Well, hmm. The History Channel has decided not to air a docudrama on the Kennedys because it doesn’t “fit” their brand. Evidently the point of contention is that it has fictional elements and thus doesn’t meet the network’s exacting standards for historical accuracy.
Lord love a duck—the cable franchise that brought you series called “Ancient Ink”, “Pawn Stars” “Ice Road Truckers” and “Axe Men” has standards? Independent of the ones for churning out dreck at the speed of knots and stuffing 18 minutes of commercials per hour of “content”?
Historicity hasn’t been an issue for THC or any of its sister channels, including A&E, Bio or History International
How does a show called “Dog the Bounty Hunter” or “Hoarders” constitute either arts or entertainment? Since when was biography restricted to films on paranormal experiences and bios of mobsters and celebrities (some of whom aren’t yet in their mid-20s)? And, as for HI…it’s mostly recycled crap from the other two, with the addition of "The Naked Archaeologist".
So it’s really amusing that THC is claiming some sensibilities around the veracity of any of their programming, much less of DBOF (Drama Based on Fact, as they used to say at CBS).
I don’t really care whether some Kennedy Cabal “got” to THC to stop any scandal; I’m not sure what dirt this production could have dished that hasn’t already been shoveled by DBOFs in the past. And I’m not worried that this is a first-amendment issue, because I can’t see how what gets broadcast on any channel could be considered free speech, anymore than what Apple or GM put into the marketplace would be. It’s all about product, positioning and packaging.
It would have been interesting seeing Greg Kinnear as JFK, though.
No comments:
Post a Comment