Senate Democrats Threaten ABC Over "Path to 9/11"

Written by Brian Garst, Posted in Foreign Affairs & Policy

I haven’t commented on this Path to 9/11 controversy yet, because up till this point I haven’t much cared. Some of the critics had somewhat reasonable points, and if they wished to decide not to watch or arrange a boycott of the show that’s their right. The free market place allows people to decide what goods they choose to consume, for whatever reason.

Further, if they want to convince other people they shouldn’t watch or convince ABC to change something, they again have the right to make that argument. ABC or other proponents of the series can then respond to the merits of those arguments. In this regard, I’ve found some of the criticisms rather silly. The Clintonistas, whose primary concern appears to be simultaneously to protect the Clinton legacy as well as the religious-like conviction that the left holds on blaming everything in the Middle East on Bush, don’t seem to understand the difference between documentary and docudrama.

This point is highlighted by the fact that the letter includes a passage where the Democrats say “Even Thomas Kean . . . has admitted that scenes in the film are fictionalized.” As if this is some great revelation, when the fact is that even ABC will “admit” that scenes are fictionalized, because it’s a docudrama. It makes no claim of being a 100% factual portrayal of events. It uses composite characters and other fictionalized scenes to portray the essence of the 9/11 Commission in a film format that people can understand. And in that regard it sounds like it does a good job, portraying neither administration in a flattering light.

But this is not what really got my intention and forced me to weigh in on this topic. What is truly amazing is that five Senate Democrats, confident that their pals in the media will give them a pass on their outrageous behavior, issued a veiled threat to ABC that there will be consequences if they don’t do as Democrats demand.

We therefore urge you to cancel this broadcast to cease Disney’s plans to use it as a teaching tool in schools across America through Scholastic. Presenting such deeply flawed and factually inaccurate misinformation to the American public and to children would be a gross miscarriage of your corporate and civic responsibility to the law, to your shareholders, and to the nation.

The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airwaves in serving the public interest. Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events.

Disney and ABC claim this program to be based on the 9/11 Commission Report and are using that assertion as part of the promotional campaign for it. The 9/11 Commission is the most respected American authority on the 9/11 attacks, and association with it carries a special responsibility. Indeed, the very events themselves on 9/11, so tragic as they were, demand extreme care by any who attempt to use those events as part of an entertainment or educational program. To quote Steve McPhereson, president of ABC Entertainment, “When you take on the responsibility of telling the story behind such an important event, it is absolutely critical that you get it right.”

Unfortunately, it appears Disney and ABC got it totally wrong.

The implication couldn’t be any more clear. Get it right (read: please the Democrats), or risk losing your broadcast license for not “serving the public interest” (read: the Democrats’ interest) by not fulfilling your “civic responsibility to the law”. Which, by the way, we in Congress make. Did you know that, ABC? We’re the makers of law, and you’re breaking it. Don’t break the law!