Pittsburgh Arts, Regional Theatre, New Work, Producing, Copyright, Labor Unions,
New Products, Coping Skills, J-O-Bs...
Theatre industry news, University & School of Drama Announcements, plus occasional course support for
Carnegie Mellon School of Drama Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni.
guardian.co.uk: US film industry magazine the Hollywood Reporter has apologised for its role in kickstarting the infamous 1947 blacklist that destroyed the careers of writers, actors and directors accused of being communist sympathisers.
What does this mean now? Why didn't this happen earlier? These were questions I first asked myself when reading the article. But there's a follow-up article on Hollywood Reporter's website where blacklisted actors express their thanks and support for the apology, albeit 65 years later. I suppose the first step to solving a problem is admitting that problem. This apology is just that, the journalist son of a pioneering journalist admitting that McCarthyism spread to Hollywoood reporting for the wrong reasons. Hollywood Reporter's participation in the Red Scare ending or drastically changed the careers of a few actors and writers. Regardless of how you feel about communism and politics the issue here isn't McCarthy's political agenda but journalistic integrity. What is the role of journalism covering the arts? What is the intent of a review, news story, or editorial? Is it to communicate truth or an ideal or is it the reaffirmation of the current cultural climate? I'd say there's something to be said about both motivations. Unfortunately the cultural climate around the time of McCarthy was fear. This apology exposes the idea that jounralistic integrity is often flawed and easily marred by the culture of the day. The apology doesn't give actors those opportunities or provide any financial dues they may have lost due to Hollywood Reporter's past press but it does reinforce a principal - that a periodical was in a position where they could've taken a neutral position, perhaps one more suitable for its contents, but instead chose to color themselves of one opinion by supporting an outside agenda. This, the apology states, was wrong.
Regardless of when this reporter's family apologized, this gesture was definitely appropriate. So many times, pride simply gets in the way and some people cannot own up to their own actions. The Red Scare was a complete witch hunt that ended so many careers and moved so many artists away from their true potential. Clearly, freedom of speech was exercised in this journalist's writing. He didn't necessarily have to come forward because he is entitled to his own opinion. Writing can just have such an impact on the general public. I'm not sure what he wanted to accomplish in the early stages of the Red Scare with his writing. It certainly escalated and sometimes, as a journalist, it can be just as powerful to keep a neutral voice.
So I not sure what i think about this article. Acknowledging a wrong done is a large step in mending the future. I think I will have to go with Matt on this one. Journalistic integrity, what does that mean? My personal feeling is that there is a large lack of integrity in the news today. So I feel this apology is nice step in the right direction. Continue forward to strive for responsible, intelligent, and most important news filled with integrity. News can destroy people, even when they did nothing wrong and the news comes back to correct itself. Damage is already done.
Think this article is going to do a nice job of bringing back to many peoples mines the damage news can do if used improperly. Also the importance of having integrity when you are reporting.
Well, definitely better late than never. Of course it was wrong and this happening in history is now looked at as a terrible witch-hunt, and I hope that even before this apology the families of those that were hurt knew that many people no longer felt the way they had when these people were blacklisted, and hopefully Willie Wilkerson has always known what his father did was wrong, but coming out with an official apology can only ensure that wounds are healed and people can continue moving forward from these terrible actions that were committed in the past. It is never too late to bring it up and continue to learn from our mistakes.
I think it is interesting that it has taken this long to apologize for this. this list destroyed careers and it has been almost something completely ignored. Humans do a lot to hurt each other but the worse part of it is when we can recognize it and still choose to ignore it longer. I think it is important as humans to not only recognize the problems we create and deal this them regardless of the consequences. We should take more responsibility of what we do and by doing so we can fix a lot of what we mess up and improve the playing field for another generation.
Can anyone argue that black-listing people from making a living because of their political beliefs is wrong? It would be a tough sell. I do have to be the outlier here though and say that I think it's just as questionable for us now, and by us I mean Sean Penn, from the distance of time and comfort of fame, to hand down on the past, even if it did affect his family specifically. The fact is, none of us can say with certainty what we would do were we in Kazan's shoes, facing a choice between capitulation and excommunication, or worse deportation. Taking the self-righteous position is too easy here, I think, and when an apology or an outcry of injustice bears about as much authority or ability to set things right as the cheap entertainment rag on which it is printed, it seems like a waste to me, and worse, a publicity stunt to sell more cheap rags. Maybe our efforts, and Mr. Penn's, would be better spent looking out for the millions of people suffering from unfair working conditions RIGHT NOW in our country. Yes we must learn from past injustices to better guard against new ones, but we also have to learn to forgive the past and admit our own imperfections and moral frailties before judging them in others.
