White House, media in bad bargain

When light was recently shone on the White House's policy of bribing TV producers to adjust their scripts, the policy was abruptly canceled. That indicates that the people behind it knew it was a little sleazy.

What happened before the light was turned on is a little complicated. Congress appropriated a billion dollars to buy anti-drug commercials on TV -- on the condition that the networks run one free ad for each one bought. This rankled the networks because carrying public service announcements (PSAs) means that they cannot carry paid advertising.

Time to sell

Six networks -- ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, UPN and WB -- salivated. They could free up millions of dollars worth of ad time simply by having the doctors on "ER" say they don't use cocaine. At first, the drug office watched the shows and decided what to count as PSA time. Then the White House, which loves Hollywood (especially for the millions of dollars that actors, writers and producers contribute), went a step further: "Why not show us the scripts before filming? Then we can suggest where to insert messages that we'll count as PSAs."

Venality totally supplanted any remaining shreds of good sense and artistic freedom. Some networks vetted their scripts without telling the writers of the shows. White House staffers suddenly became partners with producers, telling them how to tweak their programs to qualify for the PSA credits.

Practice stopped

Indeed, it was a bad idea, but how come no one noticed before the light went on? It's easy to understand politicians trying to control the media; that's been going on for centuries. But finding such a supine media is disturbing. These are the same people who cry "censorship" any time someone suggests that their content is objectionable and should be changed. Imagine the reaction from Hollywood if a Catholic bishop said, "Let me read your screenplays ahead of time for religious content and suggest changes."

Now we know: The networks would say yes if the bishop could come up with $25 million.

What if?

But would the reaction from the public be the same if the White House offered millions of dollars for inserting pro-abortion messages? And what would be the reaction from Hollywood if a pro-life president offered millions for putting anti-abortion messages into TV shows?

The ease with which so many members of the artistic community roll over when told to by Washington -- through the White House in this case or by the National Endowment for the Arts in other instances -- puts me in mind of a lap dog.

No, not a lap dog. Something smaller. Something that scampers away when a light goes on.

(02-03-00)