Spin
May 15th, 2007My favorite part is when that Larry King creature is talking to Slick, fifteen minutes in:
“He would — uh — serve you — you know what I mean?”
Woh. Not before bedtime kiddies. Not before bedtime.
Via: Google Video:
Using the 1992 presidential election as his springboard, documentary filmmaker Brian Springer captures the behind-the-scenes maneuverings of politicians and newscasters in the early 1990s. Pat Robertson banters about “homos,” Al Gore learns how to avoid abortion questions, George Bush talks to Larry King about halcyon — all presuming they’re off camera. Composed of 100% unauthorized satellite footage, Spin is a surreal expose of media-constructed reality.
Spin is a wonderful documentary. A higher quality version has been available for several years at Illegal Art. Direct download in MPEG-4 here.
I wish I could say this film was more compelling, but it’s really not that good. What, we’re supposed to be surprised that Pat Robertson calls people “homos” when he thinks no one is watching? Or that politicians have advisors who tell them to avoid answering direct questions? I kept waiting for some real good scoop, but I think the closest thing to it was the democratic presidential candidate who was excluded by the media. That was newsworthy, and perhaps the filmmaker could of interviewed him and expanded that segment. But these snippets of “secret” dialog were just lame.
I disagree as to the most powerful moment . . . I foung the media’s total shut out of the best candidate for President, the city Mayor who wanted to cut defense spending 50% in wake of the “end of the cold war” pre-the next one “the war on terror” – – I had never heard of this guy and to see how they totally “disappeared” him, telling him that to get media attention he “already had to have media attention” – – a problem none of the military industrial complex candidates we were given to “choose” from had – – I recommend everyone watch this and weep . . . .
Fascinating. The whole Slick Willy fiasco is really making sense in light of this little documentary.
Ted Turner and his new money (and any of his allies) wasn’t allowed into the Halls Of Illumination (or had some other little petty disagreement with Others of Power) so he used his lapdog Larry to really play up the Bill and Al show using CNN. And it worked! …for a while. Ted, unfortunately, chose a candidate that had easily exposed flaws which They used to prevent Teddy from extending his new-found power. I guess chalk it up as a noob mistake.
Robertson also plays an interesting part in this unfolding game of power. Based on other documentaries about the neo-conservative movement and the creation of the Jihad movement, it’s clear that Robertson was being used as a naive power broker of the religious right for the neo-conservative Illuminated as their (neocons) prominence continued to rise. Unfortunately for those resisting Ted’s overtures, the religious-right aspect of the neo-conservative movement wasn’t fully realized by 92.
After 96, the neo-conservative movement went into full-swing by bringing Rupert Murdoch in to further erode Turner’s almost monopolistic use of media as a tool of power, and by co-opting Robertson’s religious base.
It’s interesting to watch Murdoch as he purchases all these new Web2.0 “properties” as a way to build a possible power platform to leverage upcoming generations. I remember reading all the incredulous reviews when Murdoch started doing this — about how it was a bad investment as a media property… but looked at from the propaganda perspective, not seeming so foolish.
I saw this in college. What’s interesting is how difficult it is to tell who exactly is in control? Is it people in the media, the candidates? Sometimes it seems like some have more control than others. Like the media lady who told the doctor his point was “obtuse.” That seemed calculated. The media people who excluded the Cherokee historian seemed more ignorant than anything.
What I find worthwhile is witnessing the divergence between off-camera behavior and on-camera behavior. It’s interesting to see that Bush and Clinton stay in character, whereas Dan Rather and other news types break out of character. This could reveal an internalization of values, or Grade A double-think. Probably a bit of both. I mean, Nixon knew he was being taped; supposedly he installed the tapes in his office. This was probably a strategy to give him a copy of the record to circumvent his enemies bugging him and then using the records against him. He would now have his own copy, with which he could use as leverage. Of course, they still used his tapes against him anyway, but you get the point. Not a fun world, the world of politics.
Fascinating…
All right, I’ll bite. What did Larry mean by “serve”?
ted turner would shame bill clinton’s dancing skills: http://www.amazon.com/You-Served-Special-Omarion-Grandberry/dp/B0001MMGC2/