6 comments:
What does this mean now? Why didn't this happen earlier? These were questions I first asked myself when reading the article. But there's a follow-up article on Hollywood Reporter's website where blacklisted actors express their thanks and support for the apology, albeit 65 years later. I suppose the first step to solving a problem is admitting that problem. This apology is just that, the journalist son of a pioneering journalist admitting that McCarthyism spread to Hollywoood reporting for the wrong reasons. Hollywood Reporter's participation in the Red Scare ending or drastically changed the careers of a few actors and writers. Regardless of how you feel about communism and politics the issue here isn't McCarthy's political agenda but journalistic integrity. What is the role of journalism covering the arts? What is the intent of a review, news story, or editorial? Is it to communicate truth or an ideal or is it the reaffirmation of the current cultural climate? I'd say there's something to be said about both motivations. Unfortunately the cultural climate around the time of McCarthy was fear. This apology exposes the idea that jounralistic integrity is often flawed and easily marred by the culture of the day. The apology doesn't give actors those opportunities or provide any financial dues they may have lost due to Hollywood Reporter's past press but it does reinforce a principal - that a periodical was in a position where they could've taken a neutral position, perhaps one more suitable for its contents, but instead chose to color themselves of one opinion by supporting an outside agenda. This, the apology states, was wrong.
Regardless of when this reporter's family apologized, this gesture was definitely appropriate. So many times, pride simply gets in the way and some people cannot own up to their own actions. The Red Scare was a complete witch hunt that ended so many careers and moved so many artists away from their true potential. Clearly, freedom of speech was exercised in this journalist's writing. He didn't necessarily have to come forward because he is entitled to his own opinion. Writing can just have such an impact on the general public. I'm not sure what he wanted to accomplish in the early stages of the Red Scare with his writing. It certainly escalated and sometimes, as a journalist, it can be just as powerful to keep a neutral voice.
So I not sure what i think about this article. Acknowledging a wrong done is a large step in mending the future. I think I will have to go with Matt on this one. Journalistic integrity, what does that mean? My personal feeling is that there is a large lack of integrity in the news today. So I feel this apology is nice step in the right direction. Continue forward to strive for responsible, intelligent, and most important news filled with integrity. News can destroy people, even when they did nothing wrong and the news comes back to correct itself. Damage is already done.
Think this article is going to do a nice job of bringing back to many peoples mines the damage news can do if used improperly. Also the importance of having integrity when you are reporting.
Well, definitely better late than never. Of course it was wrong and this happening in history is now looked at as a terrible witch-hunt, and I hope that even before this apology the families of those that were hurt knew that many people no longer felt the way they had when these people were blacklisted, and hopefully Willie Wilkerson has always known what his father did was wrong, but coming out with an official apology can only ensure that wounds are healed and people can continue moving forward from these terrible actions that were committed in the past. It is never too late to bring it up and continue to learn from our mistakes.
I think it is interesting that it has taken this long to apologize for this. this list destroyed careers and it has been almost something completely ignored. Humans do a lot to hurt each other but the worse part of it is when we can recognize it and still choose to ignore it longer. I think it is important as humans to not only recognize the problems we create and deal this them regardless of the consequences. We should take more responsibility of what we do and by doing so we can fix a lot of what we mess up and improve the playing field for another generation.
Can anyone argue that black-listing people from making a living because of their political beliefs is wrong? It would be a tough sell. I do have to be the outlier here though and say that I think it's just as questionable for us now, and by us I mean Sean Penn, from the distance of time and comfort of fame, to hand down on the past, even if it did affect his family specifically. The fact is, none of us can say with certainty what we would do were we in Kazan's shoes, facing a choice between capitulation and excommunication, or worse deportation. Taking the self-righteous position is too easy here, I think, and when an apology or an outcry of injustice bears about as much authority or ability to set things right as the cheap entertainment rag on which it is printed, it seems like a waste to me, and worse, a publicity stunt to sell more cheap rags. Maybe our efforts, and Mr. Penn's, would be better spent looking out for the millions of people suffering from unfair working conditions RIGHT NOW in our country. Yes we must learn from past injustices to better guard against new ones, but we also have to learn to forgive the past and admit our own imperfections and moral frailties before judging them in others.
Post a Comment