The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Hollywood's new censors > Comments

Hollywood's new censors : Comments

By John Pilger, published 2/3/2009

In the age of the 'war on terror' censorship in Hollywood works by omission and 'introspective dross'.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
John
I hope there are many more of your articles on OLO. There are many forms of censorship including overload of trivia so the 'real' gets buried and the famous Hollywood line 'Based on a true story.'
Over the years I have followed your work and researched the issues raised and come to the conclusion that whilst we are supposed to be 'free' in the West we are never told the truth.
Posted by Daviy, Monday, 2 March 2009 12:06:05 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shock, Horror,

People like to see movies that reflect what they believe, gives them some escape from reality, and Hollywood panders to it.

Block busters are 90% fantasy. Reality comes in the form of documentaries that are watched by a handful of people.

If you want to get on the big screen tell people what they want to hear not what they need to hear.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Monday, 2 March 2009 12:26:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sadly, people don't actually mind murderous governments so long as it is theirs and there is a suitable back-story to justify it.
Hollywood is one thing, where was the media...any media that questioned the manufactured "reasons" for Iraq?
There were reporters on the ground in Iraq reporting exactly what was subsequently found and also reporting the US's motives, but these were largely suppressed (AlJazeera), or ignored (Ted Rall).
The fact is that the media was playing war games along with Blackwater, Haliburton and the other profiteers.
Thank God for the Internet, and one day we may even have the "democracy" that we supposedly invade others for.
Posted by Ozandy, Monday, 2 March 2009 1:59:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pilger's focus is on war and colonialism, but film-making has entrenched many other forms of power as well. For example, the Hollywood Code of the 1930s is well-known for its harsh sexual morality. Much lesser known are the restrictions it put on the portrayal of such social issues as the poor and the rights of women.

The poor were not allowed to be shown to challenge the reasons for their poverty - instead, they had to either be shown as being happy with their lot or overcoming their poverty through the attainment of wealth. None of that commie stuff about the rich exploiting them. Some filmmakers, like Elia Kazan, occasionally got away with it, but only in return for dobbing in his commie friends to the HUAA.

Ditto, women. If a woman was shown to have an active sex-life, the Code's script guidelines required her to be 'punished' in some way - e.g. by losing the man she loved to a virginal rival or by dying some awful death - or she had to be portrayed as a whore or equivalent. Strong female characters were allowed, even encouraged, but female independence was a no-no.

By the 1960s, the Code was ditched, but its legacy lingers in Hollywood to this day.
Posted by SJF, Monday, 2 March 2009 4:58:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For those interested, the Graham & Alford article,
"The power behind the screen" is available at
http://www.newstatesman.com/film/2009/01/disney-hollywood-interests

and a similar story by the same authors,
"The Deep Politics of Hollywood - In the Parents' Best Interest" can be found at
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12465
Posted by Sir Vivor, Monday, 2 March 2009 9:26:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear John, I can’t believe that I’m reading an article from a member of the media industry complaining about censorship. Are you serious?

What’s even funnier is that you seem surprised! considering your entire industry is built upon censorship, one voice trying to have its voice heard over that of others, by any means possible.

It’s rather like a manufacturer complaining that nobody is buying their product and then blaming the customer.

You have positioned your “product” in the marketplace and must accept that the market is rejecting it. Once you have accepted that fact you can do some basic analysis to determine why?

Your product is “opinion” on a wide range of global injustice causes for the underdog, passionately presented with biased, prejudicial, and selective research. A bit like Michael Moore, unfortunately he has turned “vigilante”. Which I might add it a natural progression for those who feel they are not being taken notice of.

Your product is positioned well left of centre and for many, such voices are disproportionately represented. So much so that your remaining outlets are facing sever criticism for promoting products like yours. The BBC, ABC and SBS are classic examples.

You have failed to recognize that your market can “educate” itself more today than ever before and is capable of forming its own opinion. Therefore your target audience is shrinking because fewer are buying your product.

Your product will always be bought by those who have an irrational “pet hatred” of big companies, globalisation, capitalism, imperialism and any social injustice that can be whipped up into an emotive hissy fit.

Your industry itself has long moved from news, current affairs and entertainment, to that of “opinion junkies” who seek to influence the masses. This is precisely what you complain about from your targeted “pet hatreds”.

Your pet hatreds are “Your Competitors”.

Many today are concerned that the Fourth Estate is no longer benign and is not only capable of, but actually does influence outcomes. That is definitely not good.

Believability Survey, the Australian, 2007. Politicians came 17th, Media 27th. I rest my case.
Posted by spindoc, Tuesday, 3 March 2009 9:23:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy