Daily dose of truth

Back when David Letterman was on NBC and his show was called Late Night, I remember that during one of his anniversary broadcasts the host rode out onto the stage -- it might have been Radio City Music Hall, taken over for this particular celebration -- atop a white horse. It was around 1990, and I felt that Letterman was, as the image indicated, somewhat of a hero for those of my generation: the purveyor of humor that was smart, funny, irreverent and that spoke to us.

Letterman is at CBS now, and I don't watch his show that often. When I do see it, there is less anticipation that each night is going to be a spectacle -- some new twist on the talk show format that will have everyone talking the next day. He can still be funny, but he is now 61 and his show can no longer be relied on to prod and poke fun at the establishment. It has been for a while now part of it.

A few years ago I began watching The Daily Show, which Jon Stewart took over hosting in 1999, and I've come to see that program as a nightly "must-see." For people like me -- progressives who attempt to be politically aware -- it is "the smartest, funniest show on television and a provocative and substantive source of news," as described in a recent story in The New York Times.

To those who don't watch The Daily Show, it may seem impossible for a self-proclaimed "fake news show" to be a source of what is happening in the world, but it's true. The program often takes apart political news and lays the pieces bare for all to see, while network news shows offer fluff and dance around the truth. There is, often, a little crass humor here and there, but there is some brutal honesty regarding our politicians and our political system. There's also a serious discussion with each evening's guest -- and Stewart always shows himself to be on top of every issue and able to spar with the most highly-regarded minds.

More and more the owners of those minds are showing up, liberal and conservative. They know that Stewart's audience is smart and reads books, so the show is a key stop for writers of political non-fiction. Also, politicians consider it a show worth visiting. John McCain has been on several times, as have the presidents of several countries and more than two dozen current or former US Senators.

Even when I need to wake up early the next day, I try to catch The Daily Show (11 p.m. on Comedy Central, channel 76 on Comcast Cable), and if Jon Stewart rides out one night on a white horse I will applaud.

Reality TV?

"Jack Bauer is a criminal," according to Gary Solis, a retired West Point law professor. "In real life, he would be prosecuted." Solis speaks, of course, about the character played by Kiefer Sutherland on Fox television's wildly successful program, 24. His comments are part of an article in the Feb. 19 issue of The New Yorker that discusses the portrayal of torture on the show and profiles Joel Surnow, co-creator and executive producer of 24.

Surnow appears to be an egotistical, empty-headed loudmouth -- though I'm sure people who lean to the right could read the piece, which is called "Whatever It Takes," and was written by Jane Mayer, and come away feeling that Surnow is an outspoken defender of all that is good. The part of the article that is most interesting, however, is the middle third, when Mayer discusses a visit to the set of 24 by Gen. Patrick Finnegan, the dean of West Point. Along with Finnegan were "three of the most experienced military and FBI interrogators in the country," and the group came to "voice their concern that the show’s central political premise—that the letter of American law must be sacrificed for the country’s security—was having a toxic effect. In their view, the show promoted unethical and illegal behavior and had adversely affected the training and performance of real American soldiers."

Yikes. It's a scary thought, but according to Finnegan and others, 24 is quite popular among cadets at West Point as well as soldiers in the field in Iraq and Afghanistan, where DVDs of the program circulate widely. One interrogation expert, who was deployed overseas, said, "People watch the shows, and then walk into the interrogation booths and do the same things they’ve just seen.” He added, "In Iraq, I never saw pain produce intelligence." The FBI expert said, "Only a psychopath can torture and be unaffected. You don't want people like that in your organization. They are untrustworthy, and tend to have grotesque other problems."

On TV, Jack Bauer is always presented with the "ticking bomb scenerio," in which getting key information from the bad guys immediately can prevent the loss of thousands or millions of lives. The truth is more complex. First, that situation rarely, if ever, happens. Second, torture rarely, if ever, gets usable information from suspects. In the context of those facts, is it then worthwhile to follow a course that will, in the end, produce little information, eventually scar the interrogator and, as Gen. Finnegan added in the story, hurts America's image around the world?

For his part, Sutherland is said to be upset at the possible fallout from the actions of his character and also "bored with playing torture scenes." He has condemned the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib as "absolutely criminal," and is being asked to appear personally at West Point or in a training film to emphasize that his show is purely entertainment and should not be emulated. Surnow, of course, said, "They say that torture doesn't work, but I don't believe them." I disagree with his position, but what infuriates me is the arrogance of a person who dismisses the input of others -- as well as facts and figures -- so callously. The army interrogation expert said, "They have this money-making machine, and we were telling them it's immoral." Unfortunately, the first half of that assessment is the only part that carries any weight.

Tube talk

No one working in television that I am aware of writes like Aaron Sorkin. While he was at the rudder of The West Wing the show was brilliant -- rivaled only by Buffy the Vampire Slayer. (I kid you not.) I recently borrowed from a friend DVDs of Sorkin's previous TV series, Sports Night, and if I can get my DVD player hooked up I hope to watch that program soon.

Currently, Sorkin is the force behind another show, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, and while it might be a bit short of The West Wing at that show's height -- though the episode "Nevada Day, Part 1" was damn close -- Studio 60 is witty, lively, moving and funny. Check it out Mondays at 10 on NBC.

Issue one: Quagmire

These days I don’t see The McLaughlin Group that often, but I caught it this week and witnessed the most amiable episode of the program I’ve ever seen. Eleanor Clift and Tony Blankley even agreed at one point, which almost caused me to fall off my seat.

The reason? It was a year-end review and all five panelists were in agreement that the Bush Administration’s handling of the situation in Iraq has been incompetent and disgraceful. John McLaughlin and Pat Buchanan have frequently been critical of the White House, but the reactionary Blankley usually comes to Bush’s defense with a voice as loud as his sense of fashion. This week, however, he seemed to have his tail between his legs.

Bye bye.