Why is ABC broadcasting Political Propaganda?

Question

In "The Path to 9/11," ABC has included scenes which are outright fabrications - all of them casting Democrats in a bad light.

Why not include scenes casting both parties in a good light, or Republicans in a bad light?

Because ABC is not Fair and Balanced, like Fox - that's why.

By openly lying about events in the years preceding the attacks, ABC has demonstrated political bias. It's no small coincidence that this is happening in an election year.

It's an excellent strategy, one used by propagandists for many years. By cloaking this politicized statement in the guise of "historical fiction", ABC is not required to air opposing viewpoints. In addition, many people will believe this "fiction" to be fact, especially if its false premises are re-enforced by politicized statements under similar guises, such as "entertainment", or "talk show".

The Democrats have offered to help ABC correct factual errors in the "fiction", but ABC has thus far refused. Why?

Because ABC is engaging in the production of biased political propaganda. They have no intentions of making this production Fair and Balanced, the way Fox would.

In the spirit of fairness, the Republicans should also extend a helping hand, since they are just as interested in political integrity and fairness as the Democrats. In addition, they would be protecting their own interests and verifying that the end product is indeed fair to both sides.

This is the time for all Americans interested in fair and balanced politics to come forward and assist ABC in getting the story straight. Obviously this is no time for anyone to let political bias affect the truth, so anyone proposing that EITHER side be prevented from helping ABC is unfair and biased.

God Bless America. God Bless the Democrats, Republicans, and people of all beliefs.

Already I see one response blaming Clinton for everything. When will biased people learn? The Democrats AND Republicans AND people of all other beliefs must come forward to protect the fair and balanced truth.

Still more answers using this question as a springboard to complain about the Democrats, whereas I suggested that ALL parties come forward in a fair and balanced spirit to protect the truth, the way Fox News would and the way ABC obviously has no intentions of doing.

I'm sorry if this approach offends politically biased responders such as berryv1, but the fair truth is more important than your discomfort at being biased.

STILL MISSING THE POINT - another biased response, this one from tkm18.

I don't see how even these biased responders can miss the point - this is the time for ALL sides to come forward to protect the unbiased truth.

These biased responses, attempting to use this issue as a springboard against the Democrats, are ABSOLUTE PROOF that the truth needs to be protected, and that BOTH Democrats and Republicans need to get involved.

It'll be interesting to see how the pundist propagandists from both sides slice and dice this question the way these biased responders have, to highlight only the things that protect their biased interests.

When will they learn? Fair and Balanced is the only way.

Answer 1

Republicans have slowly taken over the media... I have been saying this for months. Last year they tried to take control of PBS but failed; although they did cut funding.

Answer 2

ADVERTISEMENT

"The Path to 9/11," whose large ensemble includes Harvey Keitel and Patricia Heaton, offers a panoramic sweep of the events leading up to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The movie dramatizes what it deems intelligence and operational failures of the Clinton and Bush administrations, relying heavily on public records. Thomas Kean, the chairman of the 9/11 commission, served as a consultant.

After a screening of the first episode in Washington last week, some audience members attacked the film's depiction of the Clinton administration's pursuit of Osama bin Laden. Among those unhappy was Richard Ben-Veniste, an attorney and member of the 9/11 commission whom some conservatives have dismissed as a Democratic attack dog. Richard A. Clarke, the former counterterrorism czar, has criticized the movie for suggesting that the Clinton administration was in a position to capture Bin Laden in 1998 but canceled the mission at the last minute.

After much discussion, ABC executives and the producers toned down, but did not eliminate entirely, a scene that involved Clinton's national security advisor, Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, declining to give the order to kill Bin Laden, according to a person involved with the film who declined to be identified because of the sensitivities involved.

"That sequence has been the focus of attention," the source said, adding: "These are very slight alterations."

In addition, the network decided that the credits would say the film is based "in part" on the 9/11 commission report, rather than simply "based on" the bestselling report, as the producers originally intended.

ABC, meanwhile, is tip-toeing away from the film's version of events. In a statement, the network said the miniseries "is a dramatization, not a documentary, drawn from a variety of sources, including the 9/11 commission report, other published materials and from personal interviews."

