Nuke and Hitler
Published April 13, 2003
Opinions: everyone has them, and in a free society people are allowed, even encouraged, to speak theirs. But a big problem arises when individuals choose to use executive positions within organizations to forward their own views, coloring entire organizations with an individual's view.
That is the problem with the Tim Robbins-baseball Hall of Fame flap: the president of the HOF, Dale Petroskey, canceled an anniversary celebration of the film Bull Durham at the Hall as a gesture against the politcal opinions of fim co-star Tim Robbins, thereby simultaneously politicizing a non-political event and a non-political organization. Other than being generally proclaimed a fool, Petroskey has not yet suffered any employment action.
The same cannot be said for Ed Gernon, head of the movie and miniseries division of Canadian production company Alliance Atlantis, who was fired for an interview he gave to TV Guide regarding CBS's May sweeps miniseries Hitler: The Rise of Evil. The Washington Post reports:
- In the April 12 TV Guide, the publication says that "Gernon stated his belief that fear fueled both the Bush administration's adoption of a preemptive-strike policy and the public's acceptance of it." According to the article, "Gernon said a similar fearfulness in a devastated post-World War I Germany was 'absolutely' behind that nation's acceptance of Hitler's extremism."
Gernon is quoted as saying of the miniseries, which tracks Hitler's rise to power in 1930s Germany: "It basically boils down to an entire nation gripped by fear, who ultimately chose to give up their civil rights and plunged the whole world into war.
"I can't think of a better time to examine this history than now," he added.
The article further quotes him as saying that "when an entire country becomes afraid for their sovereignty, for their safety, they will embrace ideas and strategies and positions that they might not embrace otherwise."
- "With respect to the comments attributed to Ed Gernon in the most recent issue of TV Guide, the comments do not represent the views of Alliance Atlantis, nor do they reflect in any way the purpose of the miniseries 'Hitler: The Rise of Evil.' We have no further comment to offer on this."
- Nuke and Hitler
- Published: April 13, 2003
- Type:
- Section: Video
- Filed Under: Video: News, Video: Television
- Writer: Eric Olsen
- Eric Olsen's BC Writer page
- Eric Olsen's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
I'd like to dispute the claim that the HOF is "a non-political organization".
Cooperstown Museums Collaborate on Third Annual Winter Cultural Series
President Bush's top spokesman, an award-winning National Geographic author and one of America's most celebrated futurists highlight the listings for the third annual Cooperstown Winter Cultural Series, made possible by the National Baseball Hall of Fame & Museum, Fenimore Art Museum and The Farmers' Museum. The Cooperstown Winter Cultural Series, an enlightening and engaging wintertime event, open exclusively to members of the three museums, returns in 2002 with installments in February, March and April.
...
"In his first year Ari Fleischer has had a more demanding job than any White House Press Secretary in history" said Hall of Fame President Dale Petroskey. "He has managed to be a candid spokesman for the President while clearly and simply articulating the Bush Administration's goals, both foreign and domestic. We are thrilled to welcome him to Cooperstown and hear his perspective on life in the White House and the current political scene which of course includes the war on terrorism."
Well, it appears that the HOF doesn't mind politics as long as it's Republican politics.
Y'know what would be kewl? Get Fidel Castro nominated to the Baseball Hall of Fame.
If flashing a peace sign endangers troops, imagine what having Fidel in the HoF would do? Viva la revolucion!
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/4575)
There's a clear difference between Gernon's behavior and Petroskey's.
Gernon made a comment without claiming he spoke for any organization.
Petroskey actually cancelled an event on behalf of an organization.
Making a comment and cancelling an official event are clearly in two separate categories, or separated at least by degree. One is a comment. The other is an official action. Gernon can plausibly claim he was only speaking for himself (in fact--it's pretty clear he was). Petroskey can hardly claim he wasn't acting in an official capacity.
I don't see what is so controversial about Gernon's comments anyway. Germany reduced civil liberties and adopted an aggressive military posture as a result of fear. That doesn't seem to be in dispute.
The United States has publicly adopted a new, aggressive military doctrine (preventive war) and is passing legislation that reduces civil liberties. These facts are not in dispute either. What is in dispute--that we're doing it out of fear? That we should learn from history?