Criticism back in vogue
ESSAY Questioning authority is in, thanks to a city’s ruin and inane celebrity behaviour Mainstream media starts doing its job again, instead of leaving it to the bloggers
From questioning Sean Penn’s motives to slamming George W. Bush while he’s already down, criticism south of the border is finally back in style. The recent anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks not only marked the passage of four years since terrorists changed the political course of the world; it also signalled the fourth anniversary since meaningful social criticism in the U. S. went on hiatus. But judging by recent reactions of politicians, members of the public, and even the media, it appears the four- year moratorium that silenced many Americans has been lifted.
Last week, President Bush, who managed to mount an offensive against an unproven enemy in Iraq while a neutered lap- dog press was afraid to perform its duty, was finally taken to task. He had to admit he was at fault after the media demanded to know how Mike Brown, the dubiously qualified Bush appointee who lead the Federal Emergency Management Agency, was given the responsibility of protecting millions of lives.
Thankfully Brown stepped down — about a week after Paula Zhan, in what appeared to be a moment of unscripted ( and uncensored) incredulity, went after Brown on CNN for not knowing about thousands of stranded people trapped inside the New Orleans Convention Centre and his general incompetence in responding to hurricane Katrina. Bush has since been widely criticized for apparently lying to Americans during his last election campaign, which he won in large part because of his promise to make national security his top priority. Thanks to the criticism, it’s now clear that the appointment of Brown contradicted Bush’s promise to do everything he could to keep the country safe.
Another example of criticism’s comeback, and perhaps the moment that will one day be looked at as a turning point, was Anderson Cooper’s exchange with Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu.
During an interview on CNN, Cooper had just been told by Landrieu that Congress had worked hard to pass a bill aimed at helping the rescue effort. Cooper responded: “Excuse me, Senator, I’m sorry for interrupting. I haven’t heard that, because, for the last four days, I’ve been seeing dead bodies in the streets here in Mississippi. And to listen to politicians thanking each other and complimenting each other, you know, I got to tell you, there are a lot of people here who are very upset, and very angry, and very frustrated.
“ And when they hear politicians slap — you know, thanking one another, it just, you know, it kind of cuts them the wrong way right now, because literally there was a body on the streets of this town yesterday being eaten by rats because this woman had been laying in the street for 48 hours. And there’s not enough facilities to take her up.” But even before Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, forcing reporters to do what they’re supposed to do — report, freely — one could sense a backlash against the imposition of political correctness and celebrity reverence that has steadily been crawling over U. S. culture. Much of this responsible criticism has come about because of the Internet, as one response to a mainstream press unwilling to take on the movers and shakers of our society is to tune it out. Many young people, however, have taken the lead. As fringe websites such as the Drudge Report, The Smoking Gun and popular blogs continue to challenge the mainstream press for generational dominance, the more irreverent alternative to established media is slowly influencing its competition. When Tom Cruise appeared on the Today Show in June, lecturing the usually innocuous Matt Lauer about the dangers of psychotropic drugs, and the “ pseudo science” of psychiatry in general, the host, surprisingly, wasn’t willing to just sit back and reflect on this latest offering of celebrity wisdom ( likely knowing he would be quickly pilloried across cyberspace).
Instead, Lauer challenged Cruise’s advocacy of Scientology over any other spiritual/ scientific pursuit with the following: “But a little bit of what you’re saying Tom is, you say you want people to do well. But you want them do to well by taking the road that you approve of, as opposed to a road that may work for them.” The criticism didn’t stop there, following Cruise’s eventual freefall from reality that took place in front of the camera: “Matt. Matt, Matt, you don’t even — you’re glib. You don’t even know what Ritalin is. If you start talking about chemical imbalance, you have to evaluate and read the research papers on how they came up with these theories, Matt, okay? That’s what I’ve done. Then you go and you say where’s the medical test? Where’s the blood test that says how much Ritalin you’re supposed to get?”
Within 24 hours the Internet was filled with raving cutdowns of Cruise’s words, and the rest of the mainstream press — usually beholden to the power of celebrity — also stood up to the unchecked authority of the actor.
For too long, magazines such as Vanity Fair and Esquire, not to mention celebrity vehicles like People and Us, have been unwilling to criticize stars out of fear they would be cut off from their lifeblood by hyper- vigilant agents and over- protective handlers. Of course, other than their performance on the screen, we wouldn’t have to worry about being critical of celebrities if they didn’t get involved in sensitive social and political subjects that open them up to public scrutiny ( or should). Sean Penn might have avoided criticism for being an opportunist when he visited Iraq ( and documented his time there). But without the cover of political correctness, his recent rescue mission in Louisiana during a time when emotions were raw has brought scorn from the media and the public alike. He was photographed helping rescue stranded New Orleans residents. The pictures were reportedly taken by a crew that Penn brought along to record the events.
If that indeed is the case, Penn would be hard- pressed to come up with a defence against the accusations of self- promotion and opportunism that have since been levelled against him.
Rightfully so, wouldn’t you say?
While the right targets are increasingly being found in the south, in Canada, we’re still trying to get our act together. We haven’t found our aim just yet.
Last week, we didn’t mind piling on an ailing former prime minister because he referred to some of his former political enemies and associates in lessthanflattering terms. And yet at the same time, the current Prime Minister earned himself an extra month in power, as the federal election was pushed back at least four weeks thanks to the Gomery Commission report’s postponement — with hardly a hint of the criticism that’s back in style down in the U. S. Email San Grewal at sgrewal@thestar.ca.