Editor’s Pick
FEBRUARY 4, 2009 2:54PM

Hey Sutherland! Hire Me to Be Your Publicist

Rate: 14 Flag

The Guardian published an interview on February 2 with Kiefer Sutherland that focuses on his perspectives on how torture is portrayed on 24 and the influence it has had on the views of its audience. Evidence collected by my organization (Human Rights First) and journalists show that soldiers in Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay have copied Jack Bauer's brutal interrogation techniques

But Sutherland says that "24 is not the problem." He insists, at times, that real life has nothing to do with what happens on the program and that real life infuses the program, depending on the question. The reporter, Decca Aitkenhead, concludes that "the only really consistent thread in the logic of his defence of 24 might be an intellectual motto of 'Whatever it takes.'"

An On-Line Application to Be Kiefer Sutherland's Publicist

Dear Mr. Sutherland,

You are great at torturing terrorists, talking sense to over-stressed politicians, and stopping plots to blow up major cities. But one thing you don't seem to be so good at (I mean this nicely! Don't come after me with a set of wire cutters!) is good, old-fashioned public relations. I can help.

My first bit of advice: stop talking to The Guardian. Man, that interview with you that they ran this week did you no favors.

Second, I don't want to overtax the writers you work with at "24" but is it possible for them to come up with a plotline that does not depend on you torturing someone? That might do wonders for your image! (Plus it might reduce the numbers of viewers who watch your show and come away thinking "torture works!")

Third, don't allow the wardrobe people to put you in that khaki jacket you wore to your hearing in front of the Senate investigative committee in episodes 1-4. It makes you look a little old and boring. And for a show that has been on as long as "24" and that is as repetitive - (no more terrorists with nukes please!) - we don't need clothes that do anything but suggest new and fresh!

Fourth, you might want to actually read some of the reports from U.S. soldiers who say they have imitated Jack Bauer's torture techniques in the field. It's a little embarrassing to keep having to tell reporters (like The Guardian and Charlie Rose) that you have not read these reports. Maybe just read one.

For example, take a look at Philippe Sands book. He interviews a Lieutenant Colonel named Diane Beaver who worked at the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. She says that your show was "hugely popular" and that it "gave people a lot of ideas."

Again the point here is not that we care about torture. The point is that the show will likely be on the air for longer if you at least pretend that you are concerned. You are an actor. Fake it if you have to.

I think we should also plan a nationwide "listening tour" to soften your image. Maybe we can get Justice Scalia to come along. He seems to think you actually "saved Los Angeles."

Finally to prove that these human rights types are the namby-pamby, one-worlders that we know them to be, let's stage a photo-op that will send every paparazzi scrambling for his camera lens. I want you to "turn yourself in" at the headquarters of one of those groups like Amnesty International (are they a human rights group?) to be arrested for using torture. They probably won't even have handcuffs on hand! What amateurs!

My point here is that Jack Bauer has to adjust with the times or retire. It's all about accountability now. Obama is in the White House, not Bush. You led the trend when it was all about torture, now you can lead the trend when it is all about putting the torturers in jail. If possible, you should try and bring someone like Donald Rumsfeld with you.

Thanks for considering my application. I look forward to working with you.

David

David Danzig directs The Primetime Torture Project at Human Rights First. Danzig organized a briefing that brought military leaders to the set of "24" to urge the producers of the program to change the way they show torture.

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
I don't think 24 is new to the idea of war is hell and do whatever it takes to get the job done. This plot format has long been accepted in Hollywood because it keys into two basic human natures, the need for justice and frustration with evil.

Shows like 24, Dirty Harry, Walking Tall, and Die Hard tap into the idea that if you cut through the red tape (the constitution and justice system) the hero can get the bad guy and keep us safe. And those pesky lawyers are only making it hard for the hero to keep us safe.

I find it interesting that on 24 the moderate president is portrayed as the one willing to invade a country right now while the bad guys wants to wait. Also, there is always an underlying vain of corruption that gives the hero licence to "do whatever it takes" because the system is flawed.

This all seems logical to the common man, until heaven forbid they become the object of the government's attention. Then you want due process and your worse nightmare would be Jack Bowers standing over you with his BIC.
Rated, because I am really tired of meaningless violence. And people who don't own their portion.
MTodd: You're right, the show's story resolutions are pandering of the worst type and hardly new. This shit has been going on for 40 years or more. What is new is the Right's apparent confusion of fiction w/ reality. Nobody really wanted to hear Clint Eastwood going around defending Harry's violent streak, and he didn't. Presidents and Chief Justices of the US Supreme Court for gawd's sake didn't say suspects ought to be shot by police officers if they thought the perp might be guilty.

