Eat The Press

"24": Life Imitating Art (But Not the Other Way Around)

John Neffinger |  Posted Thursday February 22, 2007 at 09:58 AM

In case you're having trouble getting through that fat double issue of the New Yorker that landed last week, Jane Mayer has narrated a helpful 7½ minute video version of her article skewering the makers of the hit TV show "24" for its portrayal of torture as (1) always effective (2) often legal and (3) patriotically bad-ass, notwithstanding the near-universal disagreement of people who actually know what they are talking about.

And it's not just couch potatoes who are eating it up: Real American soldiers, some of whom end up interrogating prisoners, have been taking the lessons of "24" to heart, so much so that the military has asked the producers to knock it off. Mayer reports that a contingent from West Point, complete with a Brigadier General and several high-ranking military interrogators, showed up on the set (where they were promptly mistaken for thespians, natch) to politely complain that many young soldiers are so moved by Jack Bauer's heroics that they refuse to believe it when their superior officers explain that torture does not actually elicit useful information (and is flatly illegal besides). Mayer even quotes one of the Army interrogators in the article saying that his fellow soldiers in Iraq "watch the shows... and then walk into the interrogation booths and do the same things they've just seen." Who knew TV still had such power?

"24" executive producer Joel Surnow proudly maintains that the show is "patriotic." Yet he excused himself from the meeting with the military brass, and did not seem at all inclined to support the troops' request. Meanwhile, Surnow's buddies Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham have rushed to his defense (cf. Ingraham: "The average American out there loves the show "24." OK? They love Jack Bauer. They love "24." In my mind that's close to a national referendum that it's OK to use tough tactics against high-level Al Qaeda operatives as we're going to get").

What's a "24" fan to do? First we learned our oil addiction had caused 9/11, now our viewing habits caused Abu Ghraib? (Does snacking between meals promote nuclear proliferation, that's what I'm worried about.) In case it makes anyone feel any better, Mayer confesses on the video that she, too, finds the show "riveting"and "addictive" and "could not wait" for the next episode. She also gives "24" kudos for is not having used the controversial simulated-drowning technique known as waterboarding. Too bad, then, that they went ahead and threw that in a couple of weeks ago, too.

For his part, star Kiefer Sutherland reportedly feels torn about the side-effects that the vehicle of his career redemption might be having on U.S. foreign policy. No word yet on whether Kiefer will at least take the military up on its offer to tape an instructional video for his slower fans in the service explaining that interrogations don't actually work that way (and that his name is not really Jack Bauer).

No word either on when the New Yorker web site will start offering 60-second video roundups of the Talk of the Town. "Here's your host, Hendrik Hertzberg!"

Whatever It Takes [New Yorker]
Video: Making Them Talk [New Yorker]
Waterboarding: Torture, But Totally Not That Bad [Fox News]

Related:
Why Torture Doesn't Work [AlterNet]

Ed. Note: Not only does torture not work, but neither, apparently, does Condé Net: The New Yorker goes to the trouble of splicing together this nice little video — complete with pre-branding — and then posts it to...YouTube? We're just speculating here, but we know that YouTube is quick and easy, and have heard rumblings (and grumblings) that Condé Net is slow, bureacratic, and inefficient. That marquee web content is being hosted by an all-access outside source seems to bear that out. Still, we're grateful - hooray for free, embeddable content!