The Drug War is now affecting the FIRST AMENDMENT!
Interview with Mike Farrell: Movie Payola, Death Penalty
drcnet.org
Bloodied but unbowed, harassed yet heedless, drug czar Gen. Barry
McCaffrey last week rode off to open a new front in his roundly
criticized five-year, billion dollar mass media propaganda
campaign. The Office of National Drug Control Policy has already
cut payola deals with television programs and magazines, in which
those media produced anti-drug messages for cash prizes from the
drug czar's bounty.
Now, McCaffrey is targeting the movies. "We are making available
to the producers, directors, writers -- the creative community --
the resources, the understanding that the National Institute of
Drug Abuse gets out of $600 million a year of taxpayer dollars
studying this issue," McCaffrey told Congress. "As powerful as
television is, some experts believe that movies have an even
stronger impact on young people," said McCaffrey. While
McCaffrey did not produce a detailed plan for Hollywood's
participation, he said the process of enlisting filmmakers and
screenwriters had already begun through workshops, briefings,
roundtables and one-on-one conversations with industry leaders.
DRCNet spoke with Hollywood figure Mike Farrell about McCaffrey's
latest scheme as well as the Raul Garza death penalty case.
Farrell, a long-time TV and film actor and producer, is best
known for his portrayal of the BJ Hunnicutt character in the
long-running TV series MASH, and currently co-stars in the CBS TV
series Providence.
Farrell has also parlayed his celebrity status into a role as a
committed and effective activist, especially on issues related to
human rights and criminal justice policy. He is the Chairman of
Death Penalty Focus (http://www.deathpenalty.org) and the Co-
Chair of Human Rights Watch/California, and is a member of the
advisory board of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death
Penalty. Farrell is also a spokesperson for CONCERN/America,
Good Will Ambassador for the United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees and a member of California's Commission on Judicial
Performance.
WOL: What do you make of Gen. McCaffrey's latest foray into the
entertainment business?
Farrell: He sought a way to make an effective end run around the
censorship issue and still put money into films that convey his
message. This is an example of the heavy hand of the government
intruding into an area of social policy and seems close to
government manipulation of public attitudes. That is a very
dangerous area.
WOL: Some industry figures have been quoted as saying that
Hollywood is such a money-driven town that the industry would
find the drug czar's financial blandishments irresistible. What
do you think?
Farrell: Oh, yes. This is a business of whores to a significant
degree, and it will perk up the ears of all of those people who
are money-driven. The effect could be relatively benign if the
movie already carried an anti-drug message, but if writers or
directors are skewing their work so its fits within certain
guidelines to get that money, then that would be very disturbing.
WOL: Hollywood has taken a lot of flack over portrayals of sex
and violence, and now Gen. McCaffrey is implicitly pressuring the
industry to portray drugs in a certain fashion. What sort of
responsibility does the industry have toward audiences or society
at large?
Farrell: We all need to aware of needs of society and the
vulnerability of the audience to whom we're speaking. I think
Hollywood has a big responsibility in terms of portraying life
realistically and appropriately. Like life itself, sometimes
these messages are life-affirming, but sometimes they are not.
That's not my business. In real life there is sex, there is
violence, there is indulgence in behaviors that some find
reprehensible. And although I'm not personally a fan of
entertainment that promotes or is irresponsible in promoting
wanton sex, or violence, or overindulgence, we cannot allow
ourselves to be bludgeoned into censorship. There's a tendency
toward self-censorship already, especially when artists go into
an area they fear will spark controversy or a hostile response.
That is a terrible insult to the artistic process.
WOL: So, what should or could the film community do in terms of
drugs as a social issue?
Farrell: In terms of drugs and drug policy, there are things my
community can do that would be much more beneficial to the
community at large than adapting our messages to fit some outside
guidelines. We could realistically show the impact of drug use,
we could show the positive, pro-social effects of drug education
and rehabilitation -- all of those things we wish the government
were promoting instead of filling our prisons.
WOL: Is there anything you like about McCaffrey's proposal?
Farrell: I'm pleased that he's being as overt as he is, because
then people are forewarned and thus forearmed. There are already
so many of what we used to call "hidden persuaders" that it is
frightening to think the government is getting involved. As if
they would be any better for us than the others, the private
interests.
WOL: Let's turn to the subject of Juan Raul Garza. In your
capacity as chair of Death Penalty Focus you've been deeply
involved in his case and in the broader issues surrounding the
death penalty. What is your reaction to President Clinton's
decision to put Garza's execution on hold?
Farrell: I was part of a campaign to inform the president about
our feelings on this issue and to help him understand that
killing Raul Garza would in many respects run counter to the
interests of the nation. I am pleased we were able to convince
the president to postpone the execution and start a review of the
whole federal death penalty process.
WOL: Opponents of Garza's execution have pointed to several
problems with how the decision to seek the death penalty in his
case was made. The OAS, for instance, has intervened, claiming
prosecutors violated international covenants when, in the trial's
penalty phase, they asked the jury to consider murders for which
Garza was never tried, let alone convicted. What is your
reaction to this argument?
Farrell: It was outrageous conduct. Using murders where he
wasn't tried or convicted was an extraordinary act on the part of
the prosecution, probably unprecedented and definitely unethical.
WOL: Garza's attorney has indicated that he will raise issues of
racial and geographic disparity in the administration of the
federal death penalty. What about such disparities?
Farrell: The preponderance of minorities on death row, the
institutional racism and corruption on the part of ambitious
prosecutors, and even the chance of human error, all are
increasingly disturbing to many people. To allow a man of
Hispanic origin to be the first executed without taking a serious
look at the history of death penalty prosecutions at the federal
level would be indiscreet, if not downright criminal.
WOL: What is it that drives politicians to so rabidly support
the death penalty?
Farrell: Not unlike the drug war, the death penalty is a
political tool that has nothing to do with justice and is not
good social policy. Both are the result of ambitious politicians
looking to push emotional buttons that can ensure their political
power. They're certainly more interested in that than in solving
social problems and ensuring the public safety.
WOL: The death penalty issue has achieved a high profile this
year with Gov. Ryan's moratorium in Illinois and the focus on
Gov. Bush's record in Texas, among other things. Is there reason
to think the tide is beginning to turn?
Farrell: Yes. President Clinton's action in calling for a hold
on Garza's execution while Justice completes its review of racial
and geographic disparities and establishes guidelines for
clemency petitions was a defensive action, as well as being an
appropriate action. The increasing prominence of the whole death
penalty issue is a sign that in this country we are seeing a
willingness to rethink our positions. At long last, because of
organizations like yours and ours with our continued insistence
on good, solid information to counter the official line, we are
now finding traction with people who might otherwise not know any
better. This is a hopeful sign, indeed. People are asking for
straight talk from their politicians and requiring them to
justify the outrageous statements they make in support of their
outrageous policies.
(Death Penalty Focus of California is a non-profit organization
dedicated to the abolition of capital punishment through
grassroots organizing, research, and the dissemination of
information about the death penalty and its alternatives. They
are a sponsor of "Committing to Conscience: Building a Unified
Strategy to End the Death Penalty," a conference taking place
Nov. 16-19 in San Francisco. Visit deathpenalty.org
to find out more.) |