Until Bush came along with Cheney and Cheney dragged in John Yoo and David Addington. This whole set of bimbos isn't exactly tied tightly to anything remotely resembling the reality you and I live in. Newt Gingrich, father of them all, based his operations plan for the CIA (later followed by Cheney when he set up C-TEG) on James Bond books.

David: FWIW, I think you should do all Kiefer's PR. Otherwise he could come out of this with a career so damaged he'll only be able to get working hosting AEI Roasts.
I can proudly say I have never watched a single episode of 24. And I watch TV a lot!!!
I have watched several movies that show the torturing of innocent people... Slum Dog Millionaire, Rendition, and a few others...

You can blame 24 and Jack Bauer all you want, but there are two sides to every story.

24 shows the torturing of guilty people who have information that will save the lives of thousands. Good for them.

Portraying the torture of guilty people is no worse than only portraying the torture of innocent people. They both send a message.

Innocent people do get tortured in real life, but so do guilty people. Both sides have an agenda.
Fishstick, in real life you can't know whether people are guilty or not, and in this country you're innocent until proven guilty. And even if you are guilty, you are protected from cruel and unusual punishment.

David, thanks for this piece. I can't believe there is any question -- Torture is wrong in all cases. And the use of torture does as much psychic harm to the torturer (and the government that allows it) as it does to the victim.
You are a very funny man. And underlying that humor is a deadly serious subject you care deeply about--I can tell. Thank you.
Rated. This show is an adolescent fantasy. Dominance and honor aren't about sinking to the lowest level possible it's about rising above. I think Jack Bauer was throwing a woman tied to a chair around a room the last time I could stand to watch this show. I thought she's just going to lie to him 12 times in a row until the bomb blows up. Hell hath no fury, yaknow. Since when did the good guy get to beat up women anyway? How is this even selling Ford Explorers?
First of all, not every moment of 24 involves torture. That's only become the narrative as the show became a punching bag for both the left and the right. And what no one realizes (since many of the commentators rarely if ever watch the show) is that torture usually fails on the show... either they accidentally torture the wrong person or the respective evil scheme occurs in some form anyway. At the very least, it's shown in a negative light, as Jack's actions have caused him to lose everything of meaning in his life.

Some seasons (like 2 and 5) had plot lines that were sympathetic to liberal ideas, other seasons (4 and 6) were tilted more toward conservatism (seasons 1 and 3 were pretty apolitical).

And Sutherland is dead on: if the alleged best and brightest fighting force in the world can't differentiate between escapist fantasy and real life, than that's a major problem for the people who educate said fighting force. Besides, this would have all been null and void if the people running the country had allowed, encouraged, ordered torture of military prisoners.

Why is it that it's so much easier to blame a fictional hero for American soldiers committing torture than it is to blame the actual military heads who ordered or allowed said behavior?

Keifer Sutherland is an actor... he is not a military instructor and he is not an expert on interrogation. It is not his responsibility if our fighting forces give a fictional character more merit than a trained army interrogation instructor.
Mick,

During the Vietnam war, Johnson had his fair share of constitutional abuses. Protesters being arrested, and those who opposed the war were targeted by the FBI. It does not matter whether it is the far right or left power unchecked will abuse.

When you look at most abuses of the constitutional rights of Americans there is usually "war" attached to the reason. War on drugs, war on terror, the war on crime, it does not matter those in power use it as an excuse to suspend rights in the name of expedience and national security. Regardless if the threat is real or not, if we allow the abuse in the name of the ends justify the means, we will all end up in trouble.
Sutherland is an actor, not a professor of semiotics. His opinions are pretty much beside the point.
"Besides, this would have all been null and void if the people running the country had allowed, encouraged, ordered torture of military prisoners."

HADN'T allowed, encouraged, and ordered... not HAD. Sorry.
I've never seen the appeal of "24". Kiefer Sutherland has the charisma of a brick wall. The plot lines are preposterous and the torture is never-ending. Please, make it stop.

(rated)
I'd give you two thumbs up if I could.

This piece is dead on. Satirically speaking.
I hit on 24's use of torture in a recent article. (Do you hear that? It's a horn! It's mine! I'm tooting it!) One point worth touching on is that the torture on the show is always about a very specific bit of information, and it more or less always works partly because of that.

http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=89873