Tuesday, September 19, 2006
AN ABC -- PAC 10 ANALOGY
Lest we draw parallels where none exist, it might first be appropriate to present the scenarios and facts of two different series of events the past week.
In one case we have the broadcast of a so-called docudrama on AB C about the "Path to 9/11," which purports to be a dramatized depiction of the events, conversations, and actions during a period leading up to the tragedy of the twin towers. However, the architects of the docudrama decide to present a version of these events contrary to that established as truth by the 9/11 Commission, and a version different from that which participants say actually happened. Words never said are put into the mouths of real persons, fictionalized for dramatic effect or for political purposes.
Now this docudrama smells so bad that its technical advisor from the 9/11 Commission disavows it, as do the actors in it. It is attacked as untruthful by historical persons depicted in it. Corporate advertisers shy away from sponsorship, because nobody wants to be held responsible. Nevertheless, decisions are made to show it anyway.
What about instant replay? People actually watch, and the public is influenced by this travesty. It comes in first one night and second the other in Nielsen ratings. There is no real outrage in the press. There are only cries of "foul" from democratic groups. The calls made by the network, revealed as partisan bias, were in essence upheld in review by mainstream media.
Now, let us turn to a scene in Eugene, Oregon, where a game of football was played on a balmy Saturday afternoon. The outcome of this game between the universities of Oregon and Oklahoma was determined by the officials. That is to say, the outcome was based upon "declared truth" rather than actual truth.
We saw the Oregon player jump in front of the Oklahoma player, knocking the ball away before it had traveled the legal 10 yard distance. Further, we saw that after a skirmish for the ball that an Oklahoma player covered it, picked it up, and walked away. On replay, we have seen the same thing dozens of times. It was clear.
However, the "official truth" was different. Game officials apparently did not see the ball touched by the Oregon player fewer than 9 yards after being kicked, and they did not see the Oklahoma player as the first to possess the ball. To compound the errors, the replay officials refused to see what the rest of the world saw on the camera footage, would not reverse the bad calls, and handed the game to Oregon.
Now, the only ones really disturbed by all this are the partisans, i.e. most of us in Oklahoma.
An inquiry by the PAC 10 conference officials has found fault with all the officials, and they have slapped their wrists with a game suspension. It seems unlikely that anyone will make any serious effort to correct the damage done.
Are there parallels between the ABC controversy and the PAC events in Oregon? It may be a stretch, but it appears that there are definite similarities. The difference may be that ABC knew of their unethical and untruthful scripting beforehand, and they proceeded anyway. How about those officials in Oregon?
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