The statement adds: "The events that lead to 9/11 originally sparked great debate, so it's not surprising that a movie surrounding those events has revived the debate. The attacks were a pivotal moment in our history that should never be forgotten and it's fitting that the discussion continues."

None of ABC's moves is likely to quell the debate, however.

The Center for American Progress Action Fund, a liberal advocacy group, said on Wednesday it had collected 25,000 letters asking ABC to either correct or cancel the miniseries. "The miniseries presents an agenda that blames the Clinton administration for the 9/11 attacks while ignoring numerous errors and failures of the Bush administration," the center said in a news release.

Answer 3

Ahhhhh poor mr clinton.... waza matter cant take some of your own political medicine you left wing wack jobs have been spitting crap like this out for as long as President Bush has been in office and now that it is mudd slung back in your face you want to start boohooin You havent a clue how many false statements have been made by the left wing idiots in the past how you can protect someone after what he did in Our House you should be ashamed of yourself talk about a lie and falsehoods I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THAT WOMEN need I say more Urrrrrr He say more and if you believe that he was telling the truth then you truly are dumb as a rock and nobody cares what you think Ooohh I am sorry a rock dosent think Case Closed

Answer 4

Actually the story says that the piece still has to be edited and it has not been seen yet , that includes the people making the claims that it will put democrats in a bad light , you should read a little better before you make irresponsible accusations , It's very simple everytime the Truth is revealed about certain things democrats loose their minds they are hoping we forgot about 9/11 and all the innocent lives lives lost , sorry libs your party is already in a tailspin this wont help , I guess the truth hurts sometimes huh!

Answer 5

The simple truth is that the American media has failed the people. They try to put forth an appearance that they are balanced, but if you research it, all of the major news networks are owned by a handful of companies who have gained a lot from the status quo, and most likely don't want it to change. ABC, if I am not mistaken, is owned by the Sinclair (oil) group who have most likely benefitted immensly from the Bush administration and Republican policies. There is probably a reason why they kept their ABC affiliates from showing a Dateline that showed a listing of fallen soldiers in Iraq, and they showed an anti-Kerry film before the 2004 election.

Answer 6

There are a number of reasons why......
1st, Bush's cousin is a big wig at ABC.
2nd, It arrives at the 5th anniversary of 9/11 which helps the propaganda set out by this administration.
3rd, its an election year.
There is way too much money to be made for the Republicans to give up any political position.
We live in a society that has replaced TRUTH with SPIN.

Answer 7

Apparently ABC is suckered down to the same level Fox "News" is vegetation since years.
Their admission that they fabricated facts disqualifies them as a news source. They should have a higher standard, but seem to have given in to an urge they couldn't fight any longer.

The plausible explanation of their actions can only be found in their attempt to help the GOP in the upcoming election. Their announcement that they will broadcast the propaganda without commercial interruptions is a clear sign that the GOP compensates them for the revenues lost.

It is yet a despicable display of the ethics of the media who are supposed to protect the public from unchecked abuse of power as we see in recent years. Unfortunately we are witnessing the complacency of the press in even broader range than during Nazi Germany. I guess the press has learned from those events and decided that it is indeed easier and more profitable to side with those who abuse power instead with those who need protection from it.

Answer 8

As long as they say its' a dramatization, and that parts of it were "fictionalized", they can get away with it. Wouldn't it be nice if someone could just put the real truth out there?
I assume you know that all the major media outlets are owned by corporate interests? This should not surprise anyone. And yet, we keep on hearing the republicans scream "Liberal media bias!"
Hmmm..... interesting, doncha think?

Answer 9

Have you considered this may be a very clever approach by ABC to get lots and lots of free advertising for the show. So they can edit to to blandness now, and still get great ratings.

Answer 10

The dates and shutting dates linked with the decrease priced Care Act (ACA), or Obamacare, are a shifting aim. they seem to alter by making use of the week, if no longer normally, in accordance with government conflicts, internet site malfunctions, and client lawsuits. maximum heavily, you could properly be apprehensive approximately lacking a cut-off date and consequently lacking of project to be coated – and as a substitute being charged a punishing tax penalty. indexed below are the main needed dates to be attentive to in the arriving months.

Answer 11

Who cares? I think little of someone who can watch a dramatization of a tragedy that happened such a short time ago.

If you're pathetic enough to watch, I couldn't care less what you think.