As NewsBusters has reported here, here, here, here, and here, the media have been in quite a lather about the first four episodes of the hit series' sixth season aired on Fox Sunday and Monday. Thanks to a report CNN did Tuesday (video available here, hat tip to Hot Air), we can now add Newsweek to the growing list of concerned media outlets. (Please be advised that it’s been difficult to identify whether this was just a web-broadcast on CNN.com, or something aired on television).
In his January 12 review, Newsweek’s Devin Gordon wrote: “Depending on your perspective, '24' is either a neocon sex fantasy or the collective id of our nation unleashed.” Much like other recent media carps and whines concerning this show, Gordon used his review as an opportunity to swipe at the current president: “At a moment when President Bush is squeezing our civil liberties to fight a war on terror, the writers of ‘24’ have come up with a story that asks whether something could ever happen here in America that makes civil liberties a luxury we can no longer afford.”
In CNN’s story about his article, Gordon stated:
If ‘24’ is true, then everything the neo-conservatives have been saying all along is true.
[…]
Nothing that happens on this show would ever happen in real life. So, for neo-conservatives to claim it as sort of a badge that they’re right is kind of like admitting that something that you watch in a fantasy world is reality.
Nothing that happens on this show would ever happen in real life? Isn’t that rather a bold statement in a post-9/11 world? In fact, prior to 9/11, mightn’t folks like Gordon have said the same thing about many spy/FBI/CIA novels and films such as those authored by Tom Clancy?
Potentially more pertinent, it seems specious to suggest that conservatives look upon “24” as a validation of their views on the war on terror. Instead, folks that consider the series as anything more than good entertainment see the show as posing possible downsides to inaction and complacency.
For some reason, folks on the left and in the media are missing this seemingly obvious distinction.
