Examining how the worst terrorist atrocity in history became part of TV fiction…

Three weeks after terrorists murdered thousands of people by flying hijacked airliners into New York’s World Trade Centre, a bright high school student stood in front of a senior American politician and asked, ‘Why is everybody trying to kill us?’

It was a fair question, given that it was on the lips of just about every US citizen at the time. However, this exchange didn’t take place in the real world. It was posed on the hit TV show The West Wing, and that fact sparked no little controversy. Some critics lauded the show’s producer Aaron Sorkin for bravely tackling this most sensitive of issues, others slammed him. The words ‘bad taste’, ‘exploitation’ and ‘condescending’ were all applied to the programme. Some questioned the arrogance of a TV producer who believed the world was waiting to hear his opinion on the tragic events.

But, in a world where the line between fantasy and reality is constantly being blurred by movie-makers and television script writers, was it really surprising that a TV programme should critically examine the issue of terrorism after 11th September?

For those of you who haven’t been glued to this American import – showing on E4 in Britain – the show is about the trials and tribulations of fictional US President Jed Bartlett, played by Martin Sheen, and his loyal team of White House staffers.

In essence, it’s a fantasy about what it would be like if a group of liberals came to power in the US. It speculates on what they might achieve and what obstacles they might face, in a nation where liberalism is equated with radicalism.

The show, airing on the NBC network in the US, has won numerous awards – including eight Emmys in one year alone (it is nominated for several more again this year) – for its cast, which includes Rob Lowe as the White House Deputy Communications’ Director. However a lot of Republicans, the right wing of US politics, really don’t like it. They don't like its anti-military stance, or it’s backing for social programmes. But more than anything, they believe that Sorkin has turned the show into a pulpit for expressing his own liberal views. Under these circumstances, Sorkin’s TV take on terrorism was bound to get up a lot of noses.

Isaac and Ishmael

The episode, which was shown in the US on 3rd October 2001 and on E4 in Britain more than a month later, was entitled Isaac and Ishmael, a reference to the sons of Abraham – the founders, respectively, of the Jewish and Islamic nations. In a departure from the on-going storyline, the episode saw a ‘lockdown’ in the White House following a security breach. An Arab-American working in the building has the same name as the alias of a terrorist known to have entered the States. The situation coincided with a visit by high school students to the White House, and the scenario allowed various characters to answer questions from the children on the nature of terrorism.

The school children were told terrorism isn’t about Islam, but Islamic extremists, and that Islamic extremism is to Islam what the Ku Klux Klan is to Christianity. In the end, the suspect is cleared, apologised to, and the moral is voiced by Toby Ziegler, the fictional Communications Director (Emmy award-winning actor Richard Schiff), who says: ‘Bad people can’t be recognised on sight, it’s not worth trying.’

Many critics claimed Sorkin used the show as a soap box for his own views, and that the children within the drama were meant to represent the viewing public, to whom Sorkin was imparting his opinions. But since his views were, in his own words, ‘to confront recent events and encourage tolerance of other cultures and ideas’, some argued that it was justified.

The industry’s response

The entertainment industry’s response to 11th September was to cut out anything that could be deemed insensitive. Microsoft removed images of the World Trade Centre towers from its Flight Simulator 2002 game, as did the makers of the film Zoolander, a comedy starring Ben Stiller. A number of films including Stuart Little 2 and Men in Black 2 were re-shot to replace scenes featuring the famous Manhattan skyline. Trailers and posters for Spiderman were also scrapped because there was an image of robbers caught in Spiderman’s web, slung between the towers.

Warner – coincidentally the makers of The West Wing – also postponed a film by David Foster called Collateral, based on the Lockerbie disaster, in which terrorists blew up an airliner over the Scottish town. At the time Foster said ‘Nerves are raw at the moment. It’s been postponed out of respect for those people who died.’

Tinsel Town shied away from confronting what happened in New York and Washington on that sunny September day because America was in shock. It’s impossible to overstate the effect of the attacks on the American psyche. Not since Pearl Harbor has an enemy visited such destruction on the American mainland. It seems that this is precisely why Aron Sorkin did what he did.

The critics view

It has to be remembered that The West Wing is a programme that tries to mirror actual events, both in the States, and around the world. Previous plot lines have covered bombing raids on Syria – a reference to US attacks on the Sudan – racism and white supremacy, conflict on the Pakistani border and the overthrow of legitimate governments in Africa. As the programme’s executive producer John Wells said: ‘I don’t think it was possible for us to proceed without pausing to acknowledge what happened.’ More than that, Sorkin knows that TV programmes like The West Wing, which have assumed a certain ethical high ground, are expected to take a position on monumental events.

The views of those who attacked what Sorkin did fell into three categories: that it was badly done; that it was too soon (as if there is a statute of limitations on when fiction can mirror fact) or that it was too smug.

The New York Post said: ‘The West Wing confronted terrorism, but did little more than make pretentious speeches’, while the Washington Post called it ‘pretentious and pietistic hubris.’ Writer Tom Shales summed up much of the criticism when he said: ‘Where do we turn when we want lessons in morality, political science, and human relations? To Hollywood of course. Or so some of that town’s more pretentious armchair philosophers seem to think.’

Clearly the ‘philosophers’ were right. More than 25.2 million Americans watched the episode – the show’s biggest ever audience. Responding to accusations that the show exploited the tragedy, NBC and Warner pointed to the fact that profits, along with the salaries of the cast, were donated to charity, and that the opening credits were replaced by phone numbers where donations could be made.

Wounded nation

Sorkin might say he used his privileged position to try to give some sort of comfort to a wounded nation. Of course Sorkin’s views might not be shared by all, or might be seen as simplistic, but they were out there for all to see. General viewer response seemed to be: ‘Yes it was preachy, but that’s what we expected.’

Not only was it expected, it seemed to be what many people wanted.

Writing in the Seattle Journal-Constitution, Jill Vejnosha called The West Wing special a ‘… civics lesson for the very young, very unpredictable 21st century.’ She went on: ‘The line “Why is everybody trying to kill us?” was a single line of dialogue in an episode of The West Wing. And yet it seemed to speak for an entire nation of Americans who lost their innocence three weeks before.'

Tough to argue with that.