White House Wants Films To Add Anti-Drug Messages 

White House Wants Films To Add Anti-Drug Messages 
Posted by FoM on July 12, 2000 at 10:55:53 PT
By Josh Chetwynd, USA TODAY
Source: USA Today
In Scary Movie, the current No. 1 movie at the box office and a hit especially with the youth crowd, a character played by Marlon Wayans spends most of the horror spoof either smoking or exhaling marijuana. When he is shot in the lung, pot smoke wafts from his chest.If White House drug-policy makers have their way, the character might instead launch into a ''stay off the grass'' message.
Drug czar Barry McCaffrey said Tuesday that he wants Hollywood to join him in dissuading young people from taking drugs.His office last year spent about $2.4 million to show anti-drug messages before or after movies across the nation, but now he's aiming to get messages into the films themselves.''Through continuous dialogue we believe we can raise awareness about how images of substance abuse in the movies impact audiences, particularly young audiences,'' McCaffrey told the House Government Reform subcommittee on criminal justice, drug policy and human resources. He came under criticism in January when it was disclosed that his office had been giving TV networks millions of dollars' worth of financial credits to include anti-drug messages in TV shows.McCaffrey says his office plans to work closely with major studios, writers and directors and ''make available the body of knowledge of the anti-drug community.''But, according to the drug office, there would be no financial incentives. So it is unclear why Hollywood would get on board.Those in Tinseltown are anything but thrilled.''I don't think it's a good idea,'' says Tom Sherak, chairman of 20th Century Fox Domestic Films, who adds that as far as he knows, Fox has not been approached with any proposal. ''The writer writes the movie. I don't think you can force things where they don't belong.''Producer Mark Johnson, who won an Oscar for Rain Man, wholeheartedly agrees with McCaffrey's goal but isn't sure he agrees with the approach. ''We are all going to resist people telling us what to do,'' he says, ''but hopefully inherent in what we do'' is an appropriate message.Writer/director Cameron Crowe (Jerry Maguire) agrees: ''All of this is political football playing. Any good writer knows to show both sides. No politician can write a script for them. The most popular movies, the ones people really take to heart, are the movies that are real. Even movies about junkies can show both sides.''The Writers Guild of America sent critical letters to the networks when the TV controversy emerged, but it is waiting to see what develops at the movie studios. ''It's unclear how the drug office hopes to impact any film production,'' guild spokeswoman Cheryl Rhoden says. But ''I'm certain that if we hear from any of our members about government interference, we will express our concern in the strongest tones.'' Fox's Sherak notes that what exactly is an anti-drug movie is open to interpretation. Sherak thought that Oliver Stone's The Doors was an anti-drug movie, especially because Jim Morrison dies at the end. But others saw it as glorifying drugs.Published: July 12, 2000 Page 5Dİ Copyright 2000 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.  Related Articles: Drug Czar Wants To Reopen The Cookie Jar Czar To Target Film Themes for Dollars
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help

Comment #7 posted by observer on July 13, 2000 at 16:54:52 PT
I certainly appreciate all the kind words! I'm just learning here, trying to sort this prohibitionist mess out. Hats off to FoM and everyone for making this site possible! Keep up the great work everyone!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by kaptinemo on July 13, 2000 at 05:15:34 PT:
Prophets in their own country...
I, too, can't thank Observer enough. Too many things have been hidden from us by government chicanery; Observer has been able to shed some light on some of the worst things the antis use against us. At this point of the movement's life, information is, if not power itself, then the stepping stone to acquiring it. Observer's extraordinary scope of knowledge has saved me many hours of searching for just the right article to confront the local knuckledraggers with sometimes damning evidence of their own narrow-mindedness.This movement is out of the cradle, now. We're taking baby steps towards eventual freedom. A large part of the success of getting that far is due to people like Observer, FoM, The Good Doctor, Tom, and so many others. Like prophets in their own country, they are seldom appreciated. I don't want to make that mistake.My thanks to all of you, posters, and lurkers.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by dddd on July 13, 2000 at 02:12:16 PT
me too
I hope Observer doesnt get a swelled head,but I must agree. Observers surgical dissections of these articles,are enjoyed and appreciated by me too........dddd
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by Dan B on July 12, 2000 at 21:41:27 PT:
Thanks, Observer
Your comments are always right-on-the-money, and your links are valuable tools for all of us. Thanks for expanding our understanding of issues influencing our common interest (ending the drug war). The propaganda information should help a lot of people understand the difference between truth and mere rhetoric. I teach my students (I teach English courses at a university) to spot some of these same techniques in order to help them create more well-reasoned arguments and to help them spot logical fallacies in their opponents' arguments. Thanks.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by MikeEEEEE on July 12, 2000 at 16:32:38 PT
Observer, your name really fits. You're the greatest.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by FoM on July 12, 2000 at 12:48:06 PT
Thanks So Much Observer!
Thanks Observer!You always come up with really good links and information!Peace, FoM!PS: I love the way you lay out the comment with all the neat stuff that you do!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by observer on July 12, 2000 at 12:25:02 PT
Can you say ''Propaganda'' ?
USA Today just couldn't bring themselves to use the "P" word. For that would imply nasty (but altogether true) things about this government, which, the editors at USA Today would have to admit and write about.white propaganda (DOD) Propaganda disseminated and acknowledged by the sponsor or by an accredited agency thereof. See also propaganda. propaganda(DOD) Any form of communication in support of national objectives designed to influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes, or behavior of any group in order to benefit the sponsor, either directly or indirectly. See also black propaganda; grey propaganda; white propaganda.  The government considers "anti-drug messages" to be white propaganda, when it is admitted at all what these "messages" really are. see: "Propaganda Media" (based upon "Psychological Operations Field Manual No.33-1") Four general types of motion pictures are adaptable for psychological operationsEntertainment. These are standard commercial productions, including animated cartoons. Entertainment films developed specifically for propaganda purposes can be very effective as the themes may be woven into the plot of the movie. These films can be very effective in gaining attention for other propaganda. . . .Newsreels. In the developing nations, newsreels are still a major attraction. They are on the scene and show exactly what is happening or, with good editing, give that impression. By careful, skilled editing and arrangement of sequence, news events can be used as propaganda. [Remember the CNN flap a few months back where Army PSYOPS operatives were allowed to 'help' with news production? -obs.] . . .  (more on the CNN / Army PSYOPs flap here: ) 
Psychological Operations Field Manual No.33-1 (summarized)
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment

Name: Optional Password: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: