The Daily Background
| Why is Newsweek censoring its George Clooney interview from Americans?
by Arlen Parsa
Let’s say a major US-based international news magazine lands an exclusive interview with one of the biggest stars and Americans pop icons of the current day. Just hypothetically speaking of course. And since he’s also a person who’s known for getting political, they interview him about American politics (”I like Obama”), and even ask him if he plans to become a politician as some rumors have suggested (for the record, he says he won’t).
If you were the editor of said news magazine, would you publish the interview in the United States, or would you publish that interview in every other non-US international edition of the magazine? Apparently Newsweek’s editors have decided that the latter is a better choice.
So why is Newsweek hiding its exclusive interview with George Clooney from its American readers?
Go take a look at the table of contents for the current February 12 US-edition of Newseek and you won’t find it. But buried in Newsweek International (of which there are European, Asian, and Latin American editions) is the interview itself. Newsweek International has published excerpts on its website. What is it about the interview that Newsweek doesn’t think is suitable for its US audience?
Newsweek is clearly promoting the interview- they even sent out press release today advertising the Clooney interview in the international edition of Newsweek.
(Click here to read a copy of Newsweek’s press release sent to other press organizations as obtained by The Daily Background.)
So why is Newsweek trying to publicize the interview everywhere else except for the US, where presumably there would be the most interest in this type of thing? A bit of context: Newsweek has been caught numerous times with totally different cover stories on the US and international editions in cases where the international cover story is about Iraq or is otherwise unfavorable in some way towards the United States.
(Click here to see an example of Newsweek giving US audiences a cover about a celebrity photographer, while giving non-US audiences a cover story titled “Losing Afghanistan,” about increased violence in the middle-eastern country.)
In the brief excerpt of the interview from Newsweek International’s website, Clooney criticizes US policy under the Bush Administration, saying that we have acted like “big bullies,” and that he feels he has to “defend being an American.”
One of Clooney’s major issues is the ongoing genocide in Darfur. When Newsweek asked Clooney about the international and US failure to prevent the genocide, Clooney told the magazine “[in] our [personal] meetings with all of the heads of government they said to us, “Your policies in Iraq have made it impossible for you now to threaten anything.” We have no moral high ground. We have to look to anyone but ourselves to be able to broker some sort of a peace treaty. That is a very frustrating place to be.”
Clooney also complained that the Bush Administration has refused to join the International Criminal Court, a treaty-based governmental organization aimed at prosecuting war crimes and crimes against humanity. Said Clooney to Newsweek: “It is rather astonishing that the United States does not play ball with the ICC, considering our country was the beacon of the idea of an international criminal court. I really like what the ICC is doing.”
“[But] I do not know how effective it is. I suppose if everybody subscribed to it, it would be tremendously effective. But I do not think that is going to happen in the near future,” Clooney continued.
Although it is not well known outside of human rights circles, the Bush Administration has been caught several times bribing the governments of poorer countries around the world in order to prevent them from joining the ICC in recent years. In other cases, the Administration has been caught creating secret treaties with other countries that would prevent them from bringing a case against the United States in the court- in exchange for humanitarian aid.
The Clinton Administration had signed on to the International Criminal Court, and that signing was awaiting ratification by Congress, however the Bush Administration un-signed from the Court after September 11th and its invasion of Afghanistan.
“I just worry that we have lost our balls for reporting,” Clooney said in his Newsweek interview being kept from US audiences, perhaps ironically. “We constantly underestimate the intelligence and interest in the audience.” Apparently Newsweek didn’t think US audiences would be interested in hearing Clooney say that.
I reckon it’s probably just that US readers are not up to discussing matters outside the US. Basically the US is full of stupid people and if you want to sell magazines to stupid people you need to aim the content at their level.
Just to add to the comment above: I expect that if you ask Newsweek they would give you pretty much the same reason.
Mark, if by “stupid” you mean people who make broad, sweeping generalizations about everyone who lives in a country based on a certain stereotype about that country, then I assure you the U.S. does not have a monopoly on stupidity… wherever it is you come from has probably cornered the market.
That’s such a lousy argument: “american audiences aren’t up to it”. Of course they are. The fact is, Newsweek is afraid of controversy.
Well, Mark, it is apparent that is Newsweek’s opinion of their American readers.
But that doesn’t quite explain this particular instance of censorship. This time it isn’t about matters outside the U.S., like the cover story about our war in Afghanistan going badly.
This time it is regarding an American celebrity discussing American politics. What could be more American focused than that?
Censorship? Come on, read up on the meaning of censorship before you throw around such loaded words.
Re: BobH
There is such a thing as self-censorship. Writing concise headlines that capture the essence of the story is also not the easiest thing in the world to do. If you think you can do a better job, then maybe you should start a blog of your own.
There is a difference between censoring and choosing not to publish something. Is every story edited out of the news paper censored? Maybe the interview just sucks because George Clooney doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Maybe the editors don’t feel like publishing garbage.
Simply put, most Americans don’t find George Clooney’s political opinion terribly news worthy. Newsweek is making a business decision as they probably sell more magazines to the “stupid” internationalists who think Mr. Clooney is speaking for anything other than a minority of Americans, even among liberals.
0
Now if George would give up acting and throw himself into the true political sphere by say, running for President, then I would find substance to this article. Otherwise, I don’t see the news worthy nature of this interview as a Newsweek-subscribed, liberal from California who happens to like both Mr. Clooney’s acting and politics.
Let’s see. He thinks the US is acting like big bullies (for defending itself), but is complaining that we’re not pushing around the Sudan enough on Darfur. Riiiiight.
Clooney isn’t that bright. Kind of like some of the America bashers on here.
James:
You are the reason why the world thinks Americans are stupid.
Tell me please what exactly the US is defending itself from!
James and AdrewK, both of you: Why haven’t you enlisted to “defend” this country?
I think that the US Army is looking for a few good chickenhawks!
I am a liberal New Yorker who adamantly hates President Bush., his policies and republicans and their values. I am not a white trash nascar watching redneck as many beleive americans to be. FYI: G.W. lost the popular vote by half a million in 2000. Not all americans are idiots.
FIXER, I want to end the war, not escalate it. Perhaps you are just a common troll, but the fact is, movie stars do not end war. They are on the periphery of power and are decidedly not policymakers nor opinion leaders.
Do I want to squelch anti-war sentiment? No. But Mr. Clooney is not political news at the moment.
there is nothing more fearsome to the news empires than a good-looking, high profile celebrity who is articulate about polictics.
Put the facts together, and it becomes clear.
The USA is becoming a police state:
http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/PoliceState.html
Not to be a pain but Afganistan is not in the Middle East but part of Asia
As an American citizen, he has a right to an opinion just like everyone else. Would Newsweek have a problem running the article here if he was saying what a great job Bush was doing and how going to war was the right decision?
While I personally find broad generalizations quite offensive, I do think a time of reckoning has come. Bill and his cohorts (in the comments area) fall into one of two categories: a) people who aren’t stupid, and feel personally attacked when America is labeled stupid (I know many friends, academics, scientists, military men, engineers etc who fall into this category - their common ground is that they are at least mildly patriotic and feel defensive), b) people who indeed are stupid and get offended because someone dares call it out.
The sad thing though, is that it’s time for the people who are actually intelligent to wake up from their torpor of northern ivy league clime, and face the music that America is indeed covered with stupid people. The fact that Gerry Springer not only exists, but is thriving should be a wake up sign to anyone with any common sense. The fact that something as preposterous as Creationism can have *any* foothold on public debate is not promising either. And the fact that George Bush was actually re-elected is probably the biggest proof that most of america is populated by the proles.
The problem is doubly apparent when you see polls and elections. Sure big cities attract relatively savvy populations, with what I would call a healthy balance of views, but all too often people entirely ignore and dismiss the entire bible belt.
This is made very apparent in the country’s culture when during a conference I recently read about, in response to litteracy problems in the Louisiana, some university student made a comment like “who cares about the south”.
The problem is that not caring and turning a blind eye on these hordes of truly unsophisticated and often not intelligent people has now cought up with the rest of the country. And all of a sudden, they want to be heard. Not hearded. The stupid people want to rule.
Let’s see, James. The US was “defending” itself by going to Iraq? I guess that’s true.. defending its weak currency by securing a massive oil reserve & all sorts of trade deals. It certainly wasn’t defending itself against WMDs (not there) or Osama (also not there). Lucky Saddam got rid of his WMDs before the US arrived, or he could have been in real trouble, don’t you think?
But what about North Korea? I’ve been watching my telly waiting for the exciting adventure story of another invasion “to defend America” - after all, those N.Korean dudes actually let off a nuclear bomb for real. But America’s response? “Mumble mumble sternwords mumble sanctions mumble mutter - we know! Let’s threaten Iran!!!” Just a thought, James, but isn’t a bully someone who picks on somebody who is obviously weaker than themselves, usually not risking a fight with someone who might do them serious injury?
The USA is like a big old tree. Still strong, but its heart is rotting. You can ignore the problem and rail against “America-bashers” as you call them, luxuriating in the security of your tree-house, but if the tree is not brought back to health soon, it will blow over when a strong storm comes. America could afford to be complacent and have a stupid populace in years gone by, but other countries are not standing still and one day America will realise it has traded places with the third world, if it’s not careful. Read what one Indian newspaper is saying here: . And if you find having some foreigner say that the average American is stupid hurts, well you can hardly dispute the average Joes and Janes here are amazingly, gob-smackingly dumb.
Can America’s problems be fixed? I hope so. You have some good, decent, intelligent people over there too. But I fear the numbers of the ignorant under the control of the greedy and corrupt, might be reaching critical mass, and a melt-down is imminent. Prove me wrong America, please. I hope you won’t fail the world, but I have deep concerns that you just might.
Those two missing urls:
* www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1887880,0093.htm
* www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCkYfYa8ePI
And another well-written article:
* www.nybooks.com/articles/17726
“Ill fares the land, to hast’ning ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates, and men decay.”
I see that Newsweek apparently thinks we would enjoy knowing more about Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. Does either of them have a noteworthy opinion on anything beyond whether or not underwear should be worn in public after 6PM? I really have no interest in George Clooney’s political opinions but see no reason to censor that in favor of whether two vacuous cows should be cavorting in clubs. Newsweek has stopped being a news source long ago. Instead it’s the People magazine of newsbytes.
The word “free press” or “capital of the free world” does not mean carry the literal meaning anymore.
Newspapers and magazines in this country are doing self-censorship - a most spineless state of affairs, and now ? when this rogue president is all but impeached ? I would think this is the time to throw the punches - when he is down on the ropes.
Afterall the coward did not flinch sending 19 year old boys to the killing fields .
Forget about pride and patriotism, your lunch is taken by China, India, Russia and Brazil.
America only knows how to brandish its guns - its still living in the cold war - mine bigger than yours - come to DC and look at the military industrial complexes.
Chineese and Indian business men are seizing control of the new world economy - while the US is busy at its old-fashioned game making guns and using them.
Operation Mockingbird never ended folks…. get a clue.
Newsweek is a business plain and simple. The US market is dried up on the Bush bashing and pointing out the mistakes in this nation. Time to find another audience you can sell this to. Any business is going to follow the same model of catoring to the audience. Deal with it.
As for Clooney - sex sells. He apparently has enough appeal to grab many’s attention. But he’s an actor spewing rhetoric that others before him have said and done more about. Christopher Reeve was a cripple debating in Congress for what he believed was right. But his sex appeal is kind of short with being in a wheel chair. Until I see Clooney in the halls of congress fighting for what is right and not just some more BS porkbarrel legislation, he’s just talk. It’s just like the people on the sidelines who boo the players on the field. If you think you can do it better then get your ass off the bleachers. Write and talk to your local, state and federal government.
Other nations have plenty of issues, however the US international presence is hard to ignore. We flaunt our arrogance and ignorance at the other nations. How would you expect them to react. They are simply barking without making official moves. We have the bigger guns and they are afraid of provoking. Yet we are broke. The US will fall the way Russia did as it had to sell it’s weapons to make money and simply eat. I frankly dont give a crap about why Japan is too proud to take so long to accept international aid to its people, why France is living in a state of martial law since the Parisian bombings, why India is still suffering from a gigantic state of poverty or why Africa as a whole seems to be so underdevloped even after all this time. Until the US is economically and socially the most powerful, no other nation matters.
For those of you who dismiss this decision a simple editorial cut:
We, on the outside of the US, care even less about the star of Batman and Robin than you do, but still they thought they would include it in the International Edition.
It is clear they thought it was a valid article, but one from which sensitive American eyes had to be protected.
Criticism of your President and politics should not be a brief editorial trend that continues until it bores your famously short attention spans, it should be a daily, national pass-time.
This is just typical America bashing.
Answer these questions:
What country is the first one to help out when there is a disaster?
Which country are people lined up to get into?
Which country gives the most in Charity donations?
Which country gives people, including illegal immigrants, the chance to
a better life?
Let us not forget that no country is perfect, including America. When somebody
punches on the gut like the Muslims did in September 11, America had no choice but
to defend herself. This is after the first first world trade center bombing in 1193,
two embassy bombings and US ship bombing.
When are you people going to wake up to the fact we are in the middle of a cultural war.
We live in a world where most of us are labeled as infidels. And you either convert or
you are a dead man.
Being a member of the mainstream press, I can tell you that Newsweek, like all major US mainstream press publications today, get their talking points from higher-ups. I’m sure they were ordered not to publish the interview in their US versions. It goes like this: reporters and lower-level editors get their orders from managing editors and editors-in-chief; they get their orders from the publisher or CEO; they get their orders from their cronies in politics et. al. In essence, decisions to run stories are made, so to speak, on the golf courses rather than the newsroom. The main goal is not to upset the cash flow - i.e., don’t piss off the advertisers, who are by and large, especially at the Newsweek level, old money and conservative.