prior to 9/11 because the public at large had little reason to think a couple of kooks in caves could harness such damage. I don't give the same pass to our intelligence services, who are supposed to be tracking this stuff. And I do think Bush should have fired George Tenant rather than giving him a medal.

But with respect to the TV movie...

I am alarmed by the notion of political leaders stepping in to censor material. Granted, this wasn't an official act of government censorship, but clearly, the Clinton's were using their heavyweight power and threat of political or social retaliation to prevent a movie from being seen the way creators wanted to depict it. How would we have felt if Richard Nixon's cronies asked Oliver Stone to censor his portrayal of the ex-President? Or the Kennedy family stepping in on JFK? There are countless numbers of examples that seem ripe for such tampering.

The Clinton's argue 9/11 was too important an event to depict inaccurately and to create scenes that didn't occur in the name of dramatic license. Actually, I'm giving them more credit than they deserve...I think they argue that "The Path to 9/11" borders on right wing propaganda.

So here's the question - what is a greater ill - propaganda or censorship? And what was "Path to 9/11?"

Propaganda is the attempt to influence the audience to a specific point of view of the propagandist. Normally, it is associated with a political or religious point of view. This differs from advertising, which is propaganda to purchase consumer goods. It also differs from art, which aspires to finding beauty or truth.

Do the creators think they are creating propaganda? Do propagandists think they are creating propaganda? I highly doubt it. I imagine they think they are trying to depict a truth - either emotional or otherwise.

Okay...leaving work early, tbc...