With every passing day, the controversy over ABC’s factually-challenged [tag]docudrama[/tag], “The Path to 9/11,” gets a little bigger. Yesterday, some of the people smeared by the film started being more assertive in their defense.
Three members of the Clinton administration have written the chief executive of the Walt [tag]Disney[/tag] Company, [tag]ABC[/tag]’s parent, to complain that the network’s coming two-part miniseries “[tag]The Path to 9/11[/tag]” is fraught with factual errors and fabrications.
The letters ask that the five-hour movie, scheduled for broadcast Sunday and Monday, be either edited for accuracy or canceled, and ABC gave a small indication yesterday that some changes might be made.
One of the officials, former Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, said in her letter to the Disney executive, Robert A. Iger, that although she had requested a copy of the film, ABC had not given her one. But, Ms. Albright said, she has been told by people who have seen it that it “depicts scenes that never happened, events that never took place, decisions that were never made and conversations that never occurred.”
“It asserts as fact things that are not fact,” she wrote.
Albright wasn’t the only one putting pen to paper. Democratic Reps. John Conyers, John Dingell, Jane Harman, and Louise Slaughter joined yesterday to call on ABC to “fix” the movie. Shortly thereafter, the DNC jumped in, accusing ABC/Disney of having “abandoned its duty to the truth,” and urging the network to keep the “propaganda off the air.” Moreover, Bill Clinton’s office is speaking out as well.
Given all of this, ABC appeared to hedge a bit, suggesting some changes might be made. “It is common practice to continue to make edits to strengthen a project right up to the broadcast date,” said Hope Hartman, an ABC spokeswoman.
That may sound vaguely encouraging, but it’s not.
ABC may now appear open to addressing some of the concerns raised by the reality-based community, but an ABC insider told Hugh Hewitt, a far-right blogger, that conservatives need not worry — any changes that are made will be superficial and not alter the point of the fiction. Specifically, Hewitt was told that the changes, referred to as “tweaks,” will be so inconsequential that the “average viewer would not be able to tell the difference between the two versions.” More importantly, the ABC source told Hewitt, “The message of the Clinton Admin failures remains fully intact.”
In related news:
* Fox News reported yesterday that ABC producers continue to insist that the film was “based solely and completely on the 9/11 Commission Report,” a claim we know is blatantly untrue.
* In describing the film, Roger Cressey — a top counterterrorism official for this President Bush II and Clinton — said “it’s amazing…how much they’ve gotten wrong. They got the small stuff wrong” and “then they got the big stuff wrong.”
* Richard Ben-Veniste, a member of the 9/11 Commission, has been very active in condemning the docudrama and highlighting how its scenes differ from the commission’s official report.
* Scholastic, which had partnered with ABC to produce an online study guide for high school students using the movie in lesson plans, appears to be backing away from the partnership. The online study guide that was on Scholastic’s website earlier this week has now disappeared.
* Media Matters has a number of interesting docudrama-related items, including pieces on recent articles on the controversy leaving out key details, the far-right’s bizarre defense of the misleading movie, and the difference in coverage between this controversy and the media’s interest in the CBS miniseries The Reagans from a few years ago.
* And Editor & Publisher obtained a copy of the docudrama and notes several of its fictional scenes.
Stay tuned.