http://barbrastreisand.com/statements.html
Quote:
Sad Day for Artistic Freedom ...Barbra Streisand
Posted on November 4, 2003
I am deeply disappointed that CBS, the network that in 1964 gave me complete artistic control in creating television specials, now caved in to right wing Republican pressure to cancel the network broadcast of the movie The Reagans. (And I say MOVIE - because this is NOT a documentary - it's a television drama.) The movie will now be aired on Showtime, where the difference in viewership is in the millions.
One can only imagine the kind of pressure that would compel CBS to take such an extraordinary action. This was an organized Republican spin machine at work. Remember the Dixie Chicks controversy? It wasn't the larger general public that called in to radio stations and burned CDs, it was a small group of right wing activists. In fact, now the band is more popular than ever, with a sold out summer tour.
I don't believe Democrats often, if ever, try to muscle the First Amendment like this. For example, in 1983, no one stopped NBC from airing Kennedy, a biopic that portrayed President Kennedy and other members of his family and administration as deeply flawed, even though the movie could have potentially been hurtful to Jackie Kennedy, who was still alive to see it, as well as to her children.
This is censorship, pure and simple. Well, maybe not all that pure. Censorship never is. Due to their experience with the restrictive English government, the framers of our constitution specifically included a ban on prior restraint in the First Amendment, which is an attempt to stop information from getting out there before the public has a chance to see it at all - exactly what is going on in this case. Of course, CBS as a company has the legal right to make decisions about what they do and do not air. However, these important decisions should be based on artistic integrity rather than an attempt to appease a small group of vocal dissidents. Indeed, today marks a sad day for artistic freedom - one of the most important elements of an open and democratic society.
|
My responce?
Barabas Streisand has made known her decree concerning the "Reagan" movie. I disagree with her ever so slightly...
Quote:
|
I am deeply disappointed that CBS, the network that in 1964 gave me complete artistic control in creating television specials, now caved in to right wing Republican pressure to cancel the network broadcast of the movie The Reagans. (And I say MOVIE - because this is NOT a documentary - it's a television drama.) The movie will now be aired on Showtime, where the difference in viewership is in the millions.
|
She's deeply disappointed with CBS? Certainly not as disappointed with CBS as those who have already been subjected to the trash she's defending. Here's a quick business primer for Babs: CBS didn't give you control of creating your TV specials because they respected your artistic freedom, they did it because they felt that your artistic freedom could make them some cold, hard cash. In this case it is the opposite...it became staggeringly clear to CBS that showing the Reagan film, even edited to the bone, could amount to a huge liability. If anything, those who exposed this travesty of film-making have done CBS a favor by preventing them from making a huge mistake.
Quote:
|
One can only imagine the kind of pressure that would compel CBS to take such an extraordinary action. This was an organized Republican spin machine at work. Remember the Dixie Chicks controversy? It wasn't the larger general public that called in to radio stations and burned CDs, it was a small group of right wing activists. In fact, now the band is more popular than ever, with a sold out summer tour.
|
Well, I guess it takes an extremist, small minority activist to know one. Of course, I would hardly call the radio talk show hosts who broadcast to more people in a day than Babs performs for in a year "minority activists." They are simply performers exercising complete artistic control in creating audio entertainment. For someone who feels that the movie which depicts real people of important stature as grotesque charicatures unrecognizable by those who knew them...you are awfully intolerant of real individuals expressing real opinions in the real world.
Quote:
|
I don't believe Democrats often, if ever, try to muscle the First Amendment like this. For example, in 1983, no one stopped NBC from airing Kennedy, a biopic that portrayed President Kennedy and other members of his family and administration as deeply flawed, even though the movie could have potentially been hurtful to Jackie Kennedy, who was still alive to see it, as well as to her children.
|
Simply put, why any lack of conviction and resolve on the part of liberals to protect their own from attack should surprise us is a mystery to me. Their lack of conviction and resolve on any number of current issues and their willingness to stab each other in the back for even the most momentary of political gains is proof enough.
Quote:
|
This is censorship, pure and simple. Well, maybe not all that pure. Censorship never is. Due to their experience with the restrictive English government, the framers of our constitution specifically included a ban on prior restraint in the First Amendment, which is an attempt to stop information from getting out there before the public has a chance to see it at all - exactly what is going on in this case. Of course, CBS as a company has the legal right to make decisions about what they do and do not air. However, these important decisions should be based on artistic integrity rather than an attempt to appease a small group of vocal dissidents. Indeed, today marks a sad day for artistic freedom - one of the most important elements of an open and democratic society.
|
Censor literally means "a person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable" (emphasis mine.) Who exactly was authorized to censor this film? Where is the law giving them that power? What agency stopped or would stop CBS from airing the film if they chose to do so? The short answer is: no supporting evidence on any count. If CBS so decides to run this piece of filth in the time slots it was originally scheduled, they will run it with no consequences but the opinion of the viewing public. "Artistic freedom" is alive and well. James Brolin (Bab's hubby) is still allowed to portray one of the premier figures in our nation's history as a buffoon and Babs still allowed to catterwaul her self-admittedly boring songs...and corporations and the public are free to accept or deny these performances as they wish.
Of course, Babs still feels that the President was not elected legally (despite vast evidence to the contrary, such as, well, he's the President), the California Recall was a "dangerous precident" (as opposed to the precident of the insane economic policies of Gray Davis), and Texas redistricting is "hijacking of the democratic process" (unless being processed by Democrats as they have for 40+ years I must assume)...it seems that unless it serves her needs, the laws by which we are governed are a mere formality. In this case, the opinions of the vast majority of Americans are insignificant with respect to "artistic freedom." But what Babs is asking for isn't artistic freedom, it is artistic imposition...she feels that CBS and the viewing public should be FORCED to endure this travesty even though both have clearly spoken. Babs needs to remember that Andres Serrano may be able to display a crucifix in a jar of urine in Soho or San Francisco to acclaim...but in the vast majority of towns his work would evoke only outrage at it's simple-minded, juvenial hatred.
It just goes to show you what living most of a life of luxury, free of the demands placed on average, working class persons...a life spent immersed in fantasies can do to your perceptions of the real world. Go back to your fantasies Babs...the majority has spoken.