While listening to Slate’s Political Gabfest podcast as I ate my breakfast this morning I heard about an interesting piece featuring in the New Yorker this week (and, much as I love reading the New Yorker because I think it makes me look intellectual, it was interesting for another reason entirely) and immediately went to the site to check it out. Hey, I’m only at Cambridge; work can wait.

I should add a disclaimer on to the beginning of this post. I have never seen 24. I could say, after reading this article, that I don’t watch it for some high-minded and moral reason…but that would be a lie. I don’t watch it because I’m a die-hard Alias fan and that would be a betrayal. So, there’s my confession. Now on to the article.

24 is one of the most popular American dramas on television – it won Best Drama and Best Actor at the Emmy Awards in August 2006 (edging out The West Wing, much to my anguish, but I’ve learnt to live with the disappointment); and last week’s Nielsen ratings show it pulling in 6.6 million viewers in the United States (it should also be pointed out here that this is significantly lower than shows like Grey’s Anatomy, so perhaps we should be worrying more about attitudes that fosters in doctors).

The US military doesn’t care about 24’s success, however – what it boils down to is this: they do not look kindly on 24’s depiction of the all-American Jack Bauer torturing suspects week after week in a race against the ticking-timebomb plot device. And now they’ve decided to do something about it.

People do not watch 24 to be political, and no-one is claiming that (despite the hardline conservative stance of Joel Surnow, its executive producer, who believes that “America is in its glory days” and when told by experts that torture doesn’t work responded “I don’t believe that”). However, the very issues that 24 represents have become politically significant and are apparently infiltrating the minds of young West Point cadets, to whom Jack Bauer is an American hero.

I’ve noticed from extensive googling that this issue was in the news back in 2005, around the time of controversy over Abu Ghraib, and whether the US condoned torture, etc. etc. But now it’s returned (much like Jack Bauer does every week), and it seems to have taken on renewed importance.

Last November a team led by US Army Brigadier General Patrick Finnegan (dean of West Point, the US Military Academy) met with a group of 24 writer and producers to voice their concerns about the illegal practices used in the show, claiming that not only did it give an entirely inaccurate depiction of the success of torture, but it was encouraging young American soldiers to set aside the law in favour of emulating their television hero, who always gets results. 24 is apparently extremely popular among recruits, and Surnow proudly displays an American flag in his office which was presented to him by a regiment based in Iraq as a thank-you for the programme. Tony Lagouranis, one of the members of Finnegan’s team, describes working with some soldiers who attempted to re-enact one of the show’s examples of psychological torture, which is illegal under US and international law.

The Intelligence Science Board, which provides advice to those working in US intelligence, released a report condemning 24’s depiction of torture, and Finnegan’s team were there to offer alternative methods Jack Bauer could employ in his weekly escapades to save his beloved country (Surnow states that soldiers and members of the Bush Administration should be enjoying the show – “It’s a patriotic show. They should love it.”). But while the 24 writers found them intriguing, they said they would take far too long to work into an hour-long programme, whose entire premise is built around violence and dramatic tension (not to mention it spawns some delightful sites, such as this one).

It’s hard to know how seriously to take this – Howard Gordon, the lead writer, says in the New Yorker article that “I think people can differentiate between a television show and reality”; but that isn’t the point. None of these recruits or ordinary viewers really believe Jack Bauer is out there saving their country from evil day after day (at least I hope not, otherwise they really shouldn’t be in the military). The problem is that the show attempts to closely replicate the current political climate and therefore makes it harder to viewers to “suspend their disbelief”, in Coleridge’s words, about what is acceptable, legal and even what works. This cannot be blamed entirely on 24 – the CIA took advantage of the American success of Alias to use Jennifer Garner as an advertising tool. But Alias, despite its violence, always had an X-Files feel to it, involving sinister prophecies and ridiculous inventions that tempered the connection with reality. That’s not to say it didn’t use torture as a dramatic device as well, but it was often on the part of the bad guys, or, if not, frequently didn’t work – I remember a lovely moment in the final season when Jack Bristow lops off a man’s ear, and when the hapless terrorist refuses to reveal any information, shoots him.

No-one is arguing that 24, or Alias, or any similar show, is responsible for such atrocities as those which took place at Abu Ghraib. That would be tantamout to claiming CSI creates more serial killers, or Weeds more suburban drug-dealers (or The West Wing more politics students…wait, I’m one of those). Nor is anyone condoning outright censorship. But aside from the human rights questions, torture does not work on most occasions, especially not in ticking-timebomb scenarios (which, by the way, have no basis in fact) – Tony Lagouranis states “In Iraq, I never saw pain produce intelligence”. Evidence solicited under torture is often made up simply to appease the torturer. And in a situation where the suspect is going to die anyway, what’s the point in giving in? Far better to hold out a little while longer and become a martyr.

Yes, TV is fiction. But sometimes it should take more responsibility for its storylines. All it would take is one episode with a proper debate about the effectiveness of torture, or one situation in which Jack Bauer expresses remorse or hesitation over a possibly ineffectual tactic for 24 to remain an exciting and clever, but not subversive, staple of American television.

Whatever it takes [New Yorker]
US military tells Jack Bauer: Cut out the torture scenes … or else! [The Independent]

Filed under: crime, culture, iraq, society, uspolitics on February 18th, 2007