The Case for Censoring Path to 9-11: Disney's Pay Off to the FCC

[McCamy Taylor]

I made the case for not censoring ABC's miniseries "Path to 9-11" in another thread. Now, I will make the exact opposite case. Suppose ABC's parent corporation, Disney needs a REALLY big favor from the Bush administration. We are talking big bucks here. Something as big as the federal media ownership rule changes that W.'s old FCC head Michael Powell handed out to the media during W.'s first term. The ones that a federal court struck down. The ones that Kerry promised to get rid of. The ones that Bush promised to fight for. The ones that all the major TV news media and many major newspapers just happened to want really badly--so badly that they were willing to sit on their presidential election exit poll results.

If you do not remember the uproar over those federal media ownership rule changes it might be because the day after W. got sworn in for a second term by Congress, Mochael Powell announced to the TV networks and newspapers that the FCC had changed its mind. It was no longer going to fight in federal court for those admininistration rule changes which it had promised the TV network heads. The results were pretty predictable.

http://www.grandtheftelectionohio.com/060112.htm

However, you can never stop a greedy business exec from hoping. Disney has been leading the vaguard of a fight with the FCC and consumers to keep cable from offering something called "a la carte". This would allow cable subscribers to pick and pay for only the channels they want. That means families that do not have children under the age of 6 would not have to pay for Disney. Disney does not like this. Check out this site to see how mad the idea of a la carte makes some people.

http://blog.pff.org/archives/communications/cable/a_la_carte/

Here is what Disney said to "a la carte"

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6316376.html?display=Breaking+News

This argument has been going on for at least several years. Now, if you are Disney, being in every home in America is damn important for your empire. If kids dont see your characters growing up, they wont visit your parks, buy your merchandise, go to your movies. There probably isnt anyone's ass that you will not kiss to stay in every cable package.

Which leads me to the important question: is "The Path to 9-11" not protected art at all? Is it simply a bribe from Disney to the Bush administration so that the FCC will rule "Nay" on "a la carte Cable"? Did someone in the Bush White House tell Disney "YOu give us a 9-11 documentary that paints Dems as weak on terror, and we will keep you in Americans' home"? In this case, demanding that ABC pull "The Path to 9-11" is not censorship. It is putting a stop to bribery of federal officials.

Which scenerio is true? Is "Path to 9-11" some poor schmoe's artistic vision? Or it a calculated bribe? Damned if I know. Nothing in life is easy. I guess everyone has to decide for themselves what they believe and act accordingly.

[AX10]

1. I'd take a la carte cable. I don't really feel like paying for Disney.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Very interesting theory.

Might be worth flogging around the net a little. Pull in some choice quotes from your links so lazy people like me can just read through the text, expend it a little, and see who'll take it as an editorial.

[McCamy Taylor]

3. This review from Editor and Publisher makes it sound like Propaganda

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/search/article_display.jsp?schema=&vnu_content_id=1003087654

If you read this review, which is a must read, this docudrama is a piece of shit. Even if it wasnt a political hot potato no sponsor would waste money on it. It trashes popular president and praises a dumbass president. THEY LEAVE OUT "MY PET GOAT"! Wtf is up with that? Every American is going to notice that omission.

So, I am now more inclined than before to believe that "Path to 9-11" should be retitled "Mickey's Pay-Off for FCC Favors